Five Reasons why 2012 is a No-Go for Clinton

FiveThirtyEight.com has a good post (defined as 'agreeing with The Styx') called "Five Reasons why 2012 is a No-Go for Clinton" about why Hillary can't conceivably run in 2012. My biggest counterargument is that since she has shown absolutely no shame or good judgment this year, why would she learn it in 4 years? Ah well. But this is the key paragraph:

3. She has burned too many bridges within the party leadership.

If Clinton's goal is to become the new Ted Kennedy, that is harder to accomplish when Ted Kennedy is still alive and kicking, and happens to hate your guts. Calling Bill Richardson 'Judas', or saying that that John Kerry is 'dead to us': these are not the sort of actions that a political franchise takes when it is concerned about its long-term future. Clinton's comments to USA Today, which triggered the Kennedy outburst, may ultimately be remembered as the moment that her campaign, having committed the crime, jumped into the White Ford Bronco and tried to make the best of it. If superdelegates are still around in 2012, she is not likely to have the head start with them that she did in this cycle.

Again, if she didn't understand that now, why would she get that in the future?

Backpost finished 2009-12-06.