adamkatz:

Since I’ve already gone out on a limb and predicted it, might as well explain why (or at least what the Situation Room people will say tonight):

1. Red Phone - This ad was a turning point. Obama’s response was powerful but it engaged Clinton on her turf - national security, commander-in-chief day one, etc. Post Red-Phone, the conversation was almost entirely about experience - that’s a good thing for Hillary. Begs the question, maybe Obama should have hit back on something else? Tax returns?
2. NAFTA-thingy - What happened in Canada obviously doesn’t stay in Canada. When people weren’t talking about national security, they were talking about this. Goolsbee’s slip-up and then Obama’s slippery handling of it raise a number of questions - in Ohio: where does he really stand on trade? everywhere else - might Obama be full of it?
3. Strategery - Obama didn’t need to sweep tonight but merely win one of two. In that situation, the smartest play was to concentrate his energies in one place. That place should have been Texas. The demographic ground is more favorable (younger Latinos like Barack) and wouldn’t have forced Obama into an obvious pander-situation (NAFTA/Ohio) that would come back to bite him in the rear.
4. Getting Close - This is the most problematic for Obama. Every-time he gets close to being the presumptive Democratic nominee, the momentum starts to sway back to Hillary. Why? Press corps gets a bit more tenacious - sure. More importantly, I think there is a nagging question about readiness to be Commander-in-Chief (brought to the surface by point 1).

P.S. Ben Smith says Hillary needs to do more than win Texas/Ohio - why? Isn’t Hillary’s claim on the nomination as strong if not stronger than Obama’s? She has won more of the contested big states and Obama’s pledged delegate lead is the result of caucuses (many of them in unwinnable red states) that were lightly contested and most susceptible to the influence of a financially-powerful campaign that can pay for turnout?

This man is a genius.