Ok, that's fair.

Protest votes are spoiler votes. That costs everyone, and that's a big part of why running Green is a dead end right now. People will experience the impact of those protest votes, point to the Greens just like they did, say Nader, and that's the end of it. Too expensive of a way to express that cost.

Now, what Sanders is doing is building a movement, leverage, and funding.

We can "cost" the party either way, win or lose! If we win, obviously that's the sweet scenario, but let's take the losing one.

The movement continues, and it funds people who can end up in the Progressive Caucus, or replace DWS. That's this election. Next year, when we see things we don't like, we take that funding and our movement and we run ads, we find and begin to fund and support challengers, we go to the press and we message our alternatives.

Know what all of those things do?

They cost the party money. Know where they will be? In that damn call center for overtime having to dial for dollars more, because now they have a challenger running ADS on TV and making their case for the midterms.

That's expensive!

And if we win one or two of those? Now it's leverage and clout. Suddenly, that Progressive Caucus has teeth.

It's never really had teeth before. Now it can. If we just don't go away, win or lose, we present the best cost and leverage we've ever had. And, we can take the party same as the Tea Party did too.

The Tea Party was a rebranding of the Republican base, and it was funded by big interests looking to take the nation right. They kicked ass, and now mostly own the GOP. Today the GOP is bat shit nuts, and that same model is one we can use to similar results.

The model isn't bad. It's all about why it's being used.

We have really great reasons for doing it. We don't need to throw gay people under the bus to get votes either. We are winners on social and economic axis.

If you want to cost them and get something, this is the way to go.