While general polls and the national mood (as well as postwar history, where only Truman and Bush the Elder managed to extend their party's hold on the White House for more than two consecutive terms) have tended to favor the odds for Democrats winning the Presidency in 2008, the details are rather different. Alan Fram of the Associated Press has the details:

The races for both parties' presidential nominations are showing signs of tightening. Yet a closer look at the numbers also reveals intriguing crosscurrents that raise questions about how solid the presumed Democratic advantage may be in November 2008.

* * * * *

Next year's Election Day is eons away in political time, and many things could happen to alter today's dynamics. For now, the surveys leave it unclear whether the apparent Democratic edge would really hold up should GOP candidates with moderate credentials like Rudy Giuliani or John McCain face Democrats such as Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama.

When people are asked which party they want to capture the White House, "They tell you about the general climate or mood, and that's not good for Republicans," said Whit Ayres, a GOP pollster not working for a presidential candidate.

"It's almost a 'Do you want George Bush to be president again?' question," he said. "But it's not the case if you say, 'Do you want Hillary Clinton or Rudy Giuliani to be president?'"

Read the whole article at the above link. "Generic" Democrats have ALWAYS out-polled specific ones, while the opposite has been true for Republican leaders like Reagan.

If the public begins to compare the experience and thoughtfulness of the entire fields of candidates, it will become clear that the Republicans have the "gravitas." Specific match-ups will become even better for the GOP as both races winnow down the fields. As of 2008, the top three Democrats will have a total of 24 years government experience, all in the Senate (including Obama's 8 years in the Illinois Senate), with NO executive or administrative experience worth noting. John McCain alone can beat that with a couple of years to spare. Giuliani has decades of supervisory experience in the Justice Department and US Attorney, not to mention eight years as Mayor of the most important city in the world, one with a bigger economy than 41 states. Mitt Romney not only saved the Salt Lake City Olympics from scandal and financial fiasco, he was known as one of the most skilled "turn-around" executives in the country before serving as Governor of Massachusetts.

The leading Democrats' "qualifications" are: being married to a President, being half black, and having pretty hair.

If the electorate had not been systematically "dumbed down" for forty years by the public education bureaucracy, there wouldn't be any contest at all.

UPDATED 12:10 a.m. to add: As The Exposer notes in the comments, Romney actually only served a single term as Massachusetts Governor, not two as I had stated. I've made the correction above.