NEW YORK: The New York Times pronounced in an editorial on Friday its “primary choices” in the presidential race: Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain.

The newspaper’s editors were “hugely impressed by the depth of (Hillary Clinton’s) knowledge, by the force of her intellect and by the breadth of her experience”. They were also certain that “she would be a strong commander in chief”.

The newspaper dismissed Democrat hopeful John Edwards as a populist, stating that “We have enjoyed hearing Mr Edwards’s fiery oratory, but we cannot support his candidacy (he) has repudiated so many of his earlier positions, so many of his Senate votes, that we’re not sure where he stands.”

Obama, on the other hand, was a promising and talented candidate, the paper stated, but “his amorphous promise of a new governing majority” led the editors to choose Clinton because they were not sure whether Obama had experience enough to “restore America’s global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm”.

The early primaries produced two powerful main contenders: Hillary Clinton, the brilliant if at times harsh-sounding senator from New York; and Barack Obama, the incandescent if still undefined senator from Illinois. The remaining long shot, John Edwards, has enlivened the race with his own brand of raw populism.