This is also from Selzer who has a heavy Trump tilt in her likely voter screens all cycle. It's very likely Clinton is ahead by double digits
You have to stop unskewing polls, Selzer is probably the best pollster in the country. They know what are they doing.
Having said that, Trump is finished.
No, no, that's not "unskewing." It's adjusting for so-called "house effects."
Pollsters often have house effects -- sampling practices and other factors that mean that they generate results that are more Democratic or Republican than the average poll. For instance, if we only have one Indiana poll, and it's from a pollster that routinely finds unusually Democratic results in other states, it's very reasonable to assume that the poll in Indiana is also too Democratic. This is perfectly reasonable, because pollsters with partisan house effects do exist, and it would be a bad idea to ignore that if the polls in a given state come from pollsters with the similar house effects.
"Unskewing" is re-weighting a poll based on either non-static political factors (like party ID), which is a terrible idea. Sometimes "unskewing" is also applied to the practice of re-weighting based on shoddy prior data like race composition from exit polls. In the former case, you're re-weighting a poll based on something you should reasonably expect to change; in the latter case, you're re-weighting a poll based on information that probably was inaccurate in the first place.
Neither of those things are reasonable. Done right, re-weighting for house effects is the right thing to do.