And that's the problem.
John Stoehr, a lecturer in political science at Yale and the 2016 Koeppel Journalism Fellow at Wesleyan, also thinks we know exactly the kind of president we'd get in Hillary Clinton, but he thinks that's be a good thing.
As a contributing writer in The Weekly, Stoehr makes the argument that we should elect her because she will be, simultaneously, an agent for change and someone who keep things as they are. Nice trick, that. As Stoehr argues:
You don't really know what kind of president you're getting until she's elected. But Hillary
Clinton may be the exception. She's long been in the public eye. We know her strengths as well as her weaknesses. Most important, we know she can be forced to listen to progressive demands. That cannot be said of Republicans.
Yes, we know what we'll get: More of the same Clinton hanky-pank. No need here to go back to her past indiscretions, from White Water up to her unsecured email server and humongous contributions to her, Bill's and Chelsea's foundation.
As an indication of just how clearly Stoehr has thought this out, he believes that President Barack Obama and Democrats have done a wunnerful job:
Let's remember the Democrats saved the economy, passed the Affordable Care Act, and reformed Wall Street — with nearly unanimous opposition from Congressional Republicans. Since 2010, we have seen more job growth since no one remembers. More Americans have health insurance. And, while it took a while, the Dodd-Frank financial reforms are now being felt.
Find out what freelance editorial services I can provide for you.
Want to be notified by email when I post? Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.