Ed wrote about this already but I had to weigh in too. I’m flummoxed.
It was weird enough a few months ago when she popped off in an interview about Tulsi Gabbard, hinting that Tulsi might be some sort of Russian asset. Gabbard lunged at that criticism, recognizing that there’s no more sterling populist credential than to be attacked by Hillary Clinton. For weeks she crowed about how threatened the warmongering corporatist Clintonite establishment evidently was by her dovish grassroots progressivism. It was a smart play, potentially a way for her to get traction in the primary.
It didn’t work because the Fox-News-friendly Gabbard is a marginal candidate whom many leftists don’t trust, particularly after her subsequent punt on impeachment. Bernie Sanders is not a marginal candidate, and Hillary’s (obviously false) attack on him as someone whom “nobody likes” or wants to work with is destined to enrage his sympathizers. She’s handing him the same sort of rallying cry to motivate lefties that she handed to Gabbard except that the history between her and Bernie makes it that much more potent in his case. The DNC put on a thumb on the scale for her in 2016; Bernie campaigned for her anyway in the name of party unity; now here she is knifing him on the eve of the primaries, even going so far as to suggest that she might not endorse him against Trump.