For me, out here in NZ, I don't see that Clinton was that competent as a Secretary of State.

As you state in one of your posts, the Arab Spring was always coming, so whether the US can take much credit for it, except for their intervention once it began, and even here Obama has stated that the intervention in Libya was the worst mistake of his tenure.

Regarding her role in taking out Bin Laden, while she was in favour of the mission, did she do much to actually bring the situation out in the first place? And would the mission not have gone ahead had she not been there to say yes? While I think a good call to make, it feels like it happened more because she was present at the time, than due to actually performing as a Secretary of State.

Here in NZ at least, there seems to be a growing feeling amongst people I talk to, that the world is getting worse at the moment, with increasing tensions between the US and Russia again, the Phillipines issues, no real end in sight around North Korea, Britain voting Brexit and seemingly due to a rise in intolerance.

A common conversation topic here is the US presidential election, and while for the most part, myself included, we would prefer Clinton over Trump, the view is Clinton is the lesser of two evils, but still not a good choice, and surely there could have been better candidates out there?

I suspect that if any other Republican candidate had won the Primary, many people here would have preferred the Republican candidate over Clinton, even though NZ tends to be left leaning and generally not in favor of the Republicans, due to a feeling that Clinton is only there for ambition / power, and hasn't really shown any qualities to suggest she would make a good president.