What happened to Hillary Clinton?

In 2006, Hillary Clinton was at the top of the world.

Voters, weary of the long war in Iraq and tired of the current Republican leadership, delivered both houses of Congress to the Democrats. Her bid to retain her Senate seat was an easy success, as the Republican opposition failed to produce a viable candidate and instead could do little more than offer a sacrificial lamb for the slaughter. Her own fund raising prowess in her campaign allowed her to sock away a cool $10 million to jump-start her bid for the 2008 presidential election. On top of that, she had the built-in support of a respected former president and professional fundraiser in her husband, Bill Clinton.

Her path to the White House looked to be clear.

Then things started to happen. The Iraq situation started to look a little more hopeful - the surge that she (and Democrats in general) had been opposed to seemed to be working. Worse still, the newly minted Democratic congress proved to be largely ineffective and incapable of bringing about the changes that Americans had sent them to accomplish. Public perception of congress took a nosedive; polls indicated approval ratings for congress at near historic lows. Then, as the campaign was underway, the Republicans looked set to pick a moderate and well-liked senator for their nominee, against all conventional wisdom.

Those, of course, are the least of Hillary's worries.

Senator Barack Obama, of Illinois, proved to be the biggest nightmare to shatter Clinton's once easy dream of becoming president. With scant experience, the senator seemed to have little going for him except for an extraordinary oratory talent and a penchant for instilling hope in his followers. It proved to be more than enough, as Hillary was thumped soundly in the out-of-the-gate caucus in Iowa. In fact, she found herself relegated to a shocking 3rd place once the results were in.

The initial loss did not prove to be fatal to the campaign. Clinton was able to regain her footing and pull of a surprise victory in New Hampshire. She was also able to follow up with a firm victory in Nevada. Nevertheless, the damage was done.

Had Clinton prevailed in Iowa and went on to scoop up victories in New Hampshire and then Nevada, it may have done enough to build up momentum. It may have shattered the notion of Obama's campaign built upon promise and hope. Instead, Iowa served to expose critical weaknesses in the Clinton machine.

Super Tuesday served to reinforce what had already been proven. The Clinton Machine was designed to tap in to the existing Democratic power network, riding on the back of inevitability to the White House. Sailing on name recognition and political networking earned victories in large, established states like California and New York. Obama, however, was able to capitalize on his popular appeal, courting the smaller states and allowing him to emerge with a slight advantage in pledged delegates and the majority of the states themselves. The end of Super Tuesday saw the once inevitable Clinton with a narrow delegate lead, and even then only thanks to the well-oiled machine that brought in superdelegates.

It was in the subsequent contests that the flaws in Clinton's methods were not only exposed, but began to shake her machine apart. The 11 contests since February 5 have been held in places other than the large, powerful states where Clinton can flex her organizational and influential muscle. Her inability to appeal to the populace in the smaller states may have proven her undoing, however. Not only has she been unable to notch a single victory in the last 11 contests, she has been unable to pull within 15 points of Obama.

While the string of losses has not put her at an insurmountable deficit in terms of delegates, the psychological damage inflicted by a string of 11 dismal defeats may prove to be irreparable.

Rather than attempting to adapt, Clinton has instead retreated further in to the strategy of relying on political favors and connections, as well as name recognition, in an attempt to win the large states. Clinton's survival hinges on good showings in Texas and Ohio, and later Pennsylvania, each with large delegate caches. Her machine has, to date, functioned well in these states and allowed her to hold a lead in opinion polling there.

Those leads are rapidly evaporating in the wake of Obama's successive victories since Super Tuesday. The inevitability of a Clinton presidency seems to be rapidly succumbing to the inexorable momentum of victory after victory. Recent polling in Texas shows Obama to be within a few points of Clinton there, and rising fast. An inability to win the Lone Star State will almost certainly prove fatal to Clinton's hopes of winning the nomination.

Even winning the three remaining large contests will not completely exonerate Clinton's past failures to perform consistently. While neither candidate is likely to attain the requisite 2025 delegates to seal the nomination prior to the convention (unless someone concedes), Clinton faces an uphill battle to even narrow the gap and come out on top. Even if she manages to hold on to leads in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, going in to the convention with a delegate deficit will make it very hard for her to win over the hearts of convention-goers and hand the nomination to her.

Particularly since it has been Obama, not Clinton, who has proven effective at winning over the hearts of the masses.