From page 551 of “A Woman in Charge” by Carl Bernstein:

“[Hillary Clinton’s] handling of the war issue subjected her to the kind of broader examination that she wasn’t expecting,” said a former Democratic senator, an admirer. “It put her in the position of looking backward, not forward, of caving to conventional wisdom, instead of moving in the direction of new leadership, new ideas, being bold. Hillary stands for very good things on almost all the other, traditional issues. Women’s rights, child care, health care, minimum wage, etc. She’s studied a lot of them. She is a very good senator, one of the best. But the war revealed that she is a throwback to another time, that she is looking like a tired version of herself.”

[Hm. I’m half-joking, but would “John Edwards” fit the description of a former senator and an admirer?]

One of her former White House aides observed, “I don’t know how anything in her life can be deep or honest because she’s tied herself in to stay with Bill… So everything is seen from this kind of warped perspective in a way. She can no longer be honest about what she actually feels, so it is hard to know if she’s being honest about what she says she thinks.”

[No evidence, just going with the gut, I wonder if “George Stephanopolous” counts as “one of her former White House aides.” I guess he was Bill’s aide, not hers.]

Finally, my favorite quote, from page 552:

A long time associate of the Clintons, with whom Hillary has consulted in her quest to return to the White House, said: “She has a very plausible case for president. She had an eight-year supergraduate course in the presidency, a progressive platform. But she should have been more probing and aggressive by this stage, not looking back.” He paused. “Besides, I’m not sure I want the circus back in town.”

Bernstein calls that comment, “a succinct expression of her biggest obstacle.”