The often-readable George Will, writing in The Washington Post, takes a very pessimistic view of Republican chances in the 2008 election. He concludes "Today, all the usual indicators are dismal for Republicans." I presume his facts are accurate, he is too much the old pro to make factual mistakes.
However, I wonder if Will isn't being too negative in his interpretation of those facts. The election in November, 2008, won't be between some generalized Democrat and some generalized Republican. That is what the party affiliation numbers he cites reflect.
November's contest will be between either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama and one of several Republicans running. Leaving aside the shortcomings of the GOP hopefuls, it must be said that neither HRC nor Obama is a particularly compelling candidate. Both have major shortcomings, reasons why substantial blocs of voters won't want to vote for them. Is it necessary to reflect that for over two centuries no woman nor African-American has ever been a major party U.S. presidential candidate?
If November, 2008, turns out to be a race between two relatively uninspiring candidates, we could see a low voter turnout on election day. Historically, low turnouts favor Republican candidates. In other words, George, it ain't over till it's over.
