The media and the Democrat establishment have done a fine job trying to convince the American people that Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president of the United States. We only need to sit back and accept it like we would the next sunrise. But all isn’t well with the Clinton brand these days. In fact, the case could be made that her road to the White House is not nearly as foregone a conclusion as we’ve been told.

The lengthy list of Clinton scandals hasn’t seemed to stop the Hillary machine just yet, but the Clinton Foundation’s numerous sketchy dealings are beginning to take their toll.

The latest chapter in the Clinton Slush Fund’s ongoing improprieties includes FIFA, the world soccer body whose executives appear to have been engaging in corrupt acts for two decades. It now turns out that Qatar, the host country for the lucrative World Cup in 2022, was a regular donor to the Clinton Foundation and was a sponsor of the 2013 Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting. By that point, there were widespread allegations that the country had bribed its way into hosting the 2022 tournament. There were also accusations that unsafe working conditions in the building of its soccer stadiums for the World Cup led to the deaths of numerous immigrant workers.

Donations to the Foundation from Qatar and FIFA had been ongoing since 2006 and continued through Hillary’s term as secretary of state. In public, Hillary was calling for a stronger stance against Middle Eastern regimes and Bill was decrying the abuse of migrant workers. In private, however, Qatar was donating between $1 million and $5 million to the Clintons.

Bill’s response to all this is to shrug and move on. He told attendees at a Foundation event in March, “My theory about all this is disclose everything and then let people make their judgments.”

Theory and practice are clearly two different things with the Clintons.

Take, for instance, Hillary’s stance against the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling. She claims to want open political discourse, but she is so staunchly opposed to open spending on political activity by corporations and independent groups that she vows to support only those Supreme Court nominees who are sworn to overturn Citizens United. In other words, a litmus test. And let’s not forget that the whole case was about a movie funded by political groups critical of Hillary. She’s all for free speech, so long as she approves of the speech.

Hillary’s assault on voter laws is also motivated by how it will benefit her campaign. She called Thursday for universal and automatic voter registration, a horrible idea to eliminate the most basic requirement of having to register to vote. It’s her plan to counter voter ID laws, which she complains are a nasty invention of Republicans who are “systematically and deliberately trying to stop millions of American citizens from voting.”

Democrats have long attacked voter ID laws, which, of course, are really in place to prevent fraud. But seeing as how Democrats have a tougher time winning elections legitimately, these laws are an impediment to their grand plan. Her strategy includes identifying sympathetic judges and jurisdictions to hear cases against voter ID laws in hopes of at least suspending those laws for the 2016 presidential race.

Interestingly enough, a recent Rasmussen poll shows that 76% of Americans — and 58% of Democrats — support voter ID laws. The Leftmedia predictably labels voter ID laws racist, thereby perpetuating the BIG lie. Yet the Rasmussen report demonstrates that the American public isn’t exactly buying what they’re being sold on this one.

In fact, the American public may not be buying what they’re being sold about Hillary Clinton in general. A recent CNN poll shows that Hillary is in free fall in a number of demographic categories. Her general favorability rating is at 46% for, 50% against. Among men, she has 38% favorability, with 58% not liking her. She has a 54% favorability with women, but a 59% unfavorable opinion among whites. Young people ages 18-34 give her a 55% favorability rating, but they’re traditionally the least informed and least active voting bloc. She’s trending poorly among most other age groups, with older people liking her least. And she also loses points among people in income groups above $50,000.

Meanwhile, her tone-deaf campaign marches merrily along, trampling on a previously scheduled youth event and blood drive to make way for a campaign event at New York City’s Roosevelt Island.

While the 2016 Democrat nomination appears to be earmarked for Hillary, perhaps her inevitable presidency isn’t quite so inevitable. It’s comforting to see after all this time that larger swaths of the electorate are finally getting to know the real Hillary.