Romney was a better candidate than whoever the R's will put up in 2016 and Hilary is a better candidate than Obama. Landslide.
Hillary is a far worse candidate, which is why she lost. She also has the added disadvantage of following this disaster and a president who will finish in the high 30s if he's lucky.
Not sure who GOP will choose, but I doubt it will be worse than Romney.
Do you believe that someone who has not yet separated himself/herself from an incredibly mediocre group of candidates will be a good candidate?
Do you not think Hilary is already doing a great job of separating herself from Obama? The repubs are going to campaign as if they are running against Obama and will once again fail to reach any voter who doesn't religiously watch Fox news.
Once again? My friend, you are misinformed. Romney trounced Obama among independents. He lost because many of those that "religiously watch Fox News" didn't show up to vote. So you've got it exactly backwards.
Hillary can try to separate from Obama, just like McCain tried to separate from Bush. It's only so effective.
As for GOP candidates, there are plenty of good possibilities. Marco Rubio would be a superb candidate (once he gives the official mea culpa on the gang of eight fiasco). Scott Walker is an intriguing possibility. These are smart people with good ideas. Or, it could very well be a grassroots campaign for someone that's not on anybody's radar. There is a groundswell of popular animus towards Washington that's only growing stronger scandal after scandal, across almost all demographics. Another Hillary weakness and another GOP opportunity.