I would agree except that the Democrats just don't have candidates with any real public appeal to run against the Republicans. Clinton was a highly appealing candidate to a huge number of Americans (first time I ever heard him speak I predicted he would be the next presidient). Kerry, Dean, and company don't have this kind of appeal. Bush will win by virtue of the power of incumbency (and maybe a major terrorist incident to boost the security issue in his favor).
1992 - Ross Perot - 19% of electorate.....lest we forget.
1992 had nothing to do with Clinton and everything to do with Perot. People forget just how many votes he got. People also forget that GW is well liked by many people - much warmer than his dad - and Clinton provided a stark contrast in the "likeability" factor which allowed people to ignore the issues. We can ill afford to ignore the issues these days and the Dems know it as well.