Sheryle Gay Stolberg leads her NY Times' analysis today:

The conventional wisdom, here and around the country, is that the centerpiece of President Obama's domestic agenda — remaking the health care system to cut costs and cover the uninsured — is on life support and that only a political miracle could revive it.

Stolberg proceeds to explain why the conventional wisdom is wrong.

I'm wondering if she has the conventional wisdom correct. From my reporting, my read of the status of health care reform in Congress, my take on the political stakes of the influential political players, I believe the conventional wisdom is still that Obama will pass some measure of health care reform. And as much as I despise echoing conventional wisdom, I agree. One reason, top Democratic strategists believe the cost of inaction is too much. History says they're right. Most recently, think George W. Bush on social security reform and Bill Clinton on health care.

Despite the turning tide, Obama remains unlikely to suffer Clinton's fate (on this issue). But in months, not years, we'll see.