Amibguous Cad
Member
It is pretty silly to say "sure, Hillary is looking like she'll win normally red states and start converting lifelong GOP voters to Democrats, but she's not going to win 49 states, so she must suck!" You're picking one of the most historically lopsided electoral outcomes to compare against.
Well, yes. I keep harping on her historically terrible favorability ratings, but Trump's are worse than Mondale and Goldwater's, too (and worse than hers). And neither of them had a prominent intraparty opponent refuse to endorse them at the election or have as much of the party establishment and the media against them. On the merits we should be expecting one of the most historically lopsided electoral outcomes. We've seen this happen before: a party gets taken over by extremists, nominates a candidate well outside the American mainstream, and gets crushed. 1984 and 1964 are the best parallels to this current election.
Sanders never led Clinton head to head. Beating another candidate by more than your opponent beats that candidate is obviously not a good metric. There are too many other variables and, since they will never be held accountable for the claim, it's easy to say "I'll vote for Sanders but I'll never vote for Clinton!" Since we know that the vast majority of Sanders supporters are now Clinton supporters it's very safe to say this polling result was meaningless.
There's nothing to argue with here. I mean that literally: there's nothing but unsubstantiated speculation, so there's nothing to respond to.
Hey, I can do that too. Beating another candidate by more than your opponent beats that candidate is obviously the best predictor of long-term electoral success. Hey, this is fun. Probably works better when you're in the mainstream opinion of the thread, though.
Independents aren't real. They are mostly conservatives. I am not sure why people keep bringing them up as though this hasn't been known since it started happening a lot in 2010.
And Bernie did better with these conservatives than when it was just Democrats because...?
She did. They're actually way better now. People just had to get to know her!
It was -17 the week before the conventions. We should perhaps wait for convention bounces to wear off before making any judgments.
There's also a third option, which is that, once again, you have created a model of the American political system which doesn't match reality.
Classy.