Actually, only one out of the last several. She’s up 4.5 in the RCP average, 3.7 in four-way race polls.
So 3 is closer than 10 to reality.
Those are the unskewed polls, right? 
Congratulations on mere cherry-picking in that one, not insinuation.
That’s the RCP average. If you think they left out polls, then post them. I see only one poll in the past dozen where she’s up by double digits and it’s a two-way race poll, which is not actually what’s happening.
Most importantly for the purposes of the Senate, Clinton is only getting 40.6% of the vote:
Ain’t no coattails with 40.6% of the vote.
Well considering our nation elects its presidents with a popular vote in July, and spots the Republican 4 percentage points, it looks like Hillary has lost.
I actually think Clinton’s margin will probably increase. First, I think that she will make a smart VP pick, like Tim Kaine, while Trump picks someone who reinforces his unseriousness, like Gingrich. Then there’s the conventions, one of which will look professional and the other which will be a huge cluster.
The only path I see for keeping it close is for Trump to skillfully push the right buttons of the silent majority as Nixon did, plus for events to give him some support(recession, terrorist attacks, increased crime). But even there I don’t really see much hope for him. Clinton’s interview with Ezra Klein shows that she gets the anxieties of the white working class and if push comes to shove, she’s never been afraid to throw some group under the bus to win an election.
In terms of margins likely increasing I think you are likely, albeit not certainly, correct.
Coattails will of course depend on how many traditional GOP voters stay home, turnout for Clinton, and what that 15% who are not willing to answer Clinton, Trump, or even Johnson right now, many of whom are traditional GOP likely voters, do on election day. I personally highly doubt they go Johnson or Stein. Some hold their nose and vote against Clinton. I think many of them stay home though and some hold their nose and vote against Trump.
And the devil will be in the local details. For the House there are a fair number of suburban districts with lots of college educated White voters that have gone GOP pretty reliably. They are winnable this time. Doesn’t mean they will be won of course. And the Senate already was going to be close. Trump is divisive within the GOP plus GOP-leaner universe. Throw in with him or agin’ him, either way they piss some group off.
Sticking to the thread, a Clinton VP that can articulate economic populism well and can highlight how what Clinton wants to do will help move the needle that direction, will undercut Trump’s sales pitch mightily. The tricky part is to acknowledge the anxiety and stress “the middle” feels while also celebrating how much better the economy actually is under Obama and as a result of his policies, including trade pacts.
This is the second time I’ve seen you talk like you’re part of Trump’s group. What’s with the “we” here?
I’m still with the party. I just won’t back the party’s nominee. But i have little beef with the downballot republicans and expect to vote for Marco Rubio for Senate.
Plus I can still enjoy some satisfaction in seeing Democrats get rightfully raked over the coals for their belief that politics applies to everything, even court cases and basic administration of the law.
You’ve got a little something in your eye there…looks like some kind of beam…
The party’s choice of nominee is the truest reflection of who they are. You do support the party of Trump.
What has Little Marco ever done for you? He has no interest in doing the job, he’s just running in a failed attempt to keep McConnell in the Majority Leader’s office.
If I might post on what the thread is actually about, it seems that Elizabeth Warren is going to speak on the opening night of the convention. Seemingly, this would indicate she is not the choice. But of course schedules can be changed.
I assume that’s exactly what adaher wants too.
Given Clinton’s recent poll deterioration post-Comey, she’s going to go cautious. No way it’s Perez or Castro. The betting markets seem to favor Kaine and that would make a lot of sense. My money’s on Vilsack.
adaher saying “no way it’s Perez or Castro” somehow makes me want to put a lot of money in the prediction markets on Perez and Castro (especially Perez).
Also, cite for poll deterioration beyond today’s polls? Or is that what you’re talking about?
Between Perez and Castro, Perez would be the smarter choice - comes across as more mature, and can actually speak Spanish.
Do we know who is going to deliver the keynote address at the Democratic convention?
Never held elective office before though. Does he understand politics? His handling of those cases that has me up in arms shows that he’s a bit hamhanded about it. Lacks the subtlety required of successful politicians.
You think Clinton/Anybody loses in that comparison to Trump/Anybody?
Why tempt fate? Clinton is already ahead and only she can get herself behind. Why pick a VP that can also help her lose? There’s just no sense in taking risks with the VP pick.
Technically he has held local office, albeit at the county level.