Has any non-incum 3 years out ever been better set-up than Hillary?

[Mister Mets]

I don't see what charisma has to do with percentage points up or down. Charisma is a personality trait, not a statistical feature.

Take the presidential debates between Romney and Obama as an example, especially the second one. If you watch the Mitt documentary - which I did last night - you can see that Romney just keeps on stammering, endlessly, and thus appears very uncertain with himself - while Obama is very confident, knows how to answer each question and of course never stammers. It's very obvious from the clips that Obama had/has charisma, while Romney wasn't even close.

My point is that charisma is subjective enough that it provides an easy way to explain away results that don't fit a particular formula.

If Hillary Clinton runs, and the With the curent the electoral college trends, I can't see her losing by more than 3 points to anyone.

Demographic trends won't make a significant change from 2012, and there's a few things that won't help the party.

There will be probably be reduced African-American turnout without the first black President on the ballot.
I understand that there'll be disagreement on the topic here, but I think Obama is a better politician than Hillary Clinton. So I expect her to do slightly worse than he would in a general election.
I think some voters will want more results at the end of eight years than at the end of four, and Obama's second term isn't looking particularly productive.

There are some interesting questions about how voters deal with the economy. It's probably better for the Democrats if the middle class is happier. However, there is a school of thought that in times of economic prosperity, voters will be less concerned with the safety net.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I don't know if Hillary's on that level. Historical trends suggest that a party does worse in the third term seeking the White House than in the second term. Even Papa Bush's 40 state win with a national margin of 7.8% paled in comparison to Reagan's 18.2% in 1984. Plus, it isn't clear that Democrats can be as effective without Obama on the ballot. It would be in keeping in historical trends for Hillary to lose the General Election by about five points.

Your reasoning makes sense to me, but... who is she going to lose to? (Presuming she does get the Democratic nomination in the first place.) Christie seems to be out for the foreseeable future. Most of the nationally prominent Republicans are popular with their fans but seem to be unelectable nationally even if they don't self-destruct while campaigning, as seems all too likely. Who is left? An aging Jeb Bush (whose wife doesn't appear to want him to run)?  Or some competent and charismatic dark horse who's going to pull a Jimmy Carter? The last seems the most likely, but I'll be damned if I can see who that's going to be. XD

When was the last time the republicans had a Carter/Clinton type candidate who came out of nowhere to win?

I don't think they have, at least not in the modern era. Does Harding count?

[morgieb]

I don't know if Hillary's on that level. Historical trends suggest that a party does worse in the third term seeking the White House than in the second term. Even Papa Bush's 40 state win with a national margin of 7.8% paled in comparison to Reagan's 18.2% in 1984. Plus, it isn't clear that Democrats can be as effective without Obama on the ballot. It would be in keeping in historical trends for Hillary to lose the General Election by about five points.

Your reasoning makes sense to me, but... who is she going to lose to? (Presuming she does get the Democratic nomination in the first place.) Christie seems to be out for the foreseeable future. Most of the nationally prominent Republicans are popular with their fans but seem to be unelectable nationally even if they don't self-destruct while campaigning, as seems all too likely. Who is left? An aging Jeb Bush (whose wife doesn't appear to want him to run)?  Or some competent and charismatic dark horse who's going to pull a Jimmy Carter? The last seems the most likely, but I'll be damned if I can see who that's going to be. XD

When was the last time the republicans had a Carter/Clinton type candidate who came out of nowhere to win?

They haven't. But this field is far less advanced than most of their fields.

[Mister Mets]

I don't know if Hillary's on that level. Historical trends suggest that a party does worse in the third term seeking the White House than in the second term. Even Papa Bush's 40 state win with a national margin of 7.8% paled in comparison to Reagan's 18.2% in 1984. Plus, it isn't clear that Democrats can be as effective without Obama on the ballot. It would be in keeping in historical trends for Hillary to lose the General Election by about five points.

Your reasoning makes sense to me, but... who is she going to lose to? (Presuming she does get the Democratic nomination in the first place.) Christie seems to be out for the foreseeable future. Most of the nationally prominent Republicans are popular with their fans but seem to be unelectable nationally even if they don't self-destruct while campaigning, as seems all too likely. Who is left? An aging Jeb Bush (whose wife doesn't appear to want him to run)?  Or some competent and charismatic dark horse who's going to pull a Jimmy Carter? The last seems the most likely, but I'll be damned if I can see who that's going to be. XD

When was the last time the republicans had a Carter/Clinton type candidate who came out of nowhere to win?

Do you mean when's the last time Republicans who came from nowhere to win the nomination, or the presidency?

Republicans do tend to nominate known entities, since at least 1944. But it doesn't mean if they nominate someone relatively unknown, that person will fall in the general.

We're all political junkies here, so we're all familiar with anyone who has a reasonable chance of winning the Republican party nomination. So whether someone came from nowhere is very much in the eye of the beholder. Political junkies knew who Mitt Romney was four years ago, but there's a joke of the stewardess who saw a newscaster reading No Apologies, and mistook Romney for John Edwards. "No Apologies! Not even to his wife?"

Trends have combined at the right moment to ensure that there aren't many potential Republicans with long records. The 2006 and 2008 elections thinned the party's ranks. The 2012 runner-ups are unlikely to be party's neck nominee. Paul Ryan would have to give up his congressional power for a White House bid. Chris Christie, one of the most prominent Governors in the country, had his scandals.

This leaves the Republicans with unconventional nominees for the party. It's looking like it's going to be someone elected to statewide office fairly recently (Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Susanna Martinez, Kelly Ayotte) or a guy whose last election was over a decade ago (Jeb Bush.)

[pbrower2a]

We may never know how many people voted against Barack Obama because of race who might have otherwise voted for him.

[Bull Moose Base]

I can't think of any non-incumbent in as dominant position to be nominated OR drawing as weak opposition party as today's GOP let alone both of those together.

[Del Tachi]

I can't think of any non-incumbent in as dominant position to be nominated OR drawing as weak opposition party as today's GOP let alone both of those together.

Potentially Ronald Reagan.  Although, in 1977 Carter was still a strong candidate for reelection. 

[Bull Moose Base]

I can't think of any non-incumbent in as dominant position to be nominated OR drawing as weak opposition party as today's GOP let alone both of those together.

Potentially Ronald Reagan.  Although, in 1977 Carter was still a strong candidate for reelection. 

Maybe. But while Reagan was a strong frontrunner for the nomination in 1980, I don't think his position was as close to as dominant as Hillary now is. He lost Iowa after all. And I think a lot of Carter's weakness is hindsight. It's very rare for a party to fumble the White House after one term. And with an incumbent president actually on the ballot, the election is very responsive to what happens in the actual election year.

[Bull Moose Base]

1 year out, still looks like a pretty easy path.