@ehBeth,
hi bethie
I doubt that the Dean example is an appropriate parallel for several reasons.
Quite aside from the rather significant aspect of brains/knowledge, Dean's campaign demonstrated that he had serious smarts regarding organizing and, importantly, how to go about that task in the modern environment. There were very good reasons to place him as head of the DNC and this last election gives the proof to that puddin'. Without the Dean campaign's grassroots precedent and without his subsequent 50 state strategy, Obama's campaign would, I think, have looked rather different. Palin's possible future is as populist figurehead, not anything more substantive.
Further, Dean lost in a primary run and his reputation wasn't seriously damaged for Dem voters broadly. Palin is a much different kettle of moose, falling into disfavor with large portions of the Repub voters.
Last, it seems certain that Kerry's loss must have changed some notions among party strategists regarding Dean (and modern campaigning) but Ruffini's thinking here goes off the beam in a typically conservative way...assuming a small cadre of super powerful party controllers - the 'elite'. His use of 'eviscerate' in that last bolded sentence is another indication of what he gets wrong here. The present situation in the conservative movement where there is a seriously angry ideological divide between 'the base' and 'the RNC elitists' is of a
far greater magnitude than anything the Dems suffered in 2004.