Just about fell off my seat laughing when you said Clinton opposed Citizen United. There is no other politician (or more correctly political family) that has cashed in so massively in the corporate cash category. The rest of your rant is some sort of post revisionist justification for why the democratic party sold it's sole to the dark side. I simply can't follow your convoluted commentary. In regards to 1992 (which I think you are talking about), Clinton won because of two things.
1) Economy was in a big recession
2) Ross Perot peeled away millions of voters from the republicans
Nobody knew what a centrist democrat was at the time. It is fair to say people thought they were something slightly to the right of New Deal Democrat. Clinton certainly used the language of the new deal democrat as did Obama.
Clinton did a exceedingly poor job on health care (one should say incompetent), put a massive number of blacks in jail, destroyed welfare and public housing, eliminated nearly all banking laws which lead to the biggest economic collapse in 80 years, instituted racist drug laws and on and on and on. Clinton was also put into place the pieces to dismantle social security; thank god the Monica scandal came along to derail that fantasy. As to Green energy, it was certainly not on the radar screen 20 years ago and Obama did the minimum to keep the industry going. Who approved or put into place more laws to promote fracking, off shore drilling and pipelines than any other president in history? That's right, Mr. Obama. Plenty of public opposition.
The larger picture you obtusely refer to is called corporate cash and control. Voters have little impact on the legislative process as shown in study after study. Being a democrat doesn't change anything. Time to wake up.