With Dean still insisting that he'll go on after Wisconsin no matter what, many are wondering if that's really the best tack for him to take. Jeff over at
Notes on the Atrocities suggests that Dean is more valuable to progressive Democrats as an outsider than an insider. Although he indulges in a bit of hype by using the word "revolutionary" to describe Dean's goals for the party, I do think he makes an intersting point - one that echoes what some others have said in these threads. I would be interested learning what Kos readers think about this analysis. For example, were Dean to resume outsider status, would he be taken seriously?
If he wants to continue to remake the Democratic Party, he must face reality and step away from the race. His opportunity is in showing that politics isn't just about political races--it's about ideas and coalitions. Stepping aside now and cheerfully supporting the nominee would put Dean in the position to continue to demand Democrats act like Democrats. He can show that there's more to offer a party than candidacy and act as an example to all his supporters who will now wonder what they should do. Setting the party's agenda, crafting policy solutions--that's where the real power is. That's where real change begins. It's also absolutely critical in rebuilding the party from the ground up; Kerry may win the election, but Deaniacs could actually seize the party from the DLC.
Dean was an outsider when he started, and he showed how powerful that can be. If he loses in Wisconsin, he'll be an outsider again. The decision about how to use that position is up to him.