Personally, I don't buy this idea that Hillary is unelectable. Sure, she's polarising, but so was Bush. She's seen as a radical, but so was Bush. A lot of people will vote against her, as many others did with Bush. No, I think she's in with a shout.
Bush is seen as a radical? Maybe now, but not in 2000. Nor was he that polarizing in 2000. (Or at least, no more polarizing than just about any other Republican would be.) Back in 2000, both Bush and Gore were seen as rather vanilla, uninspiring candidates, who didn't inspire a whole lot of passion either for or against them. And of course, the campaign rhetoric of both candidates was so poll-tested for swing voters, that it was easy to forget which one of them you were listening to. Hence the Onion article, "Bush or Gore: A New Era Dawns":
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28068"Bush or Gore attributed his victory to his commitment to the issues that matter to ordinary, hardworking Americans. Throughout the campaign, the Republican or Democrat spoke out in favor of improving educational standards, protecting the environment, reducing crime, strengthening the military, cutting taxes, and reforming Social Security. He also took a strong pro-middle-class stand, praising America's working families as "the backbone of this great nation.""
