Kate,

I don't know many people who aren't disappointed, and I embrace much of what you say.

I'd share the blame a little more, adding that I'm even more disappointed in the Congressional Republicans than in the President. They took what I regarded as a potentially interesting domestic agenda and made it into a license for pork-barrel spending. Bush didn't stop them, of course....

On third parties, I'm extremely hesitant to go that route, especially in our current circumstances, which are internationally very perilous. When sending a message effectively means electing someone who's not serious about national security, it's irresponsible to send the message. But if my vote "didn't matter," I'd be a little more willing to do it.

In other words, the Electoral College, with winner-take-all state races, actually facilitates responsible exercise of the kind of protest vote that might lead to the genesis of a viable third (or rather a new second) party.

Obviously certain poltiical conditions have to obtain for this to be the case. In a closely divided state, the argument against a "protest vote" still holds. But in a state that's more red or blue, where the Democrat or Republican candidate would require some sort of divine intervention to win, an alternative party can gain its legs, building for the future when it might actually supplant one of the existing parties.