Being a good organiser only counts as positive point if what they organise is a good thing. Otherwise, they organise bad things. I note that the Clintons failed to organise universal health care in 1993, and the lesson they 'learnt' from it was to not to try harder, but to not even try and cozy up with the establishment, which in Bill's case also meant to allow Greenspan free rein in letting the bubbles economy expand -- an economy that was fed on foreign credits (which more than balanced the trade deficit ballooning under Clinton's second term), including European capital, which was doubly bad for us (capital drain from our economies and much of that lost once the bubble burst); and at the same time the Clinton government and its appointees in IMF and World Bank pushed the neoliberal 'reform' recipe across the world, causing spectacular crashes from Argentina to Russia.

What is worse: a good loser, or a Carter interlude that does not even dare to be as progressive as Carter was?  Especially if Fox News et al will be successful in making a President Hillary inherit the blame for failure in Iraq, and other crises including energy issues on which her establishment 'liberalism' would make her too timid to take bold enough government action: then we'll get someone much worse than Huckabee in 2012. (Jeb Bush, anyone? Can you imagine the damage potential of a Dubya with brains?) On Obama and the others you compared him to, sadly I think Obama has even less substance than Kerry, who didn't have much either whatever Fox News cried about his liberal extremism, and Hillary 2008 even less.

Considering that Hillary voted for and argued for the Iraq War, and that the Democrat foreign policy establishment (Albright et al, Brzezinski et al) are very much in favour of Empire Light with Europe kept under US wings as vassals (Albright used to chide European leaders for standing up to Bush, not for the policy reasons but the 'alliance' behaviour), I wouldn't take any comfort in Clinton's greater international experience.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}