How long do the media and the pollsters intend to keep up this ridiculous farce?
You sound uneasy.
Yes, I'm very uneasy that Hillary only leads someone who isn't going to run by 42 points. You caught me!
No, I'm just annoyed at the blatant double standard. In 99% of polls, only candidates who have shown interest in a run (or at the very least, have not explicitly ruled it out) are included. Elizabeth Warren is the
only exception to this. It's just more proof of the media's grudge against Hillary and their desperation in trying to create a competitive primary.
Of course, as someone who also likes accurate polls, it's annoying on that point as well. If they continually include someone who isn't going to run in their polls, it's hard to get a sense of the actual state of the race. I guess it really doesn't matter whether she's leading by 35 or 60 points since she's already the nominee, but it would still be interesting to see. I would figure a forum of election/map/polling geeks would agree with me on that point. It would be like if Strickland said he wasn't going to run, and rather than testing Sittenfeld against Portman, every pollster only tested Strickland every single time.
