It has always seemed noteworthy to me that among the first set of constituents that Senator Hillary set about cultivating was the investment banking community. Back in 2000, Masters of the Universe at top flight firms like Goldman Sachs and Lehman all seemed to emerge from meetings with her marveling at how brilliant she was to understand their business and their issues — even if GOP policies were the catalyst of a booming economy

She has courted hedge fund kings with similar diligence. That is natural enough, since a — they have a lot of money; and b — their successes have been a big part of the economic boom in New York City’s economy. (Though, unlike John Edwards, she hasn’t actually worked for one.) There will be plenty of quality time with HF types in the upcoming Hamptons tour.

So it will be interesting to see how she ultimately comes down on the legislation, pushed by Edwards, and now co-sponsored in the Senate by Barack Obama, to tax hedge funds and other private equity concerns at the normal corporate rates. This taxation comes as funds like Blackstone — founded by former Clinton Administration treasury officials — go public and reap billions, at “lower tax rates than a secretary,” to quote candidate Edwards.

Her rivals have got her in a tough spot: does she go populist, and tax the goose laying the golden eggs to satisfy the party’s pro-tax, soak the rich, base, even if that alienates wealthy donors and undercuts NYC’s economy? Or does she take a stand against raising taxes, and risk looking like she is favoring wealthy donors — including many who served in her husband’s administration?

Surely Edwards and Obama deserve credit for setting up this no-win situation for their leading competitor for the nomination.