On Fox News last night, Karl Rove disagreed with Newt Gingrich's contention that Hillary would be close to unbeatable in '16, in part, thanks to backing from a popular Obama.
"He said that a popular President Obama would be helpful to her.
That's really not accurate.
If you take a look at Truman, LBJ, and Bush 43 were all unpopular and their parties lost the White House at the end of eight years, but then Eisenhower and Clinton were both popular and their parties lost it at the end of eight years.
We had one president whose standing was neutral. In November of 1988, Ronald Reagan's job approval was 51% and his party kept the White House.
So I don't think President Obama's going to have a big impact."
True, it's no guarantee of success, but it also can't hurt, and I think you can make the argument that George W. Bush would've scored a more decisive win over Gore in 2000 if the hunter-and-executioner of Man-Bear-Pig hadn't inherited a strong Clinton economy.