Well, past is not prologue, but it is pointed out that, in the last 15 republican elections, the person who was first a year before the first primary won the primary season.
Apparently, at least recently, the republicans have been much more set in their candidate than the democrats.
I don’t think the reasons for that fact are applicable in THIS election season, and I’ve argued against such extrapolation before.
I just wanted to note that the democrat polling/primary comparison doesn’t seem to apply to the republican party process, for whatever reason.
That is not entirely true. Ronald Reagan was basically tied with GHWB a year out from the primaries.
It is also important to look at trends among the 'Rats, because the Rudy Rooters main claim is that if we don't nominate Rudy that Hillary will win.
The last non-incumbent Democrat who was the "clear frontrunner" a year before the nomination to actually win the nomination was Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and he lost.
The last non-incumbent Democrat who was the "clear frontrunner" a year before the nomination to actually win the nomination and go on to win the presidency was Grover Cleveland in 1892. However, he had previously served a term as POTUS, which makes his status somewhat unique.
The last non-incumbent Democrat who had never been president who was the "clear frontrunner" a year before the nomination to actually win the nomination and go on to win the presidency was Andrew Jackson in 1828 (the first person to actually run as a Democrat). However, Jackson had previously run for the presidency and lost in 1824.
Therefore, NO non-incumbent Democrat who has not previously served as president or run for the presidency who was the "clear frontrunner" a year before the nomination has ever won the nomination and go on to win the presidency.