For years now (as I remarked on Friday), I have adhered to the assumption that Hillary Clinton Absolutely Will Be the Democratic presidential nominee, and I am having a great deal of trouble even considering the possibility that the nomination might go to Obama.

Maybe I've been in denial. It isn't an easy thing to admit you're wrong about something you saw as virtually inevitable, and to my way of thinking Hillary was as inevitable as the sun rising.

Of course, if I am in denial, then so is the entire pack of Republican candidates:

....the Republican Party is in a predicament. Its nominee faces an uphill fight against Clinton or any other Democrat because of the Iraq war, a precarious economy and, perhaps most important, President Bush's unpopularity. With the race still fluid, Republican hopefuls are selling their electability to GOP voters.

That often translates into: "I can beat Hillary."

It's true that Clinton no longer is viewed as the guaranteed nominee. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, her chief rival, recently rose in Iowa and New Hampshire, and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina remains a strong third.

But Clinton remains solidly ahead in national polls. She appeals strongly to many women voters. She is well-financed, well-organized and battle-seasoned from her experience as a New York senator and as a first lady in a White House that was scandal-prone but also associated with prosperity and peace.

Many Democrats think she is the most electable from their party. GOP candidates seem to agree; each uses her aura of inevitability to enlist conservative voters to his cause.

"That sort of falls into the 'Be careful what you ask for' category," said Jon McHenry, a GOP pollster in Alexandria, Va. "She may galvanize the Republican base, but she, as a candidate, and her campaign, as an organization, are probably best able to handle the rigors of a general election."

This one (which alluded to college lesbianism) is a perfect example:

And who can resist juicy tabloid spreads like this?

In a truly strange way, it's hard not to love Hillary (even if you hate her).

Whether any of the details in any of these things are true really doesn't matter. The fact is, after all is said and done, Hillary remains the hottest GOP fund-raiser.

I rarely listen to Rush Limbaugh, but the other day I was just flipping through the radio dial in the car and I paused to hear him in the middle of an anti-Clinton rant. Like him or not, the man is a great anti-Clinton performer, Mr. Clinton-basher extraordinaire. Being someone who does not like the Clintons and who appreciates quality entertainment whenever I find it, I just stopped and listened. I have to say, Rush was so marvelous that it brought back genuine feelings of what can only be called anti-Clinton nostalgia. Or is that the right word? Is it possible to have feelings of nostalgia for something you have loathed, even dreaded? I don't know, but in any case, Rush was skeptical about whether the recent Obamamania truly meant the End Of Hillary, and he made a remark that the cynical anti-Clintontainment fan in me found touching:

Until the house falls on Hillary (reference to the Wicked Witch in "The Wizard of OZ" for those of you in Rio Linda), I won't rest.

While clearly the man would love to see the house fall on her, there was something wistful about the way he said it. Enemies (even those who want to kill each other) have a perverse way of bonding, and there's no reason not to expect a genuine Limbaugh/Clinton bond to have developed over the decades. Rush of course discussed the latest Clinton smears against Obama, and had a ball with Andrew Young's famous remark about Bill Clinton having had more black women than Barack Obama. He repeatedly characterized the Clintons as a "soap opera," which is not only accurate, but displays that in his heart he must be as fond of them as they are of him.

Let's face it, people like villains. It's an American tradition.

So where does that leave the GOP with a young black man who strikes people as offering freshness and hope?

In dire straits. Career politicians don't like the unpredictable, and Obama is disruptive to the status quo.

I'm worried that the sooner later, the Republicans will wake up and realize that along with the Clintons, they have a mutual stake in stopping Obama. While he hasn't won Iowa and New Hampshire, if he does, Super Tuesday looms large, and all signs point to Obama:

The first survey of likely Illinois voters leading up to the state's accelerated presidential primaries also shows that Democrats are vastly more optimistic of their chances of returning to the White House than Republicans are confident of holding onto the presidency.

The findings of the poll, conducted among separate samples of Democratic and Republican voters, provide an early sounding about voter favorites who have campaigned extensively in neighboring Iowa, home of the nation's first caucuses Jan. 3.

By joining a host of other states that moved to the so-called Super Tuesday date of Feb. 5, there is a very real chance Illinois voters will play a role in the presidential nominating contest for the first time in years. But the outcomes in Iowa, New Hampshire and other earlier states could affect which candidates Illinois voters ultimately support.

Half of respondents for Obama

Among the 500 likely Democratic voters surveyed Dec. 9 to 13, Obama, a first-term U.S. senator from Illinois, was the choice of 50 percent; Clinton, a senator from New York who was born in Chicago and raised in Park Ridge, followed with 25 percent.

It's a shame, really, because I put stopping Hillary first. Ahead of everything else. As A JACKSONIAN put it in a comment to my earlier post,

I am an ABC voter: Anyone But Clinton.

The way I see it, the less powerful of a Democratic president we have, the better.

This is anything but an endorsement of Obama.

I just hate to see Republicans actually wanting Clinton.

They ought to realize that when the dust settles, she'll ultimately be harder to beat than Obama. (And once she's in, they'll never beat her in 2012.)

UPDATE: Let's not forget the importance of useful gridlock.

What's bad in traffic is good for government!