Democratic strategists had noted that a Kerry win Tuesday would have made Mrs. Clinton's plans for the White almost impossible.

But all of that has changed with Bush's re-election Tuesday.

"Hillary now becomes a natural rallying point for the party," Hank Sheinkopf, a Democratic strategist, told the Times. "Hillary has a national constituency, a top-tier political organization and shrewd political skills."

"The party will be looking to her," said Chris Lehane, an operative for the Clintons and John Kerry. "Hillary is uniquely positioned."

But the question is: Can the Democrats afford the risk of running another Northeastern liberal for the White House?

Hillary's supporters say that unlike John Kerry, Hillary's Senate record has been far more moderate, one that mirrors Joe Lieberman's more than Ted Kennedy's.

Mrs. Clinton supported both the Iraq war and the $87 billion authorization for Iraq. Asked in recent months by ABC News if "knowing what we know now" about Iraq would have caused her to change her votes, Hillary said she still would have voted for the war and the $87 billion.

Mrs. Clinton has one more hurdle before throwing her hat into the ring. She needs to win re-election in 2006. That seems likely in solidly Democratic New York. One sign to watch for is how well she does with the state's Republicans. In 2000, Hillary did surprisingly well in Republican areas of the state.

Still, not all Democrats are enthralled by Hillary's candidacy.

Speaking in Democratic code, Bill Richardson, the governor of New Mexico, clearly telegraphed that he does not think Hillary in 2008 is a good idea.

Richardson told the paper "he thinks that the Democratic Party, in seeking to rebuild itself in the next few years, should also be looking outside Washington for its new generation of leaders."

Could one of those leaders be the moderate Democratic governor of New Mexico?

More information: