I observe but do not have confidence in interpreting. Salon and Politico, the first skewing left and the second perhaps right (though readership of both are on the left side of the spectrum).
Salon runs a deeply critical analysis of Hilary Clinton's emerging campaign for President of the United States, Hillary Clinton just doesn’t get it: She’s already running a losing campaign by Bill Curry.
Politico's coverage of the Clinton Machine as the context for Hilary Clinton's run is even more devastating by raising all sorts of issues about corruption, moral and legal, presumption, elitism, inauthenticity and insincerity, and 1% political privilege in Chelsea’s Invisible Hand: An inside report on the shadowy role of Hillary’s most important adviser. by Kenneth P. Vogel.
I am not enough of a political junky to know the motivations of either magazines or reporters but those seem pretty caustic articles straight out of the gate, without any own-party opposition. Hilary Clinton has always been fairly polarizing and has never had a deft hand at retail politics. But two such trenchantly critical articles from different sources seems odd.