TimesOnline America Editor Gerard Baker has an excellent piece on the Democratic primary race in which he nails the reason it's gone on so long; both candidates are losers:
I would say Baker has a good idea of the two candidate's horrible weaknesses. And he points out in no uncertain terms that this should easily be a Democratic year what with the unpopularity of the Iraq War and a looming recession coupled with the most unpopular president in a generation.
The longer the Democratic race goes on, the more obvious it appears that each is deeply, perhaps ineradicably flawed.
Until about a month ago Barack Obama had done a brilliant job of presenting himself as a transcendent figure, the mixed-race candidate with bipartisan appeal who promised to heal the historic and modern rifts in American life.
But the mask has slipped. Under pressure in a Democratic primary, Mr Obama has sounded just like any other tax-raising, government-loving Democratic politician. Worse, he has revealed himself to be a member of that special subset of the party's liberal elite - a well-educated man with a serious superiority complex.
Mr Obama's missteps with the working class of Pennsylvania have thus transformed Mrs Clinton from the bluestocking Wellesley graduate into the good old girl, hanging out there with the straw-chewing rednecks, embracing their values, their worldview and even their lifestyle.
Obliterate Iran! Here comes Osama bin Laden! I love duck hunting! I can do shots and beer at the same time! It's hard to know what's worse - expressing condescending views about the working class or pretending to be one of them. The Democratic campaign is simply disappearing in the enveloping vapidity of the candidates' making.
And yet, the Democrats insist on trotting out two liberals who offer nothing new in the way of solutions - only repeating the tired, statist and class warefare rhetoric that has been a staple of liberalism since the 1960's.
Read the entire superb analysis.