Time’s Jay Carney asks the question: if the Bush administration is such a catastrophe, and the GOP in general so shell-shocked from 2006 losses and public disaffection with the war, why do leading Republican presidential candidates routinely outpoll their Democratic counterparts?

I think Carney gets its mostly right, observing both the crossover appeal of Giuliani and McCain and the fact that a large chunk of the public begins the race predisposed against Clinton and unsure about Obama and Edwards. But I think the Hillary Factor deserves the greatest emphasis. While Democrats may look back longingly at the Clinton years, independents don’t. I think they have had their fill of Clintons and Bushes (Jeb, patience is a virtue). They are deeply distrustful of both parties, as the polling demonstrates, and tired of the hyper-partisan nonsense. The cable network/talk radio/blog market serves the hard-core partisans for the most part, not the middle. These voters are turned off, tuned out, and dropped from the political discussion. In 2006, those who participated voted against corruption and what they perceived as pointless attrition in Iraq. They didn’t vote for Democrats. They won’t vote for either party’s standard model in 2008, in my opinion. I’m not sure official Washington gets that yet, as it checks its Blackberry for new blog posts and hurries home to watch Fox/MSNBC.

The Democrats’ problem is that they don’t yet have a Giuliani/McCain type candidate with crossover appeal to indies. Some Democrats’ fondest wish is that Obama (or Edwards, if Obama falters) will become that candidate.

Their problem, as usual, is a Clinton.