Obama outfront of Hillary when it comes to Election

In response to an article in the L.A. TIMES (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll24oct24,0,2039684.
story?coll=la-home-center) , Obama Supporter Gregg Heacock had this to say:

Dear Editor,

Your front-page article headlined "Clinton's past returns in her favor" skews information from the L.A. Times/Bloomberg Poll to celebrate Hillary's lead over Republicans while downplaying Obama's popularity. This would be more understandable were it not that your staff writers Peter Wallsten and Janet Hook fail to examine some important figures in the poll.

We might all expect that Hillary would do well, given that she has spent 8 years in the White House and even more on the covers of grocery store tabloids exploiting her marital challenges. But you polls show that all the Republican contenders get more votes when they run against Hillary than they do when they run against Obama. Even more Republicans vote for Obama than vote for Hillary, showing that he may well be a cross-over candidate. The fact that the "don't know" responses increase when Obama runs suggests people are willing to consider him and would like to know more.

Given Obama's relative obscurity, this suggests that, once people know more about him, his rating could go even higher than Hillary's. Hillary polarizes voters. Obama doesn't. That seems significant; yet, not one word in this article even considers this difference.

Respectfully,
Gregg Heacock