Andrew Sullivan and the New Yorker: Senator Clinton a threat to President-Elect Obama? [View All]

[Politics_Guy25]

What should I make of these two snippets? Should I dismiss them out of hand?

First from Andrew:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/week46/index.html

Blog entry is at 5:01 on Thursday night.

The Permanent Menace
I hope Obama is vigilant:

“You watch,” he said. “In a year, the Clintons will orchestrate a campaign to declare this a failed Presidency.”

They will if they can. Obama's most dangerous foe remains now who it has always been. And she's not a Republican.

And the New Yorker opines here: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/11/17/081117ta_talk_paumgarten

The host predicted that President Obama would have a miserable term and face a challenge from within his own party in 2012, likely from Hillary Clinton. “You watch,” he said. “In a year, the Clintons will orchestrate a campaign to declare this a failed Presidency.”

I realize that this will be controversial so I want to tread very lightly. To say that red flags have been raised in my mind would be accurate.

However, at the same time, the Clintons' legacy could be damaged and I doubt that they would want to do this, Plus, what is their incentive? To me, the risks are far far greater than the rewards.

So all in all, call BS on this or not?

Edit: And their ferociously strong campaigning for Obama would argue and the lack of leaks designed to hurt him during the campaign tend to argue against this as well. Plus, I for one reject the premise out of hand that this will be anything but an amazingly succesful presidency. The New Yorker host probably is a rabid GOP wingnut the more I think of it as well