Okay, I gotta’ warn you, I may swear a lot in this diary. I’m gonna’ try not to, but I’m not making any promises.

This whole New Hampshire debate charade between DWS and the Clinton campaign is friggin’ (nice job, Bob!) hilarious! I mean, it is side-splittingly funny! I haven’t stopped laughing all night!

Suddenly, out of nowhere, an unsanctioned debate pops up right on the eve of the New Hampshire primary? (This right after an out-of-the-blue sanctioned forum last night.) Really? And DWS really puts her foot down and shouts, “Absolutely not!” And the Clinton camp immediately acquiesces to the debate and shouts, “We’re in!”

Really? Who couldn’t have predicted this? (I did. Numerous times in the Rec list diary on the debate, and was chastised for my observations by some Clinton folks.)

Fuck (damn it!), we did not just fall off the turnip truck, Hillary!

This kabuki between DWS and Clinton signals only one thing:

Complete fucking desperation on the part the Clinton campaign. I predict right now that their internals in Iowa are in complete free fall. Total collapse. This stupid, transparent stunt has Bill’s reactionary flop-sweat panic all over it.

And I am abso-fuckng-lutely loving it!

Why should Sanders do her a favor and debate her before New Hampshire? He has zero incentive to bail her out. Sanders’ numbers are on the rise in New Hampshire. He slingshots with momentum out of wins in Iowa and New Hampshire into her firewalls of Nevada and South Carolina. (I suspect those numbers are sinking for her, too. How else to explain this inane stunt today?)

Another bungled Hillary Clinton campaign. Losing the first two states to a Democratic socialist? That has to be galling. And no one on her team saw it coming.

You know why Clinton and her team of geniuses are worried? Here’s why:

Even though the Clinton team has sought to convey that it has built a national operation, the campaign has invested much of its resources in the Feb. 1 caucuses in Iowa, hoping that a victory there could marginalize Mr. Sanders and set Mrs. Clinton on the path to the nomination. As much as 90 percent of the campaign’s resources are now split between Iowa and the Brooklyn headquarters...

Oh my god, this is high comedy. And it’s all the indication we need of what a pathetic general election candidate she’d be. We have been continuously told by the important people that we must nominate Hillary or risk a crushing defeat in November. Tell you what, I think our biggest risk of a crushing defeat in November is nominating Hillary.

I have been writing a few diaries the last few weeks about her flailing and floundering effort:

About her choice of King Sleazeball, David Brock to be her designated hit man.

Her decision in the last two years to take millions in speaking fees from the financial and pharma industries and her inability to defend her actions, especially about her three Goldman Sachs speeches.

About the campaign’s misjudgments and misallocation of resources and putting all their eggs in the Iowa basket.

Her decision to hold a big ticket fundraiser just days before the Iowa caucus hosted by an investment firm that may be facing federal scrutiny for its shady practices.

The miscalculations made by her campaign that have brought her to a point where she is being seriously challenged by a 74-year-old, self-described Democratic socialist from a tiny state, including her campaign’s decision to limit debates:

Oh, and about making sure Debbie Wasserman Shultz and the DNC limited debates, and, thus, limited exposure for Hillary’s opponents? (And, yes, the Clinton team pressed DWS and the DNC to limit debates.) That plan has backfired, too:

Quoting The New York Times:

Several Clinton advisers are also regretting that they did not push for more debates, where Mrs. Clinton excels, to more skillfully marginalize Mr. Sanders over his Senate votes in support of the gun industry and the enormous costs and likely tax increases tied to his big-government agenda. Instead Mrs. Clinton, who entered the race as the prohibitive favorite, played it safe, opting for as few debates as possible...

So tell me again how this new New Hampshire debate “just popped up.”

I’m sorry… I just cannot stop laughing.

I think she still has the inside track to the nomination based on her massive institutional advantages. But, by no means, is she necessarily a better bet in November. These past couple of weeks of inane, backfiring attacks and outright stupidity on the part of her campaign provide dangerous omens for this fall should she be our nominee.

UPDATE

This from Politico this evening:

But a few hours later, the DNC countered with a statement from chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. “Our next DNC-sanctioned debate featuring our major candidates will be held in Milwaukee, Wisconsin hosted by PBS on February 11th, with another already scheduled for March 9th with Univision and the Washington Post,” Wasserman Schultz said. “We have no plans to sanction any further debates before the upcoming First in the Nation caucuses and primary, but will reconvene with our campaigns after those two contests to review our schedule." That statement landed minutes after Clinton’s communications director Jennifer Palmieri said the front-runner would be happy to participate in the proposed debate if the other candidates joined, thereby allowing it to be sanctioned.

Love it...