As a political neophyte and big time Dean supporter, I get confused by the deep antipathy toward Howard Dean amongst presumably liberal people. If Wes Clark or John Kerry or Dick Gephardt were beating Dean right now, I'd still root for Howard, but I'd be starting the process of learning to like the presumptive nominee. It seems to me that if Dean wins the nomination and the left showers him with sour grape juice, we're all totally screwed. If you're like me, your night's are already filled with horrible visions of a second Bush term so I don't need to remind everyone how important it is that George and Co. be removed from office in 2004. But the strain of defeatism, pessimism, and despair I hear from disgruntled Edwards or Gephardt supporters or the elitist snobbery of Clark and even Kucinich supporters is really disturbing. I understand Howard's not perfect and he's certainly not my dream candidate, but he's pretty darn good. No? What are the major gripes? From whence does all this fear and animosity spring? Somebody please explain to me EXACTLY WHY HOWARD DEAN IS SUCH A HORRIBLE CANDIDATE. Don't gimme "I just don't like him" or "he seems mean" or even "he's too liberal" because we all know that's bullshit. If you want to go with bullshit, back it up. Give me quotes, polls, stats, whatever, just make the shit stick, or don't fling it. If you can convince me to stop supporting Howard Dean, I will send you my Howard Dean stickered-up skateboard for you to put in your trophy room along with a $20 donation to whomever is your candidate of choice (sorry, Bushies, don't even try, you're wasting your keystrokes...).