As writing and inspiration often goes, this piece started out as something quite different. It was intended to be a relatively quick reply in the Comments section to CantStoptheSignal's great piece, here:http://caucus99percent.com/content/why-does-clinton-machine-want-us-leave. (And please do spend some time with that essay, it's worth it).

But in the last 48 hours the breakneck pace of political events has once again re-oriented many things.

One thing by now has been cemented as never before: Hillary Clinton and the DNC are actively trying to alienate Progressives. One can even argue, given her recent Self-Coronation as transmitted on CNN…they are actively alienating many Americans of all sociopolitical colors.

So, what could be some potential the motives ? The blueprint to all of this unprecedented unilateral stuff, ?

Here are just a few possibilities I'd like to posit:

1) First off, I honestly do NOT think we can discount the notion that hillary and DNC still actually believe that, in a scenario where Bernie is no longer a candidate, registered progressive Dems will actually grudgingly return to her in numbers.

This sounds ludicrous, I know - but if you are around my age and you recall the Bill Clinton Debacl-- oops, I mean Administration -- you can understand that Taking Liberals for Granted Since They Have Nowhere Else to Go has always been a cornerstone of Clintonism, right from the time Bill headed the Dem Leadership Council (DLC) in the 80's. Over the past generation there have even been leaked quotes of comments made by folks within the Bill and Obama cabinets, blatantly saying this (Carville, Emmanuel, Gibbs jumping immediately to mind).

So, in the spirit of "sometimes the simplest possibility can be the actual reason…", and given that creative thinking has never been the forte of Clintonpolitix…..it all may be as straightforward as this.

2) Although CantStoptheSignal's piece points out that Hillary is, indeed, not 'stupid' per se.... she has certainly shown a level of Entitlement throughout her career which has arguably clouded any good judgment she should have been able to maintain in past situations (whether as a First Lady, Senator, Sec of State, or Candidate).

So this may just be 'ingrained' (to an oftentimes scary degree). Literally a Moral Flaw which has gone wild this time around. Basically "she just cannot conceive of how she wouldn't be the Dem Nom" Particularly after she has worked so hard to line up her ducks in a row. What LOSING the Primary might actually LOOK like to Clinton and her campaign-meisters is simply beyond comprehension.

(I, for one, might suggest the simplest RX: Just recall for a moment May of 2008; then you should be able to wrap your mind around what that looks like).

Naomi Klein, in her great article in The Nation, actually gets to the nitty-gritty of this Clinton flaw: the couple's world-view is so limited, their actual life experiences so hemmed in, that they actually cannot 'conceive' that their political philosophy is wrong. (A Malady also known as Greenspanitis):

" The problem with Clinton World is structural. It’s the way in which.. profoundly enmeshed relationships—lubricated by the exchange of money, favors, status, and media attention—shape what gets proposed as policy in the first place.
" To understand this Worldview, one need look no further than the foundation at which Hillary Clinton works and which bears her family name. The mission of the Clinton Foundation can be distilled as follows: There is so much private wealth sloshing around our planet (thanks in very large part to the deregulation and privatization frenzy that Bill Clinton unleashed on the world while president), that every single problem on earth, no matter how large, can be solved by convincing the ultra-rich to do the right things with their loose change. Naturally, the people to convince them to do these fine things are the Clintons, the ultimate relationship brokers and dealmakers, with the help of an entourage of A-list celebrities.
" At the center of it all is the canonical belief that change comes not by confronting the wealthy and powerful but by partnering with them. Viewed from within the logic of what Thomas Frank recently termed “the land of money,” all of Hillary Clinton’s most controversial actions make sense. Why not take money from fossil-fuel lobbyists? Why not get paid hundreds of thousands for speeches to Goldman Sachs? It’s not a conflict of interest; it’s a mutually beneficial partnership—part of a never-ending merry-go-round of corporate-political give and take.
http://www.thenation.com/article/the-problem-with-hillary-clinton-isnt-j...

3) If one ponders Stockholm Syndrome....this may well be the endgame, too. A complete crushing and demoralizing destruction of the will of Progressives ties in quite nicely with the Clinton-Obama-DLC model of the "New Democrats".

In a sense, one can view her entire '16 campaign as just that. From the get go, she and DNC wooed in just enough Core Dem supporters to make her Coronation seem inevitable; and have since then been lowering the bar and compromising on literally EVERY issue important to Progressives, with the one exception of Abortion.
Each time this happens, each time the bar gets lowered…whether Citizens United/Super PAC funding…fracking…campaign money laundering…..flip-flops on Gun Rights…flip-flops on Coal...etc….
she, as the Chosen one, tacitly asks her followers to surrender a piece of themselves.. Surrender the piece, then rationalize that surrender to everyone else as being 'realistic', 'practical', 'politically sly' (she don't really mean it, wink-wink), or a 'necessity'.

In the end the Supporter, having compromised many of his/her core moral principles/values... is disempowered; yet still retains an allegiance, empathy, and respect for their Leader.

In a nutshell...this is the Hillary '16 Campaign.

There have, however, been a few Wildcards in Primary '16. The fact tat Bernie supporters will NOT lower their 'bar' being the Yuge one. None of the bright lights in Hillary's room likely ever conceived of such a serious 'problem'.

So, although Hillary and Co. couldn't massage a good half of Dem voters into playing her game of Hillary Limbo, the need still remains to get the holdouts to the point of complete and utter capitulation.

Triangulative wordspray has failed, MSM skewed coverage has failed, DNC proclamations have failed…so, Clinton '16 will simply use a more "Muscular" approach : bludgeon Progressives into submission.
In their eyes, given their limited understanding of how Life actually operates, they may well believe that although there would be bitterness and some revolt at first, in the end Bernistas will come crawling back…possibly even to be re-educated using carrot-stick methods.

4) The last possibility which strikes me is this: They truly have computed in their minds that they can win an election and govern with Zero Progressive support.

From a purely political perspective then, this alienation is exactly what it looks like: A Complete Jettisoning of Progressive Americans from the political process.

Recent gestures by the Clinton/DNC cabal show they are indeed trying to woo GOP/right wing supporters to her. Particularly supporters of W, to whom they are currently making their case very aggressively. Again, this may seem nuts…until one ponders: the difference between an American NeoLib and American NeoCon Administration is maybe, what ?... 6 degrees of separation ?

As Rob Urie states in his excellent CounterPunch article :
"To the political inconvenience of said establishment Democrats, including Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Koch’s endorsement [of her] has content behind it.
His charge is that establishment Democrats have the softer touch needed in present circumstance to sell Conservative policies like deregulation of industry and fiscal austerity.
As Bill Clinton, whose policies Mr. Koch preferred to those of George W. Bush, and Barack Obama have demonstrated— it is socially liberal Democrats who have been the better proponents of Wall Street’s neo-capitalist takeover precisely because they accomplish with stealth economic policies what Republicans attempt more straightforwardly through politics"
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/06/hillary-clinton-and-the-end-of-th...

So, in such a scenario, as long as Hillary can keep up the masquerade of seeming socially progressive, and as long as she can keep a % of her diehard LimboDemocrat supporters on that leash, the sham political system she would captain has no need whatsoever for Progressives, so can simply marginalize 'em, and forget 'em.

This also plays into what I personally feel IS a goal of the Corporate Plutocracy in America today: to eventually make the populace feel, thru a candidate like Hillary - that there's no need for a 2-party system at all, anymore. Because, as Hillary '16 shows us…registered Dems and registered right-wing Republicans actually can find a place under Her wide Umbrella.

And after a generation of Polarization Politics, where the populace was divided further and further into opposite camps while the 'center' became a vacant, dead wasteland…..isn't that nice big umbrella of Commonality EXACTLY what Americans have always wanted ? A bringing together of Americans* ? What a beautiful thing. What a Herculean Task Hillary will have pulled off.

America would get Clinton The Conciliator v.2.

*minus those who have been discarded as politically unnecessary, of course.

America would just need to set aside the fact that the middle-far Right of W would now occupy the new 'Center'; the Trump extreme Right now would become the Middle Right, and current Dem Neolib Clinton-Obama-Clinton faction would actually occupy the place of the current Left/Progressives. Given 4 years...that wouldn't be too difficult for the Corporate Plutocracy to do.

(As always, feedback, comments, and thoughts appreciated).