The opening of this Joe Klein Article seems right to me. 

Unlike Barack Obama, Bill Clinton does not believe in "the fierce urgency of now." The former President has an exquisitely languid sense of how political time unfurls. He understands that those moments the political community, especially the media, considers urgent usually aren't. He has seen his own election and re-election—and completing his second term—pronounced "impossible" and lived to tell the tale. He remembers that in spring 1992 he had pretty much won the Democratic nomination but was considered a dead man walking, running third behind Bush the Elder and Ross Perot. He knows that April is the silly season in presidential politics, the moment when candidates involved in a bruising primary battle seem weakest and bloodied, as both Hillary Clinton and Obama do now. It's the moment when pundits demand action—"Drop out, Hillary!"—and propound foolish theories.


As much as I would like to, I can't make myself believe that this campaign has hurt the democrats much.  Rev Wright hurt Obama, bad, but wouldn't the scandal  have hurt him more in the General Election? If  Hillary somehow wins, then yes, the primary will have hurt the Democrats, since it will have somehow produced the wrong candidate.   Klein goes on to finish the above quote with this:

And so I'm rather embarrassed to admit that I'm slouching toward, well, a theory: if this race continues to slide downhill, the answer to the Democratic Party's dilemma may turn out to be Al Gore.

I am starting to fear a late entry like Gore.  Last week I wondered what happened to Bradley, and then I thought that the guy I really miss is Paul Tsongas.   But are those the two who we should worry about? Just how popular IS Gore?     And what will the donors think?  Beats me.