A smart friend whose thing is foreign policy emails the following theory:
I'm wondering if anyone has thought to compare Hillary's campaign to... the Iraq war. Both were planned with a sense of entitlement. Both assumed a cakewalk, followed by a coronation. In each case that thinking led to similar management and personnel problems. Only late in the game did Bush/Hillary develop a last-ditch "surge" strategy that, while effective, also engendered extreme political opposition.
There's also an ironic link back to Hillary's claim that she's the best qualified to manage national security, when actually her style resembles Bush's.
Some might add that both absolutely refuse to accept defeat, even when it looks inevitable. (Here's hoping we haven't reached that point in Iraq, though some will surely differ.)
Another Iraq analogy: For Democrats this fall, everything depends on a political reconciliation between warring factions....