It's a tough question. Both of them have plusses and minuses. Given the mood of the electorate right now I would say that Obama is, because he has been successful at portraying himself as the "change" candidate, and voters are looking for a change. This is bad news for Clinton, who is seen to some extent as the agent of the status quo. I think a big reason for the problems she is having now is simple; it's something a politician friend of mine told me a year ago and that really seems to be happening now. After four years of Bush Senior, eight of Clinton, and eight more of Bush Junior, a lot of voters are balking at the idea of four to eight years of another Clinton and are shopping around for someone new. It doesn't have so much to do with them not liking her (although a lot of people don't, some for good reasons and some for not so good) but with her just seeming like more of the same.
Obama is, as Bill Clinton said, a "roll of the dice." Not that much is known about him-- which is working in his favor right now. He reminds me of Jimmy Carter in 1976, not substantively but in the source of his appeal. He has been able to position himself as the representative of "change" without alienating too many people by being specific about what kind of change he represents. Thus he's getting the best of both worlds. There's a lot of danger in such an approach-- the time will come when he will be forced to get more concrete about his positons and plans, and then he'll start seeming more like just another politician. This happened to Carter too, and almost cost him both the nomination and the election at different times. But right now Obama is riding the crest of the wave, and it might be enough-- especially in this outrageously front-loaded nominating season-- to get him the nomination.
The other great imponderable about them both, which will come more into play in the general-election season, is how their status as trail-blazers will affect their prospects. I see a great potential for Obama to get a huge number of African-American votes if he's nominated, enough to account for the margin of victory in states where you wouldn't normally think a Democrat would be favored. But I have a feeling that the chance to vote for the first African-American presidential candidate of a major party could send black voters to the polls in droves, including many who don't usually vote and have never even voted before. Some of the same sort of thing might come into play for Clinton, but I don't see it as being nearly as large a factor. Of course, there may well be a backlash for both of them too. How many people who would otherwise vote for the Democratic candidate this year won't if the candidate is an African-American or a woman? I know those people are out there; the question is how many of them there are.
Poll
