John Edwards might well be the Democratic Party’s strongest candidate against any Republican in 2008. But he can’t make that argument.

Some Republican strategists say Edwards is their perfect nightmare: a smart, articulate Southerner who taps into voters’ anger against Bush, overzealous right-wingers and overreaching corporations.

But this Edwards strategy dares not speak its name. Because it implies a belief that Americans won’t elect a woman or a black male as President. At least, not Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.

That’s the argument a respected political reporter made to me last week. Obama can’t win, he said, because he’s black and has a funny name. But a Colin Powell could be elected President. And Hillary can’t win, he said, only in part because she’s a woman. Her bigger negatives are her divisiveness and her husband.

But the Edwards campaign is already sensitive over the reaction to Elizabeth Edwards’ comments that – since he’s not female and not black – he’s not getting more media attention. Now they have to tread even more lightly.

Plus, is electability ever a winning issue? Republican moderates used to argue that Reagan was too conservative to be elected. In 1992, a lot of Democrats said a draft-dodger and rumored womanizer like Bill Clinton could never get elected.

Maybe this is the year when Democratic primary voters calculate electability. Or maybe they go with their hopes instead of their fears.

Click Here to discuss and comment on this and other articles.