I think his point was based on Charles descriptions of Hillary not his support for Obama.

Not everything revolves around the guy, you know? :)

that's why she's vague about a lot most of her ideas. She doesn't want to seem like she's going back on anything she said.

"Eat the rich" is a fundamentally good political strategy.

Doesn't seem to be in the US, where the "socialist!" label still hurts. Really, who are the populist politicians who have been elected on that platform recently? A handful out of 500+?

The First Woman President...... yet there is something unseemly about the Banana Republic aspect to this which everyone ignores........ is this really the re-election of Bill?

It seems like the dynastic thing is a concern for people (including me). Of course you can also ask if someone qualified should be discounted merely because of their relationship to a former president. I think the answer there is to break up the incestuous DLC so we are getting a wider variety of candidate for the highest levels.

If we have political mobility , for lack of a better term, we are going to discourage dynasticism by right of meritocratic action.

Yeah, I know: uber-idealistic :)

how much legislation each had sponsored in the senate.

First Obama:

Obama took an active role in the Senate's drive for improved border security and immigration reform. In 2005, he co-sponsored the "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act" introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).[56] He later added three amendments to the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act", which passed the Senate in May 2006, but failed to gain majority support in the U.S. House of Representatives.[57] In September 2006, Obama supported a related bill, the Secure Fence Act, authorizing construction of fencing and other security improvements along the Mexico–United States border.[58] President Bush signed the Secure Fence Act into law in October 2006, calling it "an important step toward immigration reform."[59]

Partnering first with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), and then with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), Obama successfully introduced two initiatives bearing his name. "Lugar-Obama" expands the Nunn-Lugar cooperative threat reduction concept to conventional weapons, including shoulder-fired missiles and anti-personnel mines.[60] The "Coburn-Obama Transparency Act" provides for a web site, managed by the Office of Management and Budget, listing all organizations receiving Federal funds from 2007 onward, and providing breakdowns by the agency allocating the funds, the dollar amount given, and the purpose of the grant or contract.[61] In December 2006, President Bush signed into law the "Democratic Republic of the Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act," marking the first federal legislation to be enacted with Obama as its primary sponsor.[62]

...

In the first month of the newly Democratic-controlled 110th Congress, Obama worked with Russ Feingold (D–WI) to eliminate gifts of travel on corporate jets by lobbyists to members of Congress and require disclosure of bundled campaign contributions under the "Honest Leadership and Open Government Act", which was signed into law in September 2007.[67] He joined Charles Schumer (D-NY) in sponsoring S. 453, a bill to criminalize deceptive practices in federal elections, including fraudulent flyers and automated phone calls, as witnessed in the 2006 midterm elections.[68] Obama's energy initiatives scored pluses and minuses with environmentalists, who welcomed his sponsorship with John McCain (R-AZ) of a climate change bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by two-thirds by 2050, but were skeptical of his support for a bill promoting liquefied coal production.[69] Obama also introduced the "Iraq War De-Escalation Act", a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq, begin phased redeployment, and remove all combat brigades from Iraq before April 2008.[70]

Later in 2007, Obama sponsored with Kit Bond (R-MO) an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, and calling for a review by the Government Accountability Office following reports that the procedure had been used inappropriately to reduce government costs.[71] He sponsored the "Iran Sanctions Enabling Act" supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry,[72] and joined Chuck Hagel (R-NE) in introducing legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism. A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.[73] Obama also sponsored a Senate amendment to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to provide one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.[74] After passing both houses of Congress with bipartisan majorities, SCHIP was vetoed by President Bush in early October 2007, a move Obama said "shows a callousness of priorities that is offensive to the ideals we hold as Americans."[75]

source

Okay so we have Immigration reform (killed)
Border fence (passed but later defunded IIRC)
Arms reduction (passed)
Govt transparency (passed)
Foreign aid (passed)
more govt transparency (passed)
clean election (submitted but not voted on yet)
(I'm not sure if "energy initiatives" means legislation or not)
Iraq war withdrawal (referred to committee, but its DOA and we all know it)
Military affairs (looks like it passed)
punitive Iran measure (in committee)
Nuclear arms control (passed)
SCHIP (vetoed)

Of the legislation listed a fair amount was cosponsored by Republicans, particularly moderate republicans such as McCain, Lugar, and Hagel but also Coburn who has a perfect (so to speak) ACU rating.

an opinion from powerline at that. Those guys are far from the sharpest tools in the shed (although they are definitively tools)

Many on the right *think* that they will have an easier time against Hillary than Obama. I suspect, for the reason laid out above, that they are mistaken. By lowering expectations so much it is virtually impossible for Hillary not to over perform with independents. Meanwhile Dems are voting in their primaries at much higher levels and rep self identification is way down. Consequently arguments that Hillary will lose because of the rep tidal wave to vote against her fall flat.

You can't get a tidal wave in a kiddie pool.

Meanwhile Obama has been built up so much that once people start actually paying attention he's going to have to be spectacular just to meet expectations.

Would Obama still win? Most likely. But I see no reason to believe he'll have an easier time than Hillary would.

P.S. the reps, as proven above, will be vastly overconfident in the face of a Hillary nomination. Much the opposite in the case of Obama.