A shakeup is almost certainly a sign of management failure. But this management failure may reflect a poor choice of strategy, poor implementation, or both.

Clinton in the past has exhibited symptoms of Bush-esk failures in accounting for dissenting views. But that was almost 15 years ago, and the benefit of doubt would suggest that Clinton may have learned from her mistakes. Now, based on this account, I am not so sure...

Initially, Clinton's former White House chief of staff, Maggie Williams, was brought in to run the campaign even though Solis Doyle was still there. The result was confusion and awkwardness for the staff, who weren't sure who was really in charge.

But even more problematic was the campaign's money crunch. Over the last seven years, Clinton had raised $175 million for her reelection and her presidential campaign. But Solis Doyle didn't tell Clinton that there was next to no cash on hand until after the New Hampshire primary.

"We were lying about money," a source said. "The cash on hand was nothing."

In turn, Clinton didn't tell Solis Doyle that she was lending her own money to keep the campaign afloat. Solis Doyle found out third-hand. And when she asked Clinton about it, the senator told her she couldn't understand how the campaign had gotten to such a point.