With the recent excitement over Barack Obama, it was easy to forget Hillary Clinton was the still Democratic party frontrunner for the 2008 US presidential election. The good news for the New York senator is that, according to a poll in the Los Angeles Times, that is still where she is. The bad news follows:
Democrats have an overwhelmingly favourable view of Sen Hillary Rodham Clinton, but she would be soundly beaten if she ran for president against Republican Sen John McCain now, a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.
Underscoring the New York Democrat's potential vulnerability, the poll also found that Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican little known to most voters, would give Clinton a run for her money.
Is Hillary in a strong enough position as she enters pre-primary campaigning in 2007? Add your comments below.
It is not her only poor showing in the polls today - the Plank blog on the New Republic website chews over a survey of Iowa voters (who have an early - and important - influence over the nomination process) that puts Clinton behind former vice presidential candidate John Edwards.
Given a choice between McCain and Clinton, half of those surveyed by the LA Times poll said they would vote for the Arizona Republican, compared with 36% for the former first lady. What is interesting is that neither Clinton's gender or Obama's race necessarily loom as big liabilities for them. Only 4% of registered voters said they would not vote for a woman for president; 3% said they would not vote for an African American.
Romney's Mormon religion is, however, more of an issue - 14% cited it as a reason not to vote for him. But all is not well for McCain either: the same proportion in the poll said they would not vote for a 72-year-old as president (his age on election day 2008). Andrew Sullivan picks on the findings of another poll that showed declining support among independents.
