Hillary Clinton has been all over the news as of late. Some of her staunchest supporters have drummed up a Hillary 2012 drive - sending out robocalls in key battleground states. Then the Washington Blade posted the article, "Would we be better off with President Hillary?"
In the article, Hillary supporter and LGBT activist, Lane Hudson states how Hillary would have progressed faster than Obama:
"My gut tells me that Hillary would have evolved to a position supporting full marriage equality," Hudson said. "While her speech in Geneva didn't mention it specifically, I feel that it is implied in her statement that 'gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights."
Still, Hudson said he believes Clinton would "have been more aggressive in helping to get ENDA passed into law."
"Without question, Hillary would have been more successful at legislating," Hudson said. "Not only does she have a solid record as a senator, but she would have been far more engaged with the Congress. ENDA didn't even leave the House committee in the last Congress."
Following the Blade's piece, several bloggers took to Twitter and Facebook to push the notion of a Hillary administration. But here's the thing, what real evidence do they have that Hillary would have been the better choice?
Hillary, like Obama, has not come out for marriage equality. And while she's great at legislating, could Hillary get ENDA and repealing DOMA done in her first term? I just don't understand why people are having such a hard time with President Obama. Yes, I agree he is not the fierce advocate we've hoped for, but he has delivered on his promises to the LGBT community. This Hillary hangover just presents a bitterness that is not productive in our community. If anything, it presents an unnecessary divide amongst activists and keeps us from moving forward.
We shouldn't waste our time hoping and wishing about what could have been. We should help our President in fulfilling his promises. I think that's where our energies would be best spent.