It seems almost manifestly unfair that no Californian is running for the Presidency in 2016. After all, a little over 12% of the population resides in the Golden State which keeps growing and 1 of every 10 electoral votes is cast here.

Yet California accounts for a mere 3 of our 45 presidents—Hoover, Nixon and Reagan—with Nixon the only one born here. Hoover was born in Iowa and never resided here.  Reagan hailed from Illinois.

Using birthplace as the metric, both Virginia and Ohio share high honors having each contributed 8 presidents. Virginia alone produced George Washington, our first Commander-in-Chief, and 5 of the initial 10 presidents. Virginia’s latest entry, former Democratic Senator, Jim Webb, is considered a long shot.

Looking at states with which presidents were most affiliated when elected, New York can claim 6 including both Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt.

However it turns out that it is neither the size of the state nor the predominance of one of the parties—although these are factors—but the heft and appeal of the individual candidate against the competition, the temper of the times, and the power of the political message that is decisive.

Arkansas, with 1/20th California’s population gave us Bill Clinton. Calvin Coolidge came from Vermont, the 49th least populous state after Wyoming.

GOP presidents Nixon and Reagan rose to fame in overwhelmingly Democratic California which previously elected them Senator and Governor. Democrat, Jerry Brown, the current governor sought the presidency three times (1976, 1980 and 1992) and failed. He shows no signs of further interest although he is the only state politician in either party with sufficient national stature to make a run and is currently riding a wave of popularity.

The influence of party continues to lose force while at the same time voters seem willing to take a harder look at independent, populist and more unconventional candidates. Republican Kentucky Senator, Rand Paul, and Vermont Socialist, Senator Bernie Sanders, appear to fall into that category, although neither is given high odds to win the nomination.

Florida, the 4th most populous state, has never sent anyone to the White House, but that could change with two Floridians—GOP Senator Marco Rubio and former Republican Governor, Jeb Bush, both vying for the prize.

Texas, which ranks 2nd, will also have two GOP entries, Senator Ted Cruz and Governor Rick Perry, but the Lone Star State beginning with Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and then with father and son Bush has enjoyed recent success.

California’s GOP is at a record low 28.4% of registered voters and dropping in comparison to Democrats who have also dipped to 43.4% with decline-to-states at 21.2% —a 10.3% jump since 1994 and making the biggest gains.

This suggests that while Democrats currently occupy every statewide office, the strongly partisan appeal which enabled previous candidates to seek the nation’s top political trophy combined with the open primary may produce a notably different cast of presidential wanabees in the future.

With the retirement of U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer and the possibility her colleague Dianne Feinstein, now 82 may also decide to call it quits, California is poised to field a less familiar much younger generation of leaders with mounting aspirations.

For Democrats the obvious suspects are Lt. Governor, Gavin Newsom who is hoping to replace Jerry Brown but may face some stiff competition, and Attorney General, Kamala Harris, who is a good bet to succeed Boxer.

On the GOP side no one at the moment in local elective office or in Congress look like immediate challengers though there may be rising stars in the wings we have yet heard little about.

In short, California, not even a battleground state given its one-party dominance, will once again be on the sidelines as at least 22 presidential candidates from 17 other states will contend, with Vice President, Joe Biden, still questionable.

Notwithstanding the dearth of presidential timber and because of it, there will be a non-stop pilgrimage of cash-strapped candidates to the state’s wealthy enclaves even if its political importance has been increasingly de-valued. This is especially true given the state’s late June primary when the bulk of delegate votes have already been doled out.

However, as Joel Fox points out in his recent column, the very large field of Republican candidates could play a pivotal role in the choice of the GOP nominee, particularly in a close election.

The final result could also be impacted by the participation of Hispanic voters—typically supportive of Democrats and now the minority majority here— if it underwent a radical change of heart voting in large numbers for a GOP candidate— a prediction few are making.

Jeb Bush, who is fluent in Spanish and has indicated support of immigration reform including roads to citizenship, and fellow Floridian, Marco Rubio, another top level GOP contender of Cuban-American lineage with differing  views will likely have a formidable role in this process.

But their bigger problem is wooing the Party’s core Conservatives, Tea Partiers and Right-wing Evangelicals, who control the super-PACS, strongly influence the primaries and are more interested in deporting and excluding illegal immigrants than promoting rights.

Of course, since California is a “winner-take-all” state which will almost certainly award its 55 electoral votes (20% of those needed to win the presidency) to a Democrat as it has been doing since 1992, the GOP tussle for votes will render the GOP contest more of an intramural squabble—albeit with potential consequences for a party that will try hard to choose its most electable nominee.