Is a centrist but she settles in the left side on the issues.

Actions do not match her words. Especially when it comes to the military and foreign policy.

When asked during a primary debate during tje 2008 election she was asked if she was a liberal, she stated she was a progressive, but completely ducked any mention of liberal.

Edit to add: poll I was referring to is from April 9th 2015. There is no way she's keeping her big leads, that's a given, its a bit too early. Also, as a liberal myself, I agree that liberals matter.

Her favorability polls. Currently she holds a high 40ish percent favorability, but so is her unfavorable.

She has slid more than 10 points in the past year and a half, and this is all before Republicans start directing all their ire at her. Currently they have to concentrate on their own primary, but what happens when they all unite? How far will she slide then?

We're not really 'purple' either. We're a few major pockets of blue (major cities) in a sea of red small towns and rural areas. The key to winning Ohio in Presidential races is a candidate that excites voters and draws them out to vote. Sherrod Brown does that, but unfortunately for Dems, he won't be up for re-election in 2016, so the Presidential race can't ride his coattails.

Especially if(as now appears likely)the Dems retake the governorship, which would take the possibility of a Gop'er being appointed to his seat if he's elected.

Worth considering...especially for HRC(she has a real obligation, if nominated, NOT to pick a "centrist&quot i.e., a conservative Dem)as her veep candidate, especially since there ARE no "centrist" Dems out there with national electoral "juice&quot .

Positives to a ticket. If anything they can be a negative depending on who it is. Plain brought down McCain in 2008, Gore really contributed nothing electorally to Bill and Wyoming was going to go Republican no matter who Bush II chose.

He'd be better served to decline such an invite.

She has to run in 50 states at the same time with a consistent message. What plays in Virginia might not play well in Pennsylvania.

She, also, has to shed her husbamd's shadow and prove that her policies will be further to the left on economic and foreign policy issues.

That was just a wee bit relevant to McAuliffe's victory.

People only look at the surface and refuse to dig deeper or apply a bit of crititical thought as to the how and why something happened.

Neon-blue cities, Neon-red rural areas.

2008, Obama got the cites to overwhelm the rural areas. 2012 he failed to do so.

I don't think a third-way-style campaign can get enough city turnout to beat the rural areas.

If you follow 74 west from Laurinburg, it's pretty blue until you hit Union County. Those counties were some of the very few to go for Dalton in 2012.

I wanted to add a little something to an intelligent discussion of NC, which happens rarely enough these days.

(i.e., anyone left of Franco) if they win, or lose BECAUSE of them if they lose

it's a perfect loop

Politicians like to win. If they thought there were more votes on the left edge than in the center, they'd appeal to them.

Hillary on almost every issue and layed out a full blueprint of his agenda.

2008 AND 2012.

2008: he never pivoted away from his primary positions. He stayed on message with health care, doveish foreign policy, and a huge stimulus to jump start the economy again.

2012: Romney was never a serious contender. Romney ran away from his own health care bill, spoke hawkish and had nothing new to offer. Romney flip-flopped on almost every position and killed parts of the republican base when he said corporations were people. Obama took a slightly more centrist tone, but his actions were still to the left of his SoS on foreign policy, his stimulus was finally starting to kick in and although his actions were a bit more centrist, he could easily point to a do nothing congress as part of the major problem.

he lost the "purple" state of North Carolina in 2012 after winning it in 2008.

And centrist statewide campaigns keep doing poorly (governor, senator, etc). Someday, the party might pick up on the pattern and stop assuming non-voters are directly in between Republicans and Democrats.

Not exactly a Debs clone.