"he can't hold a stone to HRC on the issues...etc"
What? They have nearly the same positions on almost every issue. The only difference is basically their position in 2002 on the war, the position on the mandate, and their tactical strategy with social security (although they both basically support raising the cap). This election isn't about issues. It's about character and integrity. It's about judgement. And it's about experience.
None of the major candidates really have any experience to speak of (Edwards, Obama, and Hillary). So we're really focusing on character and judgement and the ability to win.
Again - you blame the press for Clinton's image problems, but couldn't it be that her campaign/PR flaks are just incompetent? And doesn't that undermine the argument for her nomination (that she's the best equipped to deal with the Republican attack machine?)
Just because she's faced the attack machine and the media and come away ALIVE, doesn't mean she's beat them...by all accounts, they've succeeded fabulously in tarnishing her, whereas Barack Obama's skillful media manipulation has earned him glowing treatment...
Isn't it possible that the media ISN'T piling on, and rather, the much ballyhooed Clinton campaign has been inept at handling the media?
I mean...look at the last week or press releases. Even their own campaign admits that they made some pretty big mistakes.
Hillary's only argument for the nomination (in my opinion) is that she's the best suited to fight the Republican attacks...but if she can't even deal with incredibly meek attacks from Barack Obama, how can she even hope to win against the Republicans?