Hillary loses her buzz

Michael Goodwin:

No matter the office or the candidates, all campaigns usually arrive at a moment of clarity. The cotton-candy clouds of confusion part and we suddenly see that one person is connecting with voters and looks better suited for the job.

That moment is upon us in the Democratic race for President, and for backers of Hillary Clinton, it is not a pretty picture.

Although she is desperate for a big win, Clinton has frittered away almost three weeks in astonishingly trivial pursuits. It's as though her computer blew a fuse after Super Tuesday on Feb. 5 and she doesn't know what to do. Or who she wants to be.

Internal campaign feuds are becoming public, she is running low on cash and the message changes as often as Hillary's pantsuits.

One day the media is blamed for letting Obama off easily and the next day voters are accused of being fooled by his charisma. Bill Clinton is Mr. Everything one day and Mr. Invisible the next.

Most revealing is that Hillary herself now seems determined to aim low, a conclusion that was painfully obvious at Thursday's Texas debate. In a showdown she had to win, she bet the night on a cheap attack that Obama plagiarized some of his speeches and thus has a disqualifying character defect.

To say the logic is a stretch doesn't do it justice. No surprise then that Obama swatted the charge away, but she couldn't let go. "It's not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox," she said in a rehearsed line that will have no imitators at the Oscars.

It's hard to imagine a more un-presidential moment at such a critical time. It qualifies as a case of political malpractice that neither she nor her aides realized how petty the attack would sound.

Even before the Texas audience booed and groaned, it was clear the issue wasn't working. Her campaign first tried it in the days before the Wisconsin primary on Feb. 19 - a contest that seemed close until Obama won by 17 points.

...

I did not think she was that bad. Then I did not think Barack was that bad when he told her she "likable enough." I don't think elections swing on such moments anyway. These moments do chip away at some point.

The more important point on Obama's borrowing of the words of his friend is the irony of the quote "just words." The fact is they were just a rhetorical device to try to pivot off of a criticism. It is something he is usually very good at. He pivoted off his lack of experience into a "change" mantra. That worked for him for awhile until people started asking about his accomplishments. Next they might even ask what changes he had brought to Washington already. At that point we will know that he is the just words candidate.