It looks from here like we are starting to see a zeitgeist shift. The "a wet paper bag could beat Bush" thought that we all had, but didn't dare believe could come true seems to actually be taking hold.
On the other hand, Kerry's "electability" strategy seems to be based on the idea that Bush is beatable, but just barely, and only by the most "conservative" (in image, not substance) candidate or the one with the most "gravitas" or whatever.
What if an ABK candidate can convince primary voters that Bush is going down anyway and it's important that they vote with the person whose view of how America should be run most closely matches their own or whose judgement they trust the best?
Not sure how this works, but I'm going to be hopping mad if Kerry gets the nomination and it turns out that any of these guys would have beaten Bush and one of the non-Kerry guys (esp. mine, Dean of course) would have won the nomination if people weren't so fixated on what was "electable" for one moment in time.
P.S. This is technically my 3rd diary, but the first was a stupid LOTR throw-away thing (note to self--control self from posting those things). Can I get off with a warning this time?