There's actually an interesting political cycle theory related to this.
This is how it goes:
Hoover-Carter: Both of these politically moderate presidents are considered failures, and because of them ushers an era of liberalism/conservatism.
FDR-Reagan: Both presidents considered heroes of the left/right, both ushered an era of liberalism/conservatism, and also "defeated" foreign enemies of the far-right (Nazi Germany), and the far-left (Soviet Union.)
Truman-Bush 41: Both vice-presidents of the previous administration, and are one-termers who had really bad approval ratings by the time reelection came along, and failed to live up to the previous president. Both presidents also ended tensions with past enemies (Truman: Nazi Germany/ Bush 41: Soviet Union), and created new tensions (Truman: the beginning of the Cold War, Bush 41: beginning of tensions with the Middle-East with the Gulf War.)
Eisenhower-Clinton: Both were moderate heroes, who ushered a decade of peace and prosperity.
JFK/LBJ-Bush/Cheney: Both Bush and JFK were members of a political dynasty, whose election to the presidency was against the vice-president of the former administration. The two vice-presidents were extremely uncharismatic, and lost the election by a razor-thin margin, despite the last president being very popular. Both JFK/LBJ and Bush/Cheney increased tensions severely with foreign enemies (Soviet Union/Middle-East), and ushers a decade of war (Vietnam/Iraq and Afghanistan.)
Nixon-Obama: See this thread:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=168317.0So following this cyclical theory, a moderate Republican should win narrowly in 2016, and lose in 2020 to a far-left Democrat who ushers an era of liberal dominance.
