Personality wise the woman has always left me cold, though she does seem to be warmer and more charming lately. I like Obama, but I don't think he is electable because his lack of experience keeps being mentioned over and over. God knows we need a true statesperson to represnt us abroad and a tough politican to stand up to all the media scrutiny all presidents must handle. In the debates Obama often seemed a bit insecure, like he wanted to say something really wise, but wasn't sure what that would be. Obama might also end up doing something that could destroy his chances when the heat gets turned up.

After trying to imagine all of the candidates in presidental situations comparable to the last few years, only Hillary seems to have both the political knowledge and the hardheadedness to be able to fill those shoes. I also remember the gratitude and awe I felt when she first started trying to get healthcare for everyone. I almost feel that alone makes me want to give her my vote--a kind of cheater's proof to those who made her sound like some kind of inept screwball. Hillary has always been the kind of Liberal idealist I like, even in college she worked to make life better for the disadvantaged. I haven't made up my mind yet, but I've been feeling more inclined to consider a Clinton/Obama ticket as one that might set the nation afire.

As far as beating the Republicans, they don't seem to have been able to find anyone that can possibly match Hillary. I think Bush has blown it for any Republican candidate. Any Democrat can probably win against the current roster.

Caution: It's early in the race

Which makes polls, particularly polls where most of those surveyed won't even bother to go vote, meaningless here at about 19 months from election day. But, I guess it might sell a few more mags.

I don't think polls this early are "meaningless" per se. After all, Fred Thompson's supporters jump on every poll showing him moving up in the GOP primary race. And rightly so. Polls are a snapshot in time. They also suffer from two sampling bias issues: the sample size produces a margin of error (some of which become genuine outliers), and the pollster has to make decisions regarding who is actually registered to vote. Then there's the cell phone user who doesn't get polled.

But again, these caveats affect ALL polls, not just the general election matchup. Neither the primary nor the general is upon us yet. Polls give us a sense of where things are right now. What this poll does show, however, is that Fred Thompson is either not well known enough due to his acting career to make a difference in the general election, or that voters will actually pick Hillary Clinton unless Fred Thompson makes a substantial case for why he should be President - something he hasn't done yet (though his supporters have tried).

The first primary is only about seven months away. Polls like this influence voters in their respective parties. Everybody wants to pick a winner.

You have a good point Randy. "Meaningless" is an overstatement. These polls probably have some political value within political parties. The 'head to head' matchup Hillary vs. (insert name) means nothing other than I suppose convincing some Dems she's the one who can beat the Republican, whoever it might be. 'Politics' is often not reality. Given the timing and sample, the poll is not a good predictor of who Hillary can beat head to head. As for the eventual winner, I'll stick with meaningless.

Hey...Fred beats Hillary in Alabama. Please let the GOP pick Fred. Please...

Did anybody else notice that the only monogamous candidate the GOP has running is the Mormon?

(We may be living through our own national version of a greek tragedy, but it sure is funny at times.)

I keep waiting for people to sit up and notice all of the Bush-Cheney rats jumping into the Fred Thompson life raft.