Poll: Clinton Would Lead Rice in '08 Race

ALBANY, N.Y. - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton leads Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a hypothetical presidential matchup, according to an independent poll released Friday.

The poll, conducted by Marist College's Institute for Public Opinion in conjunction with New York City television station WNBC, gave the former first lady 50 percent to 41 percent for Rice.

But Republicans John McCain and Rudolph Giuliani both topped Clinton.

Clinton, McCain and Giuliani are all considered potential 2008 presidential candidates. Rice has said she will not run.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051022/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_poll

I know not everyone here is a HRC fan (myself included), but I thought it was interesting the way everyone fawns over Condi.

find a Dem that would not out poll $1,000 a pair Rice. :)

n/t

but I don't see a winner. I think either could win that one.

We would then be caught between a disaster and a nightmare.

Would solve the problem, no?

Here we go again, almost daily they tell us how well Hilliary will do, just as they convinced the democrats to drop Dean for Kerry - then laughed as they watched Kerry do what he could to lose. Democrats need to wake up, stop listening to the media and pick a fighter that is willing to stand up for America.

Hillary is the best case scenario FOR republicans-They pretend to be afraid of her when the truth is they would love nothing more than to see her as the nominee.It would give them a lot of ammo-the whole Clinton thing and all the other stuff that the democratic party needs to get by once and for all.For US...the MSM's darling is Hillary Clinton so we could lose.Redneck America is NOT voting for a woman sorry girls it's just a fact.

I believe she will never win. No woman would win. Not now, not in war, and sorry, but def. not a Clinton.

If I were a republican, I'd want like HELL for Hillary to run. Wonder why that is. This is ridiculous that she is being pushed out there as if she were the one who "most" Dems want.

I'm getting aggravated about this.

Dean raised more money, had more ground troops and had monopoly on the anto war movement. Dean's incompetence and unlikability is what did him in.

(after Gore endorsed him) they needed somebody else and promoted Clark (until NH), then Edwards (after NH), then Kerry (when it became obvious they did not have anybody else to support - then it was time to promote VP Edwards).

This would be closer to the truth.

But you got the general idea. Stop listening to the media. Listen to where people stand and whether you agree with them or not. (There are plenty of fighters I would vote for holding my nose).

He seemed really excited as anyone would be in front of a large crowd at a pep rally of all places. The media sold the idea of him being crazy and everyone ran with it.

They beat one candidate after the other once they thought he could be the nominee. That's all.

And of course, when they got this record of Dean, they played it again and again, because they had already decided against Dean.

a weak democratic candidate wins against an unlikely republican candidate

I like the trend, though.

A waste of my time to comment on a post like this, but I expect to see more responses on this than on really important issues.

The problem with this stupid poll is that we all know that there is no difference between Hillary and Condi when it comes to keeping the imperialist wars going.

Enough already.

Your average Republican that would still be terminally stupid enough to vote Republican wouldn't stand for a presidential candidate that is darker than bleached white.

candidates.

I'm so damn sick of this Hillary 2008 AND Condi for president threads.

The hell with both of them.

Succintly put. Thank you.

:)

I'll have neither Hillary nor Condi, thank you very much.

To paraphrase Hitchens (from his better days), they're two cozily-fused buttocks of the same giant derriere.

There in NY and NY candidates always seem to do better that non NYers. Besides, 2008 is a long ways away. The should be polling for 2006.

It's highly unlikely that you will find the same broad-based support that Bush got from the party for a couple of pro-gay rights, pro-choice, republicans.

My money is that they'll pick a hard-nosed, christian, republican, and give either McCain or Giuliani the VP spot so they can run of the name.

Pat Robertson and James Dobson have already said they would fully support Giuliani. I have a feeling Giuliani will be the nominee as they hate John McCain. Giuliani will be the establishment candidate and he will have full support from the Religious right.

the Democrats with the money begin to run ads with every word that McCain and Giuliani ever said good about Bush from 2001 forward.I would run that picture of McCain and Bush eating cake in Az. the same day the people in new Orleans were fighting for their lives.

Another thing I see is that the folks with the money need to find all the negative comments by the holy Right of the Repub party they said about McCain and Giulliani. We heathens on the left that the holy right say we are, will get to see just how big a hypocrites and reprobates these holy folks are, if they select either McCain or Giuliani.

So what she beats Condi, but she loses to Guilliani and McCain by 9 points and 7 points respectively.

And 49% of Americans DON'T WANT HER TO RUN. Only 48% do.

Also, More people than not say they will not vote for a woman President.

If Hillary is our nominee we are toast. AGAIN.

She would lose in a landslide to McCain.

not any percieved strenth of Hillary as a candidate...

They are polling between war and war-lite?


I would stay home.