Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-10975360-20131014124545/@comment-32656-20131127120944

Sam, that simply isn't accurate. Ample evidence exists to indicate that he was between Carter and Reagan on social issues, not left of Carter. Economically he was also between them.

By virtue of being the sitting VP, should Hilary not want it, and he does, the nomination is more or less his. He outpolls everyone but her, both against Repubs and other Dems. There's a reason for it, imo.

Hilary didn't have that big of a lead at that time, or really ever, imo - hardly a frontrunner, really. Only time she had numbers in that region was 2005, and she sure as heck wasn't a "frontunner" in 2007 or 2008. And, as Iowa showed in 2008, she really wasn't. There is a reason why that nomination battle lasted as long as it did.

Not made up, just reading from somewhere - as he noted more or less - that asks you to sip the koolaid a little too much.

Serious challenge, yes - but beat him, unlikely.

Doubt they break away like that, myself - but I'd bet on one of them mounting a third-party bid on what is now a small-party ticket or as an independent.

270 to win and Sabatos aren't all that great, imo. Have a look at  RealClearPolitics, they're good. Whathisface from the last election, the stats guy, if he says anything, would be best, imo.