Ganging Up

The backdrop for all these Obama pieces, of course, is the CW that the Hillary bandwagon can't be stopped. At the Weekly Standard, Dean Barnett questions the received wisdom:

"Thomas B. Edsall writes that Clinton is 'going for the kill' in Iowa:

The decision of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign to send 100 or more new staffers into Iowa demonstrates that she and her aides have determined to their own satisfaction that she can cripple Barack Obama in the first-in-the-nation caucus. . . Clinton's burst of hiring is a declaration that she intends to go for a knockout punch.

"Couldn't you also say this move by Clinton suggests that her campaign is seriously worried about Obama winning Iowa? That the campaign recognizes it is more vulnerable than it appears? Such an interpretation does not comport with the current Hillary-is-unstoppable media storyline, of course. But that doesn't mean it's wrong."

Former GOP spokesman Patrick Ruffini sees another troubling sign for Hillary, citing a post by Jim Geraghty:

"Pollster Scott Rasmussen just shared this fascinating observation in an interview: When you average the head-to-head matchups with Hillary Clinton vs. any of the Republicans, she's always getting 46 to 49 percent against any of them. 'When we polled her against Ron Paul, she got 48 percent of the vote. When we polled on Ron Paul among people who knew who Ron Paul is, she got 48 percent of the vote. When we polled among people who didn't know who Ron Paul is, she got 48 percent of the vote.'

"Basically, Republicans can run a stuffed animal against Hillary and still get 48% of the vote. Only worse. Ron Paul is widely despised by elements of the Republican base. A number of conservatives I know would bolt or sit on their hands if General Zod came down and made sure Ron Paul were the nominee. So what does it say he trails by 10 points? . . .

"Hillary not breaking 50% against a guy who wants to abolish the Federal Reserve is a leading indicator of her fundamental weakness in the general election."

Maybe the Ron Paul factor is stronger than we thought.