Someone recently pointed out the obvious: that this primary cycle is "about" who can best beat Bush.
We all know that the person who gets to frame the issue is the person who wins. You get the other guy to fight on your own territory.
Why isn't Howard Dean using his "we can do better than this" theme in this light?
"Electability" is a nice theme and all, but its for pussies, forgive my french. Its basic premise is who can best squeak out a win against a strong president.
Why not have Dean out there, like he was before, telling Democrats to be bold! "Electability" is not something we want to settle for. Any one of the Democrats is "electable" becuase we as democrats will vote in droves. But simply to "setle" for electability is just that -- to "settle."
We can do better than this.
In sum, the issue isn't just who can beat Bush. Its who can beat Bush Best.
The line ought to be: "Everyone of us running can beat him, and as the president's popularity continues to wane, we will realize that more and more. But when that happens, are you gonna wish that you had dared for a little more -- instead of settling for a 'safe' way that you thought could just beat him, you are gonna wish you had voted for the best way to beat him."