I see a lot of brash talk about how Dean is eminently electable. A lot of pooh-poohing of his many deficits (again, if you want to know "what negatives?"--rather than rehash them here for the umpteenth time, see the "Argument for Dean hating" entry at my blog).
Now, in the wake of these foolhardy union endorsements, we may well face a Dean nomination (though I'm certainly not giving up yet!). Which will, I believe, be followed by an almost certain loss in the general election. But it's not another argument over the "electability" issue I want here. Rather...
I want to know, what quantifiable predictions are Dean supporters willing to make? I'm expecting Dean to lose if he's the nominee. I'm also expecting Dean supporters (if they don't slink away and disappear) to make excuses, the way Nader voters do. This time, of course, the excuses will be different (you can't blame the Democrat for running a bad campaign if you're the Democrat). If Nader runs, that will sure be part of it. But even if he does not, Deaniacs are likely to say "it just wasn't our year; any Democrat would have lost to Bush, probably worse."
So go on record (I'm not putting up a poll because I want to see who's saying what), and I'll keep a copy of your predictions on file. What quantifiable outcome would be sufficient for you to admit that Dean dragged the Dems down? A simple loss of the presidency, in a squeaker? A narrow win over an unpopular Bush, but with no coattails? Or, I'm guessing, some lower bar? Let's hear it!