Last Tuesday, when it became clear that Hillary Clinton would be the Democratic nominee for president, she gave a victory speech that contained numerous olive branches to Bernie Sanders supporters. She assured them that “there’s much more that unites us than divides us,” that “Wall Street can never again be allowed to threaten Main Street,” and that together they would “get unaccountable money out of our politics” and “expand Social Security.”

But she didn’t only have her eye on her left flank. She also gave a nod to swing voters and Republicans horrified by the likelihood of a Donald Trump nomination. “My friends,” she said, “if you are a Democrat, an independent, or a thoughtful Republican, you know [Trump’s] approach is not going to build an America where we increase opportunity or decrease inequality.”

Clinton can compete in more states and pursue a wider ideological and demographical range of voters than any Democratic presidential candidate since 1964.

So began Clinton’s great six-month balancing act, trying to simultaneously win over skeptics on the left and political nomads on the right. And how exactly she walks that line could well determine how she governs.

Clinton begins the general election in the post position. She has led in every head-to-head poll against Trump over the last two months, with an average margin of 9.6 points. Five Thirty Eight’s Nate Silver produced an Electoral College projection based on a ten- to eleven-point win, showing Clinton adding Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina to President Obama’s winning 2012 map. Recent polling shows Trump behind in Utah and barely holding on to Mississippi.

Even if you believe Trump’s vicious ways and lunch bucket appeal will eventually narrow the gap, the current state of the race, at minimum, broadens her playing field. She can compete in more states and pursue a wider ideological and demographical range of voters than any Democratic presidential candidate since 1964.