Something occurred to me just now: I was originally, way back at the beginning, a Kerry fan. Then Dean came along and I admired his movement and his honesty so much that I became a Dean supporter. (Guess that makes me a flip-flopper or something....) I have to say that Kerry's done a terrific job so far, he hasn't made any major gaffes, he hasn't given the Axis of Rove much to work with. At the same time, he's articulated a very different philosophy from Bush's "bomb first, ask questions later" approach on foreign policy, and he's obviously going to be strong on domestic policy.
My question is this, and this more of a for-what-it's-worth kind of thing: out of the myriad Democratic candidates in the primary this year, would any of them have done better against Bush head-to-head than Kerry did last night? I thought he was magnificent, I totally expected him to screw something up, but he put on a clinic. So could Dean have done better? Graham? Clark? Moseley-Braun? Just curious to see what everybody thinks.