Clinton Back to All Time Highs at 538

[Doctor Jack]

She is now at 78% in the polls only model. That is just a hair short of her all time high in June, which was around 79%. Glad to see this bounce is still going a week later

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=mobilebar&v=1

[Maru Kitteh]

1. 78%!

Wow. Why so low?

No, really. Great news! Steady as she goes.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

2. Fantastic!

I'm a little embarrassed by Ohio, though. Clinton's chances are little better here than in North Carolina???

We've got a bunch of rednecks in the southern part of the state, unfortunately. Look at nearby West Virginia and Kentucky.

Oh, well. I'll obviously be pleased with a Clinton win!

[DFW]

3. That sounds consistent with a 49%-39% lead among likely voters

Theoretically, in an ideal utopian scenario for the underdog, one could win the presidency with about 30% of the popular vote by still capturing the necessary number of electoral votes.

In reality, that would never happen, as voting demographics tell another story. But even so, getting more votes than your opponent does not guarantee a win. Just ask Al Gore.

Since I have been seeing Trump bumper stickers even here in my vacation spot in Massaschusetts, obviously, Trump will need more than 30% to beat Clinton. His ideal way to the White House as more than an occasional dinner guest demands that Clinton get all of the votes in states secure for her (CA, NY), and that Trump get a mere one more vote than Clinton in battleground states where the vote is close. Since there are, too, Trump voters in California, New York and Massachusetts, he needs way more than 30% nationally to win. Maybe even more than 50%, depending on the demographics. So, 39% for him is not just "down in the polls." It's easily news that is downright crushing.

Sounds good to me.

[lunamagica]

4. WOO HOO!!!