They were a day early with that note (wasn't it supposed to come on Thursday), but I have to agree--to throw this out to the supporters for a vote is to understand where that money came from and who needs to make this decision. I can only assume that they are following MoveOn's innovations in this arena as well.

In other news, what's the VJ take on the debate last night and Dean's Southern Strategy?

I'm travelling, so I didn't see the debate. I did read a bunch of discussion online about it.

Two quick reactions from the secondhand stuff I've read so far: 1) It sounds like Edwards wants to be a divider, not a uniter ("people like you"). Very disappointing. 2) BFA posters are reporting that the calls to CSPAN this morning were overwhelmingly in support of Dean and his refusal to apologize, which I find very interesting.

On yet another note, in my district in a state house race, a Democrat beat a Republican incumbent. I'll be sending a letter to that Democrat when I get home explaining that I have not in the past voted in odd-year elections (I have a partial justification for that) and that he can thank Howard Dean for my vote and I look forward to his endorsement of Howard Dean. ;-)

I am so torn on what he should do! Do you know yet how you are going to vote?

As I said in the post: "I think they'll do it and I think it's the right thing to do."

There's nothing to be torn about. If he accepts matching funds, he has to stop fundraising RIGHT NOW, as they already have the maximum they're allowed to spend. Then, nothing to do but sit in Burlington all spring and summer while Rove makes all the GECKo[1] spin and lies about Howard look like Valentine's.

He has to opt out. It's clear that they've already decided to. There's no other rational option.

[1] Gephardt, Edwards, Clark, Kerry. Teehee.

I'm not sure, but I think I'm leaning towards opting out of federal matching funds. If Dean wins the nomination, which I think he will, then he won't be constrained on what he can spend in the campaign. We all know that Bush is raising an obscene amont of money, so Dean shouldn't hobble himself in that arena.

I'm going to vote to opt out. To take the other position requires that one endorse the stunning reality that Dean can accept no more money for the next N months.

I think the campaign was pretty smart to ask for a referendum; as many have said, it does give some good cover to Dean for backing out of his previous campaign-finance statements.

Not to mention that this is in the spirit of campaign finance reform: "Look ma, too many different people are giving me money! Should I tell them to stop?"

It's not like John Kerry dipping into his personal fortune. (Kerry does have plenty of millions himself, even if it's not as much as his wife.)

Oh, and Glen: the Thursday heads-up was for the actual mail with the voting instructions, so the campaign was accurate in saying that's the Big Deal e-mail.

They just surprised us by ruining the surprise. :)