Having spent too much time reading too many petty infighting Democratic arguments today, I just have to highlight this Kos comment (from 'Springfield Dem') as a breath of fresh air:

Daily Kos || Why Dean can win without the South

Basic disclaimer -- I'm not a Dean supporter.

However, this reaction to Dean just amazes me.  I've spent the last 12 years of my life running campaigns and working in politics, and there is one indisputable fact we need to consider.

When you run a shitty campaign in the primary, you will run a shitty campaign in the general election.

Dean is not winning because he's angry, or because he's liberal (he's not), or even because he's anti-war.  He's winning (in fact, he's smoking the field) because he's running a spectacular campaign.

How is it that so many people can look at the rest of the Democratic field, a group of candidates who can only seem to stay in neutral or go in reverse, and be so convinced that they can stand up better than Dean to the mighty GOP Wurlitzer and Bush's well-oiled $200 million operation?  It simply makes no sense.

Now would also be a good time to note that Dean in fact has already passed the $15 million mark for the quarter with several hours left before midnight.

(Will Clark out-raise Dean, as his supporters have bragged that he will? Pick out a crayon and color me dubious.)