George Will recently argued that it will be hard for Republicans to win in the general election. Frank Rich reiterated the point Sunday morning. Looking at the (relatively low) turnout on Saturday and other factors… is that so? In the wake of the South Carolina primary this weekend, National Review Online asked a group of pollsters and others.

David Freddoso

Democrats are overconfident about the presidential election of 2008. As we saw in 1988, high turnout in the Democratic nominating process does not necessarily presage anything.

If the Democratic candidate is Hillary Clinton, then Republicans can certainly win the presidency. Her negatives are just too high. If she is the presumptive nominee on Feb. 6, then Republicans will have nine months to exploit her. (Incidentally, this is one way a long, bloody fight for the GOP nomination could be a plus, since the Democrats’ target will emerge late in the game.)

I expect Republicans to lose seats in both the House and Senate, but she will help limit those losses. And she is herself beatable — certainly by McCain, possibly by Romney. I am convinced that Giuliani would lose to anyone because of his personal life and a third-party challenge from a pro-life candidate. I do not share most people’s beliefs that a Huckabee win would be totally impossible, but his appeal is probably too narrow and his own ethics problems could take a lot of complaints about Hillary off the table.

Barack Obama poses a different and more difficult challenge, but not an insurmountable one. Against Obama, one must avoid completely the subtly racist rhetoric Hillary and her surrogates have employed (and awkwardly apologized for). Nor can one follow her campaign’s lead by making the contest personal with the “cocaine” business and the oppo research into his radical kindergarten past. You can’t destroy the character of someone people like without a “murder-suicide” ending. Hillary may win the nomination anyway because Democratic voters will give her a pass, but no Republican could (or should) get away with such nonsense.

The way to beat Obama is, as Reagan put it in another context, to use his youth and inexperience against him. Obama hasn’t even served one term in the U.S. Senate. He seems like a nice guy, and he’s “hopeful” and likeable and all that, fine. Maybe he’ll even be president someday. But he’s so not ready. The guy was just talking about invading Pakistan a few months ago, precisely because he doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. He’d be in way over his head. Obama’s youth is one of his attractive qualities. But it is a double-edged sword in time of war, because it contributes to this image of inexperience. On the side, you can go after his far-left record in the Illinois state legislature.

Of course, to run on experience requires an obviously experienced candidate, and that would probably have to be McCain. Like Obama, he has an appeal to independent voters, and he enjoys a relative distance from George W. Bush — a must for the Republican nominee. Frankly, I would not like any other Republican’s chances against Obama.

– David Freddoso is an NRO staff reporter.

Michael Graham

In 2000, with just two major candidates in the field, 573,000 voters participated in the SC GOP primary. This year, with McCain, Huckabee, Thompson, and Mitt’s money all showing up (if not Mitt himself), turnout was down to 431,000 people. Where did they go?

Could it be that the high-profile fight among the Democrats is drawing a bigger crowd? A good friend of mine who votes Republican 99 percent of the time told me that he made his mind up the morning of the S.C. primary to vote Republican instead of waiting for the chance to vote for Obama. (He REALLY dislikes Hillary Clinton).

If the lengthening primary season is helping hype voter interest in Democratic candidates at the expense of Republicans, that’s more bad news for a GOP brand that is already in trouble.

Some Republicans aren’t worried, pointing out that GOP turnout in Iowa was up (88,000 to 114,000) and New Hampshire turnout was steady (around 237,000).

But Democratic turnout in both those states was way up, and Democrats managed to get 600,000 people to turn out in Michigan without Obama or Edwards being on the ballot. Meanwhile, turnout for Republicans in Michigan plunged from 1.16 million in 2000 to about 870,000 this year.

Part of this is show business. The Clinton Show is, by itself, the greatest political show on earth. Put Barack Obama on the bill, and you’ve got some of the most fascinating political theater in my lifetime.

Here’s another question to concern Republicans: What happens when it becomes a two man race? Will “Romney vs. McCain” increase the interest in the race, or weaken it? The turnout trend could actually get worse.

Where will Republicans make up the difference in November? The GOP has only one hope, and her name is Hillary Clinton.

In Iowa, more Democrats participated than Republicans, but turnout was up from about 89,000 to 114,000 for the GOP. The next week, GOP turnout was almost identical to the year 2000.

– Michael Graham is a talk-radio host in Boston.

John Hood

The conservative movement constitutes an alliance of those who accept unchangeable facts rather than trying to wish fantasy into reality, remake human nature, or avoid economic tradeoffs. Traditionalists embrace timeless morals, even when they deny one immediate gratification. Libertarians embrace the sovereignty of consumer demand and the sometimes-disorienting effects of technological change, even when the result isn’t to one’s personal liking. And hawks embrace the reality that America lives in a dangerous neighborhood, one full of bullies, pirates, and fanatics who respond to gestures of good will with contempt, larceny, and brutality.

So, conservatives, embrace the political reality of 2008: Either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama is likely to be your next president. It’s not impossible for Mitt Romney or John McCain to win the general election — international events could jar the race onto a new course, for example — but political history, Bush’s unpopularity, and economic wobbliness all stack the odds against the Republicans.

To those tempted by these facts to endorse a GOP candidate who dislikes and alienates key elements of the conservative coalition, remember that there are worse things than losing an election. Given the odds, such a desperate gambit will probably still result in a November loss, but with lasting collateral damage to political alliances, institutional credibility, and personal integrity. Remember also that the conservative moment and the Republican party are, and should be, distinct entities. And remember that conservative values, the cause of liberty, and the Republic itself have survived Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and even Lyndon Johnson. They can survive a third Clinton administration (which I suspect won’t abandon the Iraq campaign and will find its domestic agenda hard to enact) and they can survive an Obama administration, too.

– John Hood is chairman and president of the John Locke Foundation.

John McLaughlin

It’s way too early to be forecasting Republican demise or a Democratic landslide.

Except for 1994 and 2006 — which were midterm elections of merely 80 million plus voters — recent presidential years and the other midterms have been relatively close and polarized elections.

The presidential years of 1996, during which Bill Clinton won with 49 percent in an election of 92 million voters; the election of 2000 in which George W. Bush won by a mere few hundred votes in Florida in an election where 105 million votes were cast; and the election of 2004, in which Bush was reelected with 51 percent of the vote out of 122 million cast, set precedents for another extremely close partisan election. It seems fallacious that either party can get away from the other without a major miscalculation by one party or the other.

Even though President Bush may have historically low approval ratings, the Democratic majority in Congress has now worked its approval ratings to a mere 14 percent. Speaker Pelosi and Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid are now in Tip O’Neill land. Can the Republicans capitalize?

Although the Democrats won their biggest midterm congressional election since Watergate in 2006, their party affiliation is going down, independents are up and Republicans may be ticking up.

A lot does depend upon who the Republicans actually pick as their nominee. That person’s vision or lack of it will define the party. However, winning the nomination will probably force that person to jettison unpopular positions and adapt popular ones.

In contrast, the Democrats’ nomination of Hillary Clinton would assure Republican unity against her and a strong beachhead into the independents and moderates that will decide the election.

Barack Obama is a wild card. He’s the blind date about whom you’ve heard others fantasize, a fantasy which in reality may be too much for him to live up to.

The reality is that as we approach the longest presidential general election in the history of the nation there is a lot more opportunity for the Republicans to demonstrate political competence rather than incompetence. The key is to listen to the voters and not inside the Beltway pundits.

– John McLaughlin is CEO of McLaughlin & Associates. He is pollster to Fred Thompson’s presidential campaign.

Robert Moran The GOP may have some significant challenges in holding the White House in 2008, but all is not lost. Not yet. First, we need to dispel with the traditional pundit error of using national polling to talk about a race that is run and won at the state level. The next president will not be chosen by a national plebiscite. He or she will be chosen by voters in states, and needs 270 electoral votes to win. This means that only a handful of swing states will actually decide who becomes the next president. Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Iowa, and Missouri, all states that Bush won in 2004, will be critical to GOP hopes this year. It will be tough. Ohio’s Republican party and the Republican brand have been tarnished by a series of tax-raising Governors and minor scandal. The state’s poor business climate will make Ohio more of a challenge. Colorado is now a swing state and not the safe Republican state that it once was. Iowa, won by only 10,059 votes in 2004, will be difficult to hold in 2008. The race will almost surely come down to Republicans fighting to hold Florida, Ohio, Missouri, and Colorado, and Democrats working to expand the playing field. The Democratic presidential candidate may win the popular vote by a few million votes, but he or she will also need to win the Electoral College, and that is a more difficult task. It is true that the national political environment favors the Democrats at this time. They have a financial advantage, a strong partisan affiliation advantage in most national polls, the war in Iraq has beaten down the Republican brand, President Bush’s approval ratings are in the cellar, the turnout machines that the Bush campaign built at the state level in 2004 will not be as ably run this time, and traditional Democratic issues like health care are ascendant. But, this race will be heavily influenced by the qualities of the candidates themselves. Yes, the Democratic brand is stronger, but on Election Day voters won’t be choosing from competing brands, they will be choosing from competing products. And this is where the Democrats will have some difficulty. If the nominee is Hillary Clinton, she will have difficulty overcoming her high negatives in the battleground states. It won’t be any easy task. She is an extremely polarizing figure. If the nominee is Barack Obama, he will have difficulty under the intense heat of general-election media scrutiny. Obama won’t be able to rely on the general themes that he uses in his current stump speeches. He’ll need to have specifics. He will also face a stiff Republican assault on two general election weaknesses — (1) his down the line liberal voting record, and (2) his inexperience. Both Democratic nominees are to the left of the American electorate and this alone will tighten the result. Both Democratic nominees will be sucked into unpopular positions on social issues and illegal immigration. Both Democratic nominees will have to answer difficult questions on the Bush tax cuts and the way forward in Iraq. Still, Republicans must choose a candidate. The current polling suggests that McCain is the strongest general election standard bearer. This puts conservatives in a bind, as McCain’s “maverick” policy positions on taxes, free speech, and illegal immigration have been extremely difficult to swallow. But, with a war on terror and two Supreme Court justices likely to retire in the next president’s term, conservatives may be tempted to overlook McCain’s ideological defects and choose the Al Davis ethic — “Just Win Baby.” – Robert Moran is vice president of Strategy One.

John J. Pitney Jr.

It may boil down to which matters more: political climate or personal character. If the election turns on the political climate, GOP prospects look bad. A shaky economy, a protracted war, and an unpopular incumbent are not a formula for success.

If it’s a character election, Republicans have a chance. A large fraction of Americans would not consider voting for Hillary Clinton. In recent trial heat polls, McCain actually runs ahead of her. She would also be a great GOP unifier. Gallup reports some remarkable data: Asked whether they would be “excited,” “pleased,” “disappointed,” or “afraid” if each of various candidates became president, more than half of Republicans (62 percent) say they would be afraid if Clinton were elected. On the flip side, barely half as many Democrats (35 percent) say they would be excited by this outcome. No other candidate from either party generates as much cross-party fear as Clinton does among Republicans. The closest are John Edwards with 31 percent, Obama with 30 percent, and Giuliani with 29 percent.

If Democrats nominate their other leading candidate, Republicans will have to grapple with Obamamania. But ardor always cools, and the GOP will have plenty of time to argue that he is unqualified to be a wartime commander in chief.

– John J. Pitney Jr. is Roy P. Crocker Professor of American Politics at Claremont McKenna College.