Pollster.com

Likely voter generic is actually 42-49.

HillaryCorps is a good pollster.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68748720100908

Hillary dipping a toe in the water..

Pretty lousy numbers for the Dems. Of course, the "drop off voters," which appear to be disproportionaly AA, could change things if they decide to vote.

What's a secretary of state doing pontificating on budget deficits? She should just shut her mouth on it, and stop playing the typical "New" Democrat games. The surest way to elect a Republican in 2012 is for Clinton to challenge Obama.

Her job. She is the international face of the country, like it or not, and as she said, budget deficits like we are currently running lower our standing and pose a security threat.

I don't know, Paleo. This isn't 2012, but right now it looks like Hillary would beat BOBO in a primary, and be a tougher Dem contender than him in the general. Obviously, if he does get primaried and and goes on to beat her, it will hurt his chances in the general, as you say.

Not saying BOBO won't win re-election, but in today's climate, Dems best chances to win WH in 2012 seem to be with Hillary.

While technically she's right, it was odd for her to say it publically. My 1st thought was that she's testing the 2012 waters.

I can't see what leverage Hillary would have against Obama, other than approval rating. She would not have acted fundamentally different as president. She would have still pushed for health care, there would have still been a stimulus. That's what republicans are upset about, right? Unless race really is a factor, there is no issue Hillary can run on against Obama. And republicans everywhere assure me it it NOT race, it's policy. Policy-wise there's little difference between the Clintons and Obama. Obama accomplished a lot of what the Clintons failed at in his first term. He even used many of the Clinton staffers.

It would be remarkably stupid for her to run against Obama in '12 unless he's polling in the 20s. Even then, I can't see why the establishment would abandon Obama for her. She'd have less backing than she did in the 2008 primary. Obama has done a pretty good job making his cause the dem cause and wedding the party to him for better or worse.

This poll has some wonderful information, One thing stuck out however. Did you guys notice the %'s on who voted for McCain vs Obama and 48% of the respondants voted for Obama, and 48% for McCin. Odd, I thought Obama won by 7% of the vote. I would think this bodes well for the Dems

If Clinton were to beat Obama in a primary, a good portion of the AA vote in the fall would stay home. Which would ensure her defeat. No incumbent president has been defeated for renomination in modern times. Ford and Carter survived major challenges. LBJ bowed out, but if he wanted the nomination, he could have accumulated enough delegates in non-primary states to get. For an AA to be the first president in modern times to be defeated for renomination would be a prescription for disaster for Democrats.

Clinton would be better off waiting till 2016. She would be the same age as Reagan was when he was elected.