PHOTOGRAPH BY JONATHAN ERNST/REUTERS

In the past few months, as Hillary Clinton has embarked on what has often looked like a soft launch of her 2016 Presidential campaign under the guise of publishing a memoir about her four years as Secretary of State, she's demonstrated some of the attributes that would make her a formidable candidate. She's racked up more endorsements from prominent Democrats, her poll ratings have remained favorable, her fund-raising ability has been highlighted, and she has demonstrated an uncanny knack for dominating the headlines.

That last ability has proved double-edged, however. Several days after The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg delivered a lengthy interview with Clinton to an unsuspecting public, the aftershocks are still being felt. At one point in the interview, Clinton appeared to criticize President Obama's cautious approach to foreign policy, sharply dismissing the phrase "Don’t do stupid stuff," which is often attributed to him. On Tuesday, Clinton called the President to explain to him that, in the words of her spokesman, "nothing she said was an attempt to attack him, his policies, or his leadership. ... Like any two friends who have to deal with the public eye, she looks forward to hugging it out when they see each other tomorrow night."

Evidently, the "hugging it out" will take place on a golf course on Martha's Vineyard, where, on Wednesday evening, Clinton and Obama will both be attending party organized by Vernon Jordan, the venerable Friend of Bill. As I'm writing this, it's not clear whether any reporters will be allowed to witness this coming together. In the meantime, though, the media jackals—by all accounts, that's pretty much how Hillary views journalists—are happily feasting on the meat that she and Goldberg kindly provided.

Writing in Wednesday's Times, Maureen Dowd noted that the former First Lady had demonstrated "the diplomatic finesse of a wrecking ball." That was about the nicest thing Dowd had to say. Suggesting that Clinton was deliberately seeking to distance herself from an unpopular President, a suggestion that other commentators have also put forward, she concluded, "Obama is learning the truth of another unofficial slogan in politics. 'The Clintons will be there when they need you.' "

Dowd is a longtime antagonist of the Clintons, as is the neoconservative Weekly Standard, which, as Dowd noted, reprinted some of Hillary's comments from the interview with Goldberg, billing them as a "guest editorial." But it isn't just the Clinton bashers in the media who are piling on. On his Twitter account, David Axelrod, one of President Obama's top advisers, wrote, "Just to clarify, 'Don’t do stupid stuff' means stuff like occupying Iraq in the first place." (Just in case you've forgotten, Clinton voted for the war.) Indeed, this is a flap that has captivated much of the political world. One of several Politico articles devoted to the interview was headlined "Cocktail chatter with Barack and Hillary." The Washington Post and the Times had plenty more.

Even in today's hyperactive, always-on media world, that's pretty good going—especially for mid-August. Most likely, things will die down once Clinton and the President make up, which is surely what will happen. But, even though the immediate storm will blow over, it has raised anew a nagging question that has been lingering over Clinton since her rough book launch, and, indeed, since the defeat that she suffered in 2008—a campaign in which she started out as the front-runner: Can she play this game at this level?

As I intimated up top, the obvious answer is yes, of course she can. While running for the Senate in 2000 and 2006, she oversaw faultless campaigns, and racked up big victories both times, albeit not over the strongest of opponents. As a globetrotting Secretary of State, she was a very popular figure; even today, her aura and reputation are such that she has scared off any serious opposition for the Democratic nomination. Thanks to her unique set of experiences, she also has other advantages. The Clinton political operation remains a formidable one, with vast reservoirs of money and talent that it can call on, including her husband, whose mere presence is a significant plus. (According to a new statistical study by the political scientist Jordan Ragusa, every time that Bill Clinton's approval rating goes up a point, Hillary's goes up half a point.)

In short, Hillary remains a very formidable political figure, and she's still the strong favorite to be the next President. (At the British betting sites, the odds on her winning in 2016 are about 5-4.) All that said, though, she has some issues to address going forward.

One goes to the substance of her chat with Goldberg, in which she struck a tone that was hawkish, interventionist, and fiercely pro-Israel. The reactions to what she said have been interesting, and it's not clear whether they are what the Clintonites hoped for. The editors of the Weekly Standard loved the interview, and David Brooks also approved. James Fallows and Kevin Drum expressed serious reservations; so did I. If Clinton's intention was to extend her political reach and attract the support of conservatives, she succeeded. If she was seeking to present a foreign-policy vision attractive to progressives and centrists, she might need to think again.

The second, and more immediate, issue is Clinton's tendency to make verbal gaffes. When, in June, she told Diane Sawyer that she and Bill had emerged from the White House "dead broke," how did she think it would be taken? In December, 1999, the Web site Politifact pointed out, the Clintons paid $1.7 million for a house in Westchester. The following year, they bought another house, in Washington, for $2.4 million. Yes, they had mortgages and big legal bills incurred while fending off G.O.P.-inspired investigations, but they also had enormous earning power. By 2004, according to her public disclosures, Clinton was worth between ten million dollars and fifty million dollars.

Clinton's public dismissal of the phrase "Don't do stupid stuff" was similarly ill-advised. In the full transcript of the interview, to be sure, she makes clear that she doesn't believe this phrase is a fair or complete characterization of Obama's approach to foreign policy. At one point, she even talks about it favorably, or semi-favorably, remarking, "That’s a good lesson, but it’s more complicated than that." However, rather than leaving things there and expounding on her own views in isolation from those of the President, she brings up the phrase again, of her own volition, stating, "Great nations need organizing principles, and 'Don’t do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle."

For a professional politician, these are rookie errors. For a politician who has been under intense scrutiny for more than twenty years, they were almost inexplicable.

The benign explanation is that, since leaving the State Department, Clinton's gotten a bit rusty, and that's why she went out on book tour: to sharpen up and get her errors in early. As anybody who has seen her perform in public can testify, she is knowledgeable, brimming with energy, personable, and even, on occasion, funny. Once she regains her sea legs, the optimistic argument goes, these attributes will come across to the public at large, and she'll be fine.