“Well, technically you need 270 electoral votes.”

And you need to get 51% of the vote, in each state to get those EC votes. (Except Maine, I think.)

“And if you REALLY want to get nickpicky, I’d love to borrow your “poll takers aren’t representative of the voting population” bit the next time the ol’ 28% nonsense gets throw around.”

There’s a difference. When it comes to elections, only the voters have a say. When it comes to running the country, you are supposed to represent everyone. Even those who voted against you or didn’t vote at all.

Well, technically you need 270 electoral votes. And if you REALLY want to get nickpicky, I’d love to borrow your “poll takers aren’t representative of the voting population” bit the next time the ol’ 28% nonsense gets throw around.

Besides, polls this far out mean exactly bupkis. See GHWB’s 2nd term if you disagree.

Yes I have. She still leads all four Republicans contenders. You don’t need to win over 51% of the population to win, just 51% of the people who vote.

And she does a better job at that then anyone on the Republican side.

You see these numbers yet? IF they are correct, she’d need Bloomberg (or McCain) to pull a Perot and split the anti-Clinton vote.

Such tactics have never been used by anyone but Conservatives, don’t you know?