Again, you are missing the argument. The question isn't what he more he could have accomplished under the circumstances that prevailed. It's about what he could have done to have made those circumstances different, and, if he had, who knows what else he might have accomplished? Maybe little, but it would have been something, and it would have felt better, and people like you wouldn't be grumbling over the lack of appreciation for what did get done.

You want a specific thing he could have done, he could have pursued health care with more vigor and less apologetically, not to have gotten more in the health care bill (though maybe it would have), but to have left his supporters encouraged - along with more vigor in the bully pulpit generally - so that they would have turned out enough to have won the 2010 midterms, which, if they had turned out, would have happened.

After that alt-history split, the ground rules are different. It's no longer the same situation.