Anyway, the results are from seven states - South Carolina and the six New England states (Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island). For the Democrats, Hillary Clinton leads in all seven states, averaging around 34%. After that, there's a large drop down to a cluster of candidates - John Edwards, John Kerry, Al Gore and Wesley Clark - running about 25 points behind Hillary. Then, there are the low-single-digit candidates, including Bill Richardson, Evan Bayh, Russ Feingold, and yes, our own Mark Warner (1% or 2%).
For the Republicans, the gap is large as well, with John McCain WAY in the lead in all seven states, averaging around 43%. Following McCain, there's a cluster of three candidates - Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and George Pataki - with some significant (5%-10%) support. Besides that, everyone else is pretty much out of it, with George Allen managing only 1% ratings in 4 states - South Carolina, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachussetts. Not good, except for the fact that "undecided" is so large at this point, ranging from 23% to 40%.
So, right now it looks like Hillary Clinton for the Democrats and John McCain for the Republicans. And if the election were held today, the outcome would be...John McCain in a landslide. Not good for Democrats if they nominate Hillary Clinton. Obviously, the answer here is for Democrats NOT to nominate Hillary Clinton, despite all her money and high name recognition. Instead, I would STRONGLY recommend that Democrats nominate someone less divisive and more likely to win, like Mark Warner, Wes Clark, or John Edwards. If not, we can kiss the White House good bye for another 4 years, and that is simply not acceptable.