In the spirit of the season, a new poll out today finds that Americans would most like to spend Thanksgiving with either Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or Rudy Giuliani.

What does this mean for the presidential race? Absolutely nothing. It is only an indication of overall name recognition, but it is still fun to report anyway.

Clinton tops the list with 27 percent, in the latest Quinnipiac Poll with 24 percent saying they would rather share their holiday meal with Obama (John Edwards gets 13 percent).

Closely behind, Rudy Giuliani is on the guest list for 22 percent of voters, followed John McCain (17 percent), Fred Thompson (14 percent) and Mitt Romney with 7 percent.

Giuiliani and Obama have the most crossover appeal with 21 percent of Democrats saying they would share their fixins’ with the former NYC mayor while Obama attracts 24 percent of Republicans (compared with 14 percent for Clinton).

The Bob Novak piece printed in the New York Post Saturday that claimed Hillary Clinton agents have some “scandalous information” about Senator Obama generated a flurry of written statements from both campaigns Saturday.

At a press availability in Marion, Iowa, Sunday, Senator Obama was asked about the piece by reporters.

It’s “slime politics” that needs to be nipped in the bud or else it could end up getting out of control and destroy a candidate as it did to John McCain in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004, Obama said.

While Senator Clinton’s campaign insisted Obama fell for a Republican trap to pit Democrats against one another by responding to the conservative commentator’s piece, Obama dismissed the charge as “silly.”

Watch his response:

The spat over whether “agents” for Hillary Clinton have been spreading the word that Clinton has “scandalous information” on rival Barack Obama — but won’t spread it because she’s running a positive campaign — reflects the very different political world views of the two candidates.

Clinton advisers insist they have no such info, and no idea what columnist Bob Novak (who first reported the goings-on) is talking about. But they were thrilled with Obama’s aggressive, personal response to the column. They’ve long believed that Obama has a glass jaw — that he’s thin-skinned and susceptible to overreaction in the face of attacks.

They think Obama’s outrage over a three paragraph blind item from a Republican columnist plays right into that weakness. Witness statements from Clinton aides after Obama’s response — they say he fell right into a Republican trap by immediately attacking a fellow Democrat, and that his over-the-top response to such a minor story in the primary just goes to show that he wouldn’t be able to handle much tougher attacks that are sure to come in the general election.

Clinton, on the other hand, wears the GOP attacks on her as a badge of honor on the campaign trail. She’s incorporated Harry Truman’s phrase “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen” into her stump speech; aides think Obama feels the heat a little too much to be the best nominee.

Obama aides, meanwhile, believe this type of rumor-mongering is exactly the kind of scummy Washington politics that they’re fighting against. It presented a perfect opportunity to hit Hillary for being part of the back-room Washington tradition that most Americans are sick of. What’s more, they say, her campaign’s initial response just showed her evasiveness — Obama’s campaign manager David Plouffe wrote “once again, the Clinton campaign refuses to answer two simple, direct questions” about the Novak story.

In his original statement, Obama said he wouldn’t be deterred by “swift-boat politics.” That 2004 incident colors much of the current Clinton/Obama dust-up. A Clinton adviser points out that Novak was one of the first reporters to write on the swift-boat attacks on John Kerry’s Vietnam service. And Democrats are always aware of the toll those attacks took on Kerry’s candidacy, and his refusal to strike back before the swifties’ criticism went mainstream. Obama’s campaign won’t let that happen to them; their rapid and aggressive response was designed in part to nip this rumor in the bud before it gains wider circulation.

Clinton pollster Mark Penn thinks Hillary had a VERY good night. Take a listen to his opinion on her performance, and on her rivals.

Something the Republicans finally agree on today.

From Romney Campaign Spokesman Kevin Madden:

“Tonight’s debate showcased a Democratic Party more interested in playing politics than advancing the solutions necessary to meet the challenges facing our nation. Senator Hillary Clinton and her fellow Democrats outlined an agenda of high taxes, bigger government and a weakened national security posture from America in the face of grave threats from abroad.

“At a time when our nation must secure our border and enforce our nation’s immigration laws, the Democrats are actively embracing sanctuary policies that are a magnet for illegal immigration. Providing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants is the wrong approach. The American people want straight answers from real leaders that aren’t the result of two weeks of indecision and political strategizing. The American people deserve absolute clarity on an issue as important as whether or not we give driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. Governor Romney has been quite clear that we must enforce our immigration laws and end the sanctuary policies that too many public officials have tolerated for far too many years.”

From Giuliani Deputy Communications Director Maria Comella:

“Watching the Democrats debate this evening, you’d think that the greatest threat to our country was the United States. There were no mentions of Islamic terrorism, but plenty of blaming America for the world’s problems. Tonight was a clear reminder of the contrast between Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s vision of winning the Terrorists’ War on Us, and the leading Democratic candidates’ position of retreat and defeat.”

Per Fox News Polling Director Dana Blanton

While John McCain trails front-runner Rudy Giuliani in the race for the Republican nomination, slightly more Americans see McCain as a straight-talker and as honest and trustworthy than Giuliani; furthermore, for the second month in row McCain performs better against leading Democrat Hillary Clinton in hypothetical matchups than any other top-tier Republican, according to a FOX News poll released Thursday.

And despite Clinton having the highest negative rating of all the top contenders, she continues to not only hold a commanding lead in her party’s primary, but also to best her Republican opponents in the horserace.

The national telephone poll was conducted for FOX News by Opinion Dynamics Corp. among 900 registered voters from Nov. 13 to 14. The poll has a 3-point error margin

Read more here…

Get Full Results (PDF)

Former Las Vegas reporter Major Garrett braves the throngs outside the Democratic debate in Sin City to bring you the feeding frenzy that is a pre-debate cheering section. The price he pays for bringing you the up-close, no holds barred, insider access? Almost getting swallowed alive by amped up Obama supporters. Check it out.

Obama’s Campaign Manager David Plouffe sent out an email Tuesday to “Interested Parties.” Basically that means it’s sent to a large group of reporters and it’s usually something juicy.

The email was entitled “Obama Gains Strength at Critical Time,” and was meant to be a look at how the campaign sees their candidate’s chances and/or how the campaign would like the press to interpret Obama’s chances in the early primary and caucus states.

Obama is doing well, the memo stated, because Clinton cannot unify and Senator John Edwards thinks that compromise is a “dirty word.”

In Iowa:

The Clinton camp is lowering expectations despite the fact that Iowa is “make or break for them.” Plouffe continued, “Which is why they will likely start planting signs, instead of questions, in Iowa.”

Of  Edwards – “We see no signs of Edwards growing outside of his core base from 2004.”

In New Hampshire:

Recent polls show that Hillary Clinton’s lead has been cut in half. “Amongst voters who say they know both Obama and Clinton equally well, we actually take a lead outside the margin for error, and in our internal polling as well as public polling, among those following the race closely, Obama and Clinton are in a dead heat.”

In Nevada:

What happens in Nevada…..(no, guess again) will be influenced by what happens in Iowa and New Hampshire. “Therefore, what the turnout is and the pace of decision making is not fully known.”

In South Carolina:

Obama has not run a single ad in the state, the campaign noted, and yet he is still doing better than John Edwards, who won the primary in 2004. “We also believe that Edwards’ support in South Carolina, if he is no longer in the race or is a weakened candidate, is much more inclined to be supportive of Obama.”

The Eleven February 5th States:

“As best we can tell, Clinton only has a meaningful presence in California and New Jersey,” the memo read. “Edwards has no formal presence in the February 5th states.”

Here is Senator Obama himself, talking strategy at a Monday town hall forum in New Hampshire.

Maybe not, if that nominee is Hillary Clinton. The New York Times reports Edwards declined to answer whether he’d back Hillary if she wins the nomination, saying “I’m not willing to talk about that at his point.”

The news prompted a quick response from Chris Dodd. In a statement, the Connecticut Senator said, “I am surprised at just how angry John has become. This is not the same John Edwards I once knew. Of course, we should all come together to support the nominee.” Dodd added, “I wonder which of the Republicans John prefers to Hillary?”

Clinton spokesman Isaac Baker wouldn’t comment directly on Edwards’ remarks, but said, “Hillary Clinton has spent her entire adult life supporting Democrats running for office and isn’t about to change that now. We fully expect that Hillary will be the nominee, but if she isn’t, of course she will support the Democratic nominee.”

UPDATE:

Producer Serafin Gomez, traveling with Edwards in Lebanon, NH, reports the former NC Sen told reporters,”I fully expect to support the Democratic nominee, and I fully expect to be the Democratic nominee.” So what if it’s Hillary instead? “I stand by what I said,” said Edwards.

From Major Garrett, a Fox News Exclusive:

In a telephone interview with Fox, Geoffrey Mitchell, 32, says he was approached by an operative for the Clinton campaign to ask a planted question about standing up to President Bush on Iraq war funding. The encounter happened before an event on a farm outside Fort Madison, Iowa. The Clinton event was hosted by Iowa State Sen. Gene Fraise.

Mitchell tells Fox that Clinton campaign worker Chris Hayler approached him and asked him to ask Sen. Clinton a question about how she was standing up to President Bush on the question of funding the Iraq war and a troop withdrawal timeline.

Mitchell told Fox the Clinton campaign wanted to contrast Clinton to Sen Barack Obama, who had recently said the president would probably prevail in the Iraq funding battle with Congress.

Mitchell said he refused to ask the question.

“I told Chris I had other issues I wanted to raise with Sen. Clinton,” Mitchell said. Asked what those were, Mitchell said: “I wanted to ask her why she voted for the Iraq war and why she didn’t consider that a mistake.”

Mitchell told Fox that Hayler, the Clinton campaign worker, was unhappy and moved on to others. “I know he tried to have others ask that question,” Mitchell said.

Ultimately, Mitchell said Clinton took no questions at the event.

Mitchell told Fox he is an Obama supporter but cannot participate in the Iowa caucus.

Mitchell is a minister in Hamilton and said he was reluctant to come forward because of the scrutiny he and his congregation might receive. “But I thought this was important to get out and I want people to know what happened.”

UPDATE: Hillary Clinton’s Iowa campaign confirmed to Fox that one of its staff discussed questions with Geoffrey Mitchell before the senator’s April 2 event near Fort Madison, but denied attempting to plant a pro-Clinton question.

Mo Elliethee, spokesman for Clinton, told Fox that Clinton staffer Chris Hayler talked with Mitchell before the event because the two knew each other from previous Democratic activities.

Mitchell told Fox he knew Hayler because Hayler had once been with Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh’s campaign. “They had a previous relationship and were talking before the event and the topic of the senator’s position on Iraq came up, and Geoffrey said he had some questions,” Elliethee said. “Chris suggested Geoffrey ask a question.”

Asked if the Clinton campaign denied Mitchell’s unequivocal assertion that Hayler tried to plant a quesiton about Clinton trying to stand up to Bush on IRaq war funding, Elliethee declined.

“I’m not going to comment on what he said,” said Elleithee, referring to Mitchell. “They had a previous relationship, the subject came up and there’s nothing more to it than that. It’s not newsworthy. It’s innocent. It’s not yesterday.”

That was a reference to Clinton’s campaign admitting, first to Fox, that it planted a question on global warming at a Newton, IA event on Tuesday.

UPDATE #2: Geoffrey Mitchell just called Major to state he had absolutely no previous relationship with Clinton staffer Chris Hayler. Mo Elliethee, spokesman for Clinton’s campaign in Iowa, told Fox that Hayler and Mitchell “had a previous relationship,” and that a discussion about Clinton arose out of a normal conversation between two people who knew each other well.

“I had no previous relationship with him,” said Mitchell. “I knew his name and by name only as someone who worked for Sen. Evan Bayh. But we didn’t know each other and I had never met him before this event.”