So Obama got through the second debate pretty  unscathed; latest polls have demonstrated precious little progress for McCain.  And Obama has handled himself OK, he didn't - and probably won't - reach the  heights of the debating art that Bill Clinton managed but McCain just isn't  cutting it.
 But I'd be intrigued to see where we'd be now if  Hillary Clinton had managed to get the candidacy. Firstly, of course, we'd need  to know who the VP would have been - which is impossible - because it would have  certainly had a effect, not least on who McCain picked - would we have ever  heard of Palin?
 Let's assume all would be the same, would Clinton  have been more or less effective than Obama? It's true that McCain has been  anything but assured in how he's handled the period since Obama's becoming the  Dem pick. His negative campaigning has largely revolved around provably false  information and his claims to be this or that have respectively recent incidents  that prove the lie too. His truly terrible non-suspension that he still claims  was a campaign suspension was pretty symptomatic of how poorly he's played the  last couple of months. But the question remains, has Obama brought this out of  him or would have messed up this much with Hillary?
 Hillary's campaigning outfit was pretty  impressive but was quite heavily negative in the same way McCain's is. Hers  failed against Obama and it seems McCain's is too (not really surprising). But  if they both were in a face off would it be a "negative-off" or would Clinton  have gone the more aspirational route? 
 I'm afraid I'm not a journalist and don't have  the time to dig into her senate voting record to establish which votes  surrounding the current economic situation could have been used to beat her  with.
 One thing is for sure, her Iraq/war on terror  attacks would have been blunted by her voting for the war whereas Obama has no  such contradiction. Would she have seemed a more fitting Commander in Chief that  McCain during a time of so much military activity? That would be a key thing for  the voters to chew over.
 Given that I've been unable to answer a lot of  these questions I would nevertheless instinctively feel that, although Clinton  may have sneaked over the line, I think this election would have resolved by  a waifer thin majority whilst Obama, I believe, is going to knock McCain  out of the park when compared to recent elections. But with Clinton, the  possibility would still have been quite clear that McCain could also have pipped  the New York Senator and the country would be potentially more divided than ever  (especially with Palin as VP).
 Your opinions?