British pundit: "Hillary is losing the Clinton touch"

London Times US Editor Gerald Baker’s latest column leads with: “Hillary is losing the Clinton touch.” Excerpts:

The former First Lady and political lightning rod for conservatives has barely put a foot wrong since she was elected to the Senate from New York six years ago. […]

But the myth of her invincibility has recently started to unravel. Her aggressive stance on national security has landed her in mounting trouble with the Left of the Democratic Party, which has become stridently anti-war in the past year.

A deft political touch seems to have deserted her on several occasions, most recently when she accused Republican leaders in Congress of behaving like “plantation owners”.

Above all, the issue that her supporters and opponents alike consider her biggest liability has surfaced ominously: the likeability factor.

Few deny that Mrs Clinton is razor-sharp and politically savvy. But even supporters worry about her personal skills, at least before a large audience.

She is a somewhat wooden speaker with a hectoring style at times more reminiscent of Al Gore than her husband. And unlike Bill, she projects a lofty, distant air that has been likened to the Queen of Sheba in a power suit. […]

At Mrs King’s funeral — a thinly disguised political rally — Mrs Clinton’s greatest strength and greatest weakness was on display. Her own remarks were preceded by her husband’s eulogy.

The former President was on characteristically bravura form. In a tailor-made setting, in an accent several degrees south of plush Westchester County, the New York suburb that he now calls home, he was alternately funny and moving.

Mrs Clinton was, once again, in her husband’s shadow. It is a shadow that has nurtured and shielded her for years, allowing her to benefit from his raw political skills.

But it is also a shadow that, for many Americans, darkens Mrs Clinton’s reputation, reminding voters of the sleaze and scandal of eight turbulent White House years.

The hope in her camp is that people will believe that Mrs Clinton has her husband’s political strengths and none of his weaknesses.

The growing fear is that she incites the same level of loathing and suspicion as her husband always did, but has none of the charm and personality to deflect it

My only criticism of Baker’s column is that it “shorts” some of Hillary’s own sleaze and scandal problems.

Those weren’t Bill Clinton’s Rose Law Firm billing records that disappeared for two years before reappearing in The White House family living quarters.

Remember Travelgate? Byron York reported in this NRO Online article:

The First Lady's statements, under oath, were patently false. And indeed, at the end of the investigation, independent counsel Robert Ray determined that "(Hillary) Clinton did play a role and have input in the decision to fire the Travel Office employees and that her testimony to the contrary was factually false."

For much of the public, Hillary’s own sleaze and scandals are fuzzy memories, if recalled at all.

But that will change as ’08 nears, and her political foes start to jog the public’s memory. And first among those doing the jogging will be Hillary’s fellow Democrats and opponents for the party’s ’08 presidential nomination.

Bet a nickel on Hillary if you like, but not your whole allowance.

And be sure to read Baker’s entire column.

Trackback: Michelle Malkin