This analysis is pure wishful thinking. He doesn't even try to add any data to this beyond a graph that shows she's already more popular than the entire field, but says "eh, don't pay attention to that" for no reason.
"Yea, Obama's approval ratings are middling and have been for years but you know but they could decline more... (
, no reasoning given)"
"Yea, the economy is supposed to matter but I'd warn against that... (
, no reasoning given)"
"Yea, Democrats have this advantage with non-whites, but maybe they don't we'll see... (
, no reasoning given)"
"Yea, Romney got completely tarnished by a bunch of crazies in the primary last time, but it won't happen this time... (
, no reasoning given)"
"Jeb Bush is just moderate enough to be more popular than Clinton (
, lmao)"
boboblaw, stop complaining! Who cares about "statistics" or "facts" when it comes to Hillary? She is invincible!
If you actually read the article, you'd see Nate didn't bother to compile any statistics or facts and is just op-eding using his name as a reason to trust it.
Joke article.