The discussion of Allan Lichtman's
keys to the White House, which are supposed to be accurate at predicting the winner of the Presidential election over a year advance, got me thinking. A lot of recent elections that seemed to be easy wins in retrospect actually seemed competitive at various points in the run-up to the election. For instance, in 1984, Walter Mondale pulled even with Reagan after picking Ferraro. Reagan also wasn't doing so hot in 1983. In 1972, before McGovern was nominated other Democrats polled competitively against Nixon. Even going back to 1936, there was the flawed Literary Digest poll that predicted a Landon victory.
Now, Lichtman would say that all those results were snapshots (or biased polls) that didn't reflect the underlying reality. I don't think that's the whole truth, but let's ignore that for now. What elections were, by all objective criteria, never competitive at any point for at least a year before election day?
1964? I know Rockefeller would have been a stronger candidate than Goldwater, but was it ever enough to seem competitive?
1956? Wikipedia says Ike had potential health problems which may have hampered him, which for a brief period may have made the race seem competitive.
