Is Any Pro War Democrat Electable?

With all the new attention on the rise of Kerry and Edwards, real or not, its time to consider whether ANY pro War Democrat is electable.  The gripe against Howard Dean for saying his supporters aren't transferable is a canard; people surely made up their own minds about the war all by themselves.  

If the Democratic party nominates any of the proWar candidates, a third party is guaranteed.  Perhaps several third parties because the voters who are attracted to protesting the war will know they can't win the election.  Ralph Nader is a likely candidate and probably a famous entertainment figure would step forward (Susan Sarandon?).  A celebrity candidate could easily get publicity and appearances on EVERY TV show and could easily amass a substantial campaign fund over the internet.  Unlike Nader's rationale in 2000, that there was no difference between Bush and Gore, an antiWar candidate has an excellent, legitimate, even heroic,  rationale.  

Many people who vote for Democrats support Democratic issues from a sense of "doing good" rather than self interest.  They HAVE jobs; they HAVE health insurance; they HAVE good housing; their children are grown and educated; they're not personally worried about the Patriot Act or abortion rights.  But they support all those issues because its the right thing to do.  They also oppose the war because opposing the war is the right thing to do.  In a collision between those passions, its safe to predict that many will choose to stand up for their opposition to the war, and hence, an inevitable loss for any Pro War nominee.