Put aside the laughable nature of these assertions. In the Clinton worldview it was the forces of hate, with an assist from the media, which destroyed the promise of Bill’s presidency. The personal foibles that grew out of Bill’s giving nature and his need to help others – themselves the result of a troubled childhood - were cynically used as a political weapon to defeat his progressive agenda. The 2008 campaign, in this view, is déjà vu all over again.

You see, it can’t possibly be their fault. When campaign surrogates bring up Obama’s drug use, Hillary knew nothing about it. When they discus Obama’s Muslim background they meant it as a compliment. When they use potentially racist terms like “shuck and jive” to describe his campaign, it is just a poor choice of words. When Hillary herself says that Obama hasn’t done the “spade work” necessary to be president, there are clearly no racist connotations intended.

When her campaign lurches from awkward slogan to awkward slogan, when she fails to answer a straightforward question; when she gets in it to win and promptly places third; when Bill steps all over her message; this is all someone else’s fault - the media being the prime culprit.

The surprise win in New Hampshire temporarily put a smile back on Bill and Hillary’s faces and put aside the media attacks. Remarkably, after “thirty-five years of being an agent of change” Hillary claimed to have finally found her voice.

Call me cynical, but Hillary doesn’t have “a voice.” She has a driving ambition to be president and an inability to tolerate anyone who stands in her way.

It doesn’t take a pollster to predict this penchant for blaming others will return the moment she starts losing again.

After all, it can’t be her fault.