heric,

All I was saying was that it could be done, and has been done, and the most recent example is Clinton. I took your initial post to be about "electability" because that what it appears to be about; the "small state can't win" argument is one of the many spurious electablility arguments out there.

I'm still not sure how it's NOT about "electability," because you use metaphors like "learning to deal in the big leagues." I don't know what that's a metaphor for.

Here's my sense of his performance in big league politics.

(1) He's done the best of any candidate at big league fundraising (which any pol will tell you is the best predictor of success, much better than one's showing in IA and NH). In this, he broke Clinton's record, which shows you precisely one area in which Clinton was NOT once in a lifetime.

(2) Dean has also done the best at putting together a 50 state organization, which will help down the road.

(3) he's come in second best in the combined tally of the first two votes, despite the media trying frantically to destroy him with a dishonestly edited clip.

So in what sense is he a piker compared to any of the others? True, he has fewer delegates than Kerry, but much more money. In the end, money is usually more important at this stage, but the delegates are very important too. So it's kind of neck and neck at the moment.