Did Clinton sabotage liberalism?

Ezra Klein contributes to the "Clinton was bad after all" strand of liberal revisionism, suggesting that "by adapting to a conservative consensus in order to protect his presidency, Clinton made that look like a broad consensus."

My response to that is twofold. First, take note of this.

Democratic share of the popular vote in the two presidential elections before Clinton:

40.6% and 45.6%

Democratic share in the two elections after Clinton:

48.4% and 48.%

So Clinton's strategy worked. It's possible to argue with success, but difficult.

Second, observe that the conservative movement's reaction to Clintonian triangulation was to become more extreme and right-wing than it had been under Reagan and Bush. That has been bad for our country, but will speed the fall of the Reaganite conservative movement, which to me seems like a good thing.