I have already reported some of the key findings from the latest Zogby Analytics nationwide poll (May 30-31). So I have decided to take a deeper dive into the numbers. While it is still much too early to draw any firm conclusions, there is a cautionary tale for anyone who thinks that the election results are "inevitable" and that a coronation of the next President is about to take place. It is not inevitable and the numbers show plenty for former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to worry about.

Mrs. Clinton holds substantial leads over the major Republican candidates we tested. If the election were held today, she would beat former Florida Governor Jeb Bush 47% to 33%, with 14% preferring someone else. Her lead over Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is 11 points - 46% to 35%, with 12% choosing someone else. She would best Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker by 15 points, 47% to 32%, with 15% saying they would vote for someone else. She has a 16 point lead over Florida Senator Marco Rubio, 48% to 32%, but 13% saying someone else. Her leads against former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie are 17 points and 18 points, respectively.

There is hardly any good news for the GOP in these numbers. But these should be worrying to the former First Lady and U.S. Senator. First of all, her support stops well short of 50% in a two-person race. Someone with 100% name recognition has not closed the deal. Presumably, any efforts to appeal to the remaining few million voters who are unsure will involve a certain degree of reinvention, which is hard to achieve when everyone already knows you. This was the same problem former Vice President Al Gore had in 2000. It is relatively easy to present a different image when there are people out there who don't know enough about you. But when those are undecided - or who say they prefer "another candidate" - already have TMI ("too much information"), efforts to reinvent look disingenuous.

Secondly, Mrs. Clinton needs to be worried about the high numbers of those who today would select "another candidate". This does not mean to me an opening for a third party or independent candidate. Rather it suggests to me people who may very well have tuned out the candidate they already know too much about - and may not vote at all come November 2016. Let's take a closer look at who these are by examining the horse races against the top four GOP contenders.

Against former Governor Bush, 14% choose "another candidate". But that includes 36% of 18-24 year olds, 21% of 18-29 year olds, 17% of 18-36 year olds, 13% of union household voters, 11% of the Creative Class, and 18% of those who identify themselves as LGBT.

Against Senator Paul, 12% choose someone else - including 32% of 18-24 year olds, 17% of 18-29 year olds, 14% of 18-36 year olds, 22% of independents, 16% of moderates, 11% of Creative Class members, and 6% of LGBT.

Against Governor Walker, 15% select someone else with 36% of 18-24 year olds, 24% of 18-29 year olds, 19% of 18-36 year olds, 29% of independents, 20% of moderates, 15% of Creative Class members, and 12% of LGBT.

In the race vs. Senator Rubio, the other candidate is preferred by 25% of 18-24 year olds, 19% of 18-29 year olds, 14% of 18-36 year olds, 26% of independents, 16% of moderates, 12% of Creatives, 13% of LGBT, and 7% of Hispanics.

Of course, the burden will be on the GOP to nominate an appealing candidate who can unite the party without alienating swing voters. But we know that Mrs. Clinton (or whoever the ultimate Democrat nominee may be) has to keep the winning Obama Coalition of 2008 and 2012 together to win. Otherwise, the actual turnout looks more like a 2010 or 2014 turnout model and that is a huge problem for the Democrats.

Millennials, independents, moderates, Creative Class, and LGBT voters are the ones to watch. If so many today are turning their nose up at the leading Democrat (and Republican) candidates, they may not vote at all. Nothing is inevitable. Nothing.