Subjective odds that candidates win the nomination

[Mehmentum]

Inspired by this: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/listen-to-our-totally-subjective-2016-presidential-odds/

Republicans:
Romney:   20%
Paul:        12%
Huckabee: 11%
Bush:       10%
Walker:    10%
Cruz:         6%
Rubio:        5%
Christie:     4%
Perry:        3%
Graham:     3%
Santorum:  2%
Carson:      1%
Jindal:        1%
Pence:        1%
Fiorina:      1%
Others:     10%

Democrats:
Clinton:    83%
Warren:     4%
Gillibrand:  3%
O'Malley:   1%
Webb:       1%
Biden:     0.5%
Cuomo:   0.5%
Sanders: 0.5%
Patrick:   0.5%
Others:      6%

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Republicans:
Romney:   25%
Walker:     15%
Paul:        13%
Bush:       12%
Huckabee: 10%
Christie:     7%
Carson:      5%
Rubio:        4% (won't run - would increase incrementally)
Pence:        4%
Perry:        1.3%
Cruz:         1.3%
Jindal:        .9%
Santorum:  .6%
Graham:     .4%
Snyder:       .4% (won't run)
Fiorina:      .1%
Pataki:       0%
Bachmann:  0%
King:           0%

Democrats:
Clinton:    88%
Biden:     5%
Webb:       3%
Sanders:    2%
O'Malley:   1%
Warren:     0.5% (won't run)
Gillibrand:  0.3% (won't run)
Cuomo:   0.2% (won't run)
Patrick:   0% (won't run)

[Bull Moose Base]

Republicans:
Romney:   25%
Walker:     15%
Paul:        13%
Bush:       12%
Huckabee: 10%
Christie:     7%
Carson:      5%
Rubio:        4% (won't run - would increase incrementally)
Pence:        4%
Perry:        1.3%
Cruz:         1.3%
Jindal:        .9%
Santorum:  .6%
Graham:     .4%
Snyder:       .4% (won't run)
Fiorina:      .1%
Pataki:       0%
Bachmann:  0%
King:           0%

Democrats:
Clinton:    88%
Biden:     5%
Webb:       3%
Sanders:    2%
O'Malley:   1%
Warren:     0.5% (won't run)
Gillibrand:  0.3% (won't run)
Cuomo:   0.2% (won't run)
Patrick:   0% (won't run)

Looks reasonable but all signs are pointing to Rubio running whereas Pence is a much bigger question mark.

I don't understand having Clinton <90%. She could shock people by not running or Warren could chock people by running and then again by winning, but all those scenarios seem extremely unlikely.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I feel like Pence is 50-50 while Rubio is like 25-75 due to the competitive Senate seat + Jeb (I know he said that's a non-factor, but it is noteworthy even if he refuses to admit it publicly).

Perhaps Hillary should be higher. Take it from Sanders and O'Malley and call everyone but Biden and Webb, the field I suppose. I want to give Biden a fair shot as sitting VP and Webb might be able to do something in Iowa so 3% for him.

[Bull Moose Base]

But Rubio is hiring staff whose resumes reportedly match with a presidential run, and that's what's leaking. Pence's re-election would be next year too. I think he wanted the law changed to accommodate a simultaneous run for president but I didn't follow what happened.

I guess Romney could still get scared off by lukewarm or worse reaction to a run or polls showing Hillary trouncing him but so far he looks like he's running. If so, he's more likely to win New Hampshire and Nevada than any other candidate is to win any other state. That's 2 of the first 3. Iowa and South Carolina are totally up for grabs (and last cycle, were until the week before they voted). But there's a not unreasonable chance Romney sweeps the first 3 states. With that, plus being able to raise far more money than anyone except Bush who is comparable, I don't expect him to skip the race. That said, I wouldn't put his % above 20s because it would still be weird for the GOP to re-nominate him and hard to imagine some stiff resistance won't be there.

[IceSpear]

This is very difficult since you have to quantify both their odds of running and the odds of winning if they do run, but I'll do a crapshoot anyway. This would probably be better to do once we actually have fields.

Democrats:
Clinton 95% (if she declares and Warren stays out, it's >99%)
Warren 1% (would be higher, but she's almost certainly not running)
Others: 4% (made up entirely of those who may run if Hillary does not)

Republicans:
Walker 25%
Romney 20%
Bush 15%
Paul 10%
Christie 7%
Pence 5%
Rubio 5%
Huckabee 4%
Cruz 3%
Perry 2%
Carson 1%
Others 3%

[Xing]

Republicans:
Romney:   20%
Bush:        15%
Walker:     12%
Paul:         10%
Rubio:       8%
Cruz:         6%
Graham:    5%
Huckabee:  3%
Christie:     3%
Perry:        <1%
Santorum: <1%
Carson:      <1%
Jindal:        <1%
Pence:       <1% (Probably won't run)
Fiorina:      <1%
Others:     16%

Democrats:
Clinton:    75%
Warren:     10% (if she runs)
Biden:        8% (if he runs)
O'Malley:    2%
Webb:        1%
Cuomo:      1%
Gillibrand:   <1% (probably won't run)
Sanders:    <1%
Patrick:      <1% (probably won't run)
Others:      2%

[SPC]

Romney 30%
Bush 30%
Cruz 10%
Paul 5%
Rubio 5%
Walker 5%
Christie 5%
Field 10%

Clinton 80%
Warren 5%
Field 15%

[Reginald]

Walker 30%
Bush 19%
Romney 19%
Cruz 8%
Paul 4%
Christie 4%
Perry 3%
Rubio 3%
FIELD 10%

Clinton 85%
Warren 5%
Biden 5%
FIELD 5%

[Bull Moose Base]

No ifs!

Top 16 most likely Republican nominees in '16.

Romney:  20
Bush: 12
Walker: 12
Huckabee: 10
Cruz: 6
Pence:6
Carson 6
Christie 4
Rubio 4
Perry 4
Paul 3
Santorum 2
Jindal 2
Kasich 2
Graham 1
Fiorina 1

Hillary 94
Warren 4

[Mister Mets]

Republicans:
Romney: 17 percent (decent chance he doesn't run)
Jeb: 15 percent (good network/ support, unknown political chops)
Rubio: 10 percent (solid political talent, likely to run, fits the profile of the ideal anti-Hillary/ Next Gen candidate)
Walker: 10 percent (We've yet to see him on a national stage)
Cruz: 3 percent
Paul: 10 percet
Perry: 4 percent
Huckabee: 10 percent (Has won Iowa, and the map favors him.)
Santorum: 0 percent
Christie: 6 percent (Has a lot of enemies, but significant talent)
Fiorina: 4 percent (Likely to be the only woman, Underrated political talent, Seems to be acceptable to many parts of the party, even if not the first choice.)
Carson: 1 percent
Palin: 0 percent
Others: 10 percent (Combined votes for Kasich, Pence, Jindal, and any other Republican who might jump in during August.)

Democrats:
Hillary: 80 percent (Likeliest scenario if she doesn't become President is dropping out for whatever reason during the primary campaign.)
Biden: 5 percent
Warren: 3 percent (Doesn't seem to want to be President)
Gilibrand: 5 percent (Fits the profile of who Democrats want to nominate, Ambitious, Well-positioned if Hillary drops out)
Webb: 1 percent
O'Malley: 1 percent
Others: 5 percent

Anyone else have a hard time getting the numbers to add up to 100%? I kept going over with Republicans.

[SPC]

Updated. I might be overestimating Cruz and Walker a bit:

Romney 30%
Bush 30% 50%
Cruz 10%
Paul 5%
Rubio 5%
Walker 5% 20%
Christie 5%
Field 10% 5%

Clinton 80%
Warren 5%
Field 15%

[Mehmentum]

Updating as well...
Republicans:
Walker:    20%
Bush:       17%
Paul:        14%
Huckabee: 12%
Christie:     6%
Cruz:         6%
Rubio:        5%
Carson:      3%
Perry:        3%
Santorum:  2%
Others:     12%

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Updated:
Republicans:
Romney:   25%
Walker:     15% 25%
Paul:        13% 20%
Bush:       12%
Huckabee: 10%
Christie:     7% 13%
Carson:      5%
Rubio:        4%
Pence:        4%
Perry:        1.3%
Cruz:         1.3%
Jindal:        .9%
Santorum:  .6%
Graham:     .4%
Other:        .5%

Democrats:
Clinton:    88% 91%
Biden:     5% 3%
Webb:       3% 2.5%
Sanders:    2% 1.5%
O'Malley:   1%
Other:       1%

[Bull Moose Base]

Updated:
Republicans:
Romney:   25%
Walker:     15% 25%
Paul:        13% 20%
Bush:       12%
Huckabee: 10%
Christie:     7% 13%
Carson:      5%
Rubio:        4%
Pence:        4%
Perry:        1.3%
Cruz:         1.3%
Jindal:        .9%
Santorum:  .6%
Graham:     .4%
Other:        .5%

Romney dropping out is a huge boon to Paul and Walker but doesn't help Bush at all?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Updated:
Republicans:
Romney:   25%
Walker:     15% 25%
Paul:        13% 20%
Bush:       12%
Huckabee: 10%
Christie:     7% 13%
Carson:      5%
Rubio:        4%
Pence:        4%
Perry:        1.3%
Cruz:         1.3%
Jindal:        .9%
Santorum:  .6%
Graham:     .4%
Other:        .5%

Romney dropping out is a huge boon to Paul and Walker but doesn't help Bush at all?

Yep, Bush is vastly overrated. I give him a chance because of his name, but he won't stand a chance once his true views show in the debates. He also has zero chance of convincing any youngs to vote for him. I give him a chance because he is the establishment of a splintered field. I won't completely rule out a strong southern performance to give him momentum, but I'd be shocked by wins in IA/NH.

Romney dropping out helps Paul in terms of states and Walker in ability to become the establishment candidate if he can build early momentum (and I find Christie more likely to become that pick than Bush if not Walker)

[Del Tachi]

Bush: 45%
Paul: 21%
Cruz: 11%
Walker: 6%
Huckabee: 4%
Graham: 3%
Others: 10%

Clinton: 81%
Biden: 7%
O'Malley: 2%
Cuomo: 2%
Others: 8%

[The Other Castro]

Walker 30%
Bush 17%
Paul 16%
Christie 10%
Cruz 9%
Rubio 8%
Huckabee 5%
Carson 3%
Other 2%

[Bull Moose Base]

Walker: 6%
Biden: 7%

Quick, tell me your Super Bowl prediction so I can bet on the other team.

[Mr. Morden]

Fivethirtyeight just came out with new subjective odds, following the Romney departure from the race:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/listen-to-our-totally-subjective-2016-presidential-odds-for-early-february-2015/

[The Other Castro]

Harry rated Jindal as more likely to win than Paul, Christie, and Huckabee combined lol...disqualified.

[IceSpear]

If discussions around how Hillary could lose center around her having a health problem or a scandal or dying, it's pretty clear her odds are north of 90%. Nate is way lowballing her.

[Maxwell]

30% Walker
20% Bush
20% Paul
10% Huckabee
5% Christie
5% Perry
3% Rubio
3% Cruz
4% The rest

Oh and...

80% Hillary
10% Biden
5% Warren
5% the rest

(I'd give Warren a 20% chance if she actually ran, but there is only a 25% chance of that actually happening)

[Mister Mets]

If discussions around how Hillary could lose center around her having a health problem or a scandal or dying, it's pretty clear her odds are north of 90%. Nate is way lowballing her.

Maybe he took Hillary's delay as an indication that the odds of medical problems are higher than expected. He has likely heard more than we have.

[Averroës Nix]

REPUBLICANS

30% S. Walker
20% J. Bush
15% Rubio
10% Kasich
10%   R. Paul
  5% Pence
<5% Perry
<5% Santorum
<5% Christie
<5% someone else (Ryan?, Portman?, etc.)
  0% Cruz, Carson, Huckabee, Graham, Pataki, Bolton, Fiorina, Jindal, King, Palin

It's a bit of a wonder how the thin the Republican field looks compared to where it was a year or two ago. The problem isn't a shortage of plausible nominees within the party - at least a dozen have been talked up at some point, and at least half a dozen have shown serious interest in running.

At least two explanations for this decline attract frequent discussion:

(1) The shine has worn off of candidates like Christie, Rubio, and Paul.
(2) Jeb Bush is locking up enough support from donors and support from party actors to clear the field of other serious candidates like Kasich and Pence, who now seem less likely to run than they once did.

This board pays a lot of attention to (1), but (2) seems more important to me. That doesn't necessarily translate into strong odds for Bush, however. In contrast with Romney in 2012, I think this is an actual case of party actors lining up behind a candidate whom primary voters will not be willing to accept.

DEMOCRATS

>95% Hillary
<5%   someone else (Warren, Gillibrand, Biden, etc.)
  0%    Webb, O'Malley, Sanders, Cuomo

Less than 5% is generous, actually. The odds of Clinton losing the Democratic nomination are probably not much higher than the actuarial odds that a woman of her age will die or have a stroke within the next 18 months.