A persistent pattern in modern American politics is that presidential elections rarely turn out the way they look a year in advance. Such year-ahead poll leaders as Walter Mondale, George H.W. Bush and Hillary Clinton can attest to that.

So it may not mean much that pundits and voters regard Clinton as the person most likely to become the 45th president; after all, eight years ago, she didn’t even win her party’s nomination.

The strong regard many Americans have for her ability and intelligence is not matched by a similar regard for her honesty and human qualities. And despite early domination of the Republican race by Donald Trump and Dr. Ben Carson, GOP voters outside Iowa and New Hampshire have yet to focus on the alternatives amid doubts about the two front-running outsiders.

These factors were all on display last week when veteran pollsters Peter Hart and Anna Bennett, Democrats working under the auspices of the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center, convened two cross-section groups of Ohio voters in Columbus, one male, the other female, to explore voter attitudes in that prototypical swing state. They focused much of the discussion on Clinton.

While such sessions don’t provide numerical results, the comments and conclusions often offer insights, in this case questioning the early 2016 conventional wisdom. They included:

• Women voters: While perhaps more inclined to think the country would benefit from electing the first female president, women expressed the same concerns and strengths about Clinton’s candidacy as men. Julia Piechocinski, 26, a paralegal and political independent leaning to Trump, said, “It goes beyond Benghazi. She lied.”

But most in the group praised her experience. “She’s definitely strong,” said Alan Lister, 32, an independent-leaning Republican who favors Trump. That included non-supporters. “I’m not a Hillary supporter, but I think she can handle it,” said Carla Wise, 48, a stay-at-home mother who leans Republican and likes Rubio. But she conceded, “I wish I liked her.”

• Effects of the Paris attacks: Despite last Friday’s massacre, the range of concerns seemed little different from what they would have been beforehand.

“I’m not shocked by it (the Paris attack),” said Scott James, 38, a health teacher and not-strong Republican favoring Carson. “I’m not sure how it will impact us much.” But Rachel Barnes, 45, an administrative assistant and strong Democrat favoring Sanders, feared, “This is going to muddy the waters in terms of not having any meaningful discussion of domestic issues.”

While many called the current situation “disappointing” and “fearful,” a majority of both groups rated the economy better than four years ago, reflecting conditions in Ohio. “Things are starting to get better,” said Karen Kendall-Sperry, 60, a teacher and Clinton backer, noting her 30-year-old daughter was able to buy a home.

• Muddled Republican field: Comments about Republicans reflected far more uncertainty than polls indicate. The participants, most with college or post-graduate degrees, indicated strong doubts about Trump and Carson but conceded they knew little about some prospects, especially Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Carly Fiorina.

A majority of participants listed Rubio as a candidate about whom they’d like to know more. “He has some charisma,” said Robert Wead, 69, a retired teacher and strong Republican, a thought several others echoed.

• Leadership experience: Though polls show many voters are upset or even angry with Washington, even many Republicans thought presidents need experience. A strong majority of both groups opposed a Trump presidency. Republican Wead called him “a bully and a coward.”

A majority of men said they preferred “the devil I know” to an “intriguing” newcomer. “I want to be intrigued,” said Thomas Donaldson, 59, an electronic systems administrator and undecided independent. But he said Trump “just doesn’t seem like somebody I’d want running the country.”

The group was less certain about Carson. “He doesn’t give a lot of specifics about things,” said James Slate, a not-strong Republican considering Rubio and Fiorina. But Cindy Schmidt, 56, an outreach director and GOP-leaning independent, favored the neurosurgeon, declaring, “If either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump becomes our next president, I swear I’ll move to another country.”

A majority of the men predicted Clinton would be the next president. “The Republicans are in such a mess now,” noted Wead, the pro-Rubio Republican. But independent Donaldson provided the bottom line: “We still know hardly anything about the field yet.”

— Carl P. Leubsdorf is the former Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News.