Fast forward to 2012: Obama, whose resume we’re now painfully aware of, will face tough questions. Defend his record. Defend his decisions. Explain to the American People why he promised one thing in the campaign and then did the opposite while in Office. And if there’s something we (kind of) learned about Obama during 2008 and into his Presidency, he doesn’t take kindly to being questioned or having to defend something, i.e. tanking in the last debate and then canceling the next one which would have been the last one. How will this play out for those Democrats (yes, Democrats!) and Independents who are reluctant to, in their minds, make the same mistake twice? They may see a less-than-Presidential man once again lecturing us for not supporting him more or trusting him more or something. Not exactly designed to give the Voter a case of the warm and fuzzies or inspire them to whip out their checkbooks.

One thing I hear a lot of in Democratic circles — to the point where it’s now becoming a not-so-subtle roar — is how Hillary never would have capitulated so easily to the Republicans, never would have made deals with them behind the Dem Party’s back, never would have folded so easily without a fight. What I hear time and again is Hillary is stronger than Obama. A bare-knuckle fighter who isn’t afraid of the Republican Hate Machine because she’s already faced it and won. She’s relentless and determined and a ferociously hard worker — no golf or basketball for her — and isn’t that, all of that, what the Party needs?

I still think she’ll run because that is, in fact, what the Party needs.

I also hear, and this is truly frightening, people wondering what it’d be like to “make history twice” by voting for a woman. Even one on a Republican ticket. Yes, you read that right. Make history twice. If the choice is between Obama/Biden — and the albatross that is their Record and their penchant for punking their own Party — and an apparently nice Republican guy with an apparently nice (or at least not as scary as she could be) woman as VP, some would be tempted to “make history twice.” As ridiculous as it sounds, those Party Pooh-Bahs in DC would be wise not to pooh-pooh a Voter’s desire to “make history twice”.

At the end of the day and as ugly as it is (or can be), the Democratic Leadership is obsessed with self-preservation. If the irrefutable facts (i.e. polls) show that they can keep the White House with Hillary as the Nominee, many of them won’t think twice about throwing their weight behind her. And, like you said, it’s not like she’s some newbie upstart who’d have to start from scratch in gathering support and money and it’s not like Obama is somehow OWED the Nomination simply because he’s the Incumbent. It might be good to go back to the days when politicians, especially Presidents, had to earn it.

My political instincts tell me there are many whispered conversations in many darkened living rooms right now wondering how best to approach Hillary Running.

The Category II candidates are zealots for whom there is only one path: my way. That is not how the government of the USA is supposed to function. I find it hard to take them seriously, but I should.

I also think that, once Romney comes out of his strategic shell, the dynamics of the Republican primary oratory will differ between Category I and II candidates.

You say the dynamics will be different based on whether the Republicans nominate Category I versus Category II candidates – but how will it be different? (I’m not disagreeing – I’m interested in your take).