Hillary: The Demise

In earlier posts, here and here, I wrote the following:

“Hillary Clinton. Can anyone honestly believe that the Democratic core wants another Clinton in the White House? She is so polarizing, with so many negatives that it’s pretty much a guarantee that she will – as did her husband – gift wrap Congress for the GOP. Therein the reason the Kennedy Clan has come out full force for Obama. It’s not just the superficial similarities with John, but Obama is not nearly as likely to damage the party as Hillary is. And, it must be said, Obama will be more controllable. His obligation to the party core will be so strong, everything about his presidency will be approved, if not mandated, by the old guard.”

and

“Hillary Clinton is a given for Conservatives. As bad as Bill was for a Democratic Congress, Hillary will be worse. She may not shtup an intern, but her mistakes and outrageous policies (and the certain charlatans she’ll bring to the Administration) , will turn the country to the right – hard.”

It seems there is some agreement. Ron Fournier posted this piece on Yahoo News yesterday. Fournier writes [emphasis mine]:

“Obama has won 23 of 35 contests, earning the majority of delegates awarded on the basis of election results. The remaining 796 delegates are elected officials and party leaders whose votes are not tied to state primaries or caucuses; thus, they are dubbed “superdelegates.”

And they are not all super fans of the Clintons.

Some are labor leaders still angry that Bill Clinton championed the North American Free Trade Agreement as part of his centrist agenda.

Some are social activists who lobbied unsuccessfully to get him to veto welfare reform legislation, a talking point for his 1996 re-election campaign.

Some served in Congress when the Clintons dismissed their advice on health care reform in 1993. Some called her a bully at the time.

Some are DNC members who saw the party committee weakened under the Clintons and watched President Bush use the White House to build up the Republican National Committee.

Some are senators who had to defend Clinton for lying to the country about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

Some are allies of former Vice President Al Gore who still believe the Lewinsky scandal cost him the presidency in 2000.

Some are House members (or former House members) who still blame Clinton for Republicans seizing control of the House in 1994.

Some are donors who paid for the Clintons’ campaigns and his presidential library.

Some are folks who owe the Clintons a favor but still feel betrayed or taken for granted. Could that be why Bill Richardson, a former U.N. secretary and energy secretary in the Clinton administration, refused to endorse her even after an angry call from the former president? “What,” Bill Clinton reportedly asked Richardson, “isn’t two Cabinet posts enough?”

And some just want something new. They appreciate the fact that Clinton was a successful president and his wife was an able partner, but they never loved the couple as much as they feared them.”

There is reason why most of the Kennedy’s have dumped Hillary. Consider that the usually quiet and politically private Caroline Kennedy came out – vocally – for Obama.

There is reason why the usually tight-lipped, leak-proof Clinton campaign is hemorrhaging inside information. It’s the imperial “death of a thousand cuts” administered by the DNC.

Nancy Peolsi is “leaning towards Mr. Obama.”

Despite pretty strong ties to the Clintons, Harry Reid has declared himself “uncommitted.”

Howard Dean likes the Clinton money-machine, but his focus is on retaining Congress and fighting off John McCain. He can do both better with Barack Obama on the presidential ticket, but not with Hillary.

Kathleen Sebelius, Chairperson of the Democratic Governors Association, has endorsed Obama.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee just saw his state of Maryland turn out in bad weather to give Obama 60% of the primary vote.

Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, Chairman of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee is from the state that launched the Obama juggernaught with a slim (8 pt) but decisive win over the presumed winner.

Chuck Schumer, Chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee isn’t gonna turn on his fellow Senator from New York, but will it matter? Ted Kennedy probably holds more sway with Democratic Senators than does Schumer. We’ve already seen John Kerry come out for Obama as have Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Pat Leahy of Vermont and Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

There will be more.

The point is that the power brokers in the Democratic Party are NOT solidly in Hillary’s camp. That division alone speaks to her demise, but the fluidity with which these and other prominent Democrats (Gore? Edwards?) move to the Obama camp will become so common it will drown her chances to return to the White House.