Hillary Clinton Is Statistically The Most Favored Presidential Candidate In Modern History

[onehandle]

Less than three weeks ago, Mr Trump’s odds had fallen to 55 per cent. Now, he is as likely to be the Republican nominee as Hillary Clinton is to be the Democratic nominee, with both a 98 per cent favourite in the betting markets.

Now that he’s wrapped up the nomination, his chances of being America’s next president have shot up from 17 per cent to 29 per cent. But that still makes Hillary Clinton a 69 per cent favourite (Mr Sanders or ‘some other Republican’ both have a 1 per cent chance).

That means Ms Clinton begins this six-month race more favoured than any other candidate in modern history: more than Mr Obama ever was against John McCain in 2008 or Mitt Romney in 2012, or George Bush was against Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/trump-clinton-begins-as-the-most-lopsided-race-in-the-modern-era-a7012321.html

[beedle]

1. And back in Sept she had 100% odds of

ending the primary challenge before the month was out.

If we've learned one thing about Hillary, she needs to start with a big advantage to buffer he strong ability to continually lose support.

[vi5]

2. Good.

Then there shouldn't be any excuses for not winning. If she blows that big a lead, on that big of a dunce of an opponent, hated by so many different demographics, then she'll have nobody to blame but herself and that crack team of strategists she surrounds herself with.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

4. Nope. The DNC has its way of blaming others for their failures.

[Jude the Obscure]

5. s/crack/crackhead

EOM

[inchhigh]

3. ANY Dem candidate woud have had

This big of a lead against Trump. What a shame we have squandered it on someone who is unelectable.

[Loudestlib]

6. And the most disliked.