bluestateguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 10:33 PM
Original message |
We should adopt a 50 state campaign strategy for 2004 (with a caveat) |
|
Conventional wisdom says that a presidential nominee should write off states where he has no chance to win in the general election, shore up his base states and play the competitive states hard. This is a sound strategy for the general election, but it need not be the strategy from March to November. Fact is, most of those fickle, wishy washy swing voters only begin to pay attention to the campaign around Labor Day at the earliest. From March to the convention I see great symbloic value with the Democratic nominee adopting a 50 state strategy. It would exude confidence and dilute the Bush team's "aura of inevitability" strategy they are trying to adopt for 2004. The sight of Howard Dean, or Wesley Clark stumping in Kansas or Wyoming in June, after the primaries, would convey a message that the Democrats are running a serious campaign and that our nominee is playing offense, not defense. Richard Nixon tried a 50 state strategy in 1960 and it was widely assumed that it did not work, but that is because he was traveling to hopeless states in October. I do not think we should do that. Obviously, the nominee should not be campaigning in Idaho in the last week of October. But a campaign visit to all 50 states would have a positive national effect and could energize Democratic voters nationwide, which would have a positive effect on down ballot races.
|
Classical_Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 10:39 PM
Response to Original message |
|
but I think we should play things by ear. It is a very hopeful thing to me that the establishment dems are so worried about Deans appeal to the South. Look at the confederate flag issue and Zell Miller calling Dean a traitor. I think maybe they are scared he is going win alot of it.
|
michaelbmoore
(127 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 10:40 PM
Response to Original message |
2. You make a good point. . . |
|
because unless we transcend this internal bickering we will win the election, but still be stuck in the mud due to lack of coattails. . .we have to focus on the whole thing, congress and the white house. That is why the Dean and Clark grassroots movement is so important.
--Mike
|
La_Serpiente
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 10:43 PM
Response to Original message |
3. I really like SEIU's strategy |
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3353946,00.html It also has mapped an aggressive, intensive voter mobilization effort for 2004 that includes making 7 million phone calls, distributing 6 million fliers, visiting 10 million homes and running six mobile action centers in converted tractor-trailers.
Officials plan for 500,000 members to donate to the effort, totaling $20 million.
|
boxster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 10:59 PM
Response to Original message |
4. The potential problem with that strategy is money. |
|
In an election where we will most certainly be facing a huge disadvantage monetarily, the conventional wisdom might actually make more sense.
I see your point in the symbolism, but I think the money may be better spent in the states we must win to win the election. If the funding is available, then by all means visit all 50.
|
Classical_Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. If Dean continues to raise money like he has been raising |
|
it. This might not be a problem at all. Dean is really killing alot of Dem paper tigers.
|
boxster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. He's not going to raise $250 million. Bush will. |
LiberalTexan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. Dean needs voters not dollars |
|
And the way he's campaigning in forgotten states like Texas, I think he can get the voters....no problem with that.
|
boxster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-06-03 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
16. Everybody campaigns in Texas. |
|
I'd say that Ann Richards would beg to differ that Texas is forgotten. She still raises a lot of money for the Dems and I'm sure will do so again in this election.
Now, states like Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Nebraska - THOSE are forgotten states. Wyoming went to Bush by 40% in 2000; the others were all over 20%.
Considering the low number of electoral votes in those states, I'd rather see the nominee fight for states that were close in 2000.
|
Silverhair
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
6. That takes time & $$, and both are in short supply |
Classical_Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. If Dean ends up with as much as Bush it won't be in short |
|
supply. Based on his present rate of fund raising he will have that much.
|
boxster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. He won't end up with as much as Bush. |
|
Based on his present rate of fund raising he will have that much.
I think your math might be a little off. Didn't he raise around $15 million last quarter?
|
ShaneGR
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
10. How much does it cost to travel around in a bus for two months? |
|
With the staff, probably about 5 million. I think it would be a great investment. LOTS of earned media.
|
boxster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. That's nearly a state a day - way too optimistic for a bus tour. |
|
Does anyone even do bus tours anymore? As convoluted as campaign scheduling is, I think it's likely not feasible.
Too bad Wellstone didn't take the bus!
|
ShaneGR
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. Well, I'm talking about 25 states in 60 days |
|
It doesn't have to be 50 states, as whoever the nominee is could visit the remainder of them later in the campaign. And who goes to Hawaii? Or Alaska?
And oh yeah, Clinton went on several bus tours in 92. Watch the War Room.
|
boxster
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-06-03 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
15. Ok, not sure where you ever said 25 states. |
|
Clinton wasn't facing a $250 million campaign opponent, either, so the campaign strategy has to be different this time, of course.
The point is - it's likely not going to be economically feasible to campaign much in states that are basically lost causes. Wyoming, for example, went to Bush by 40 points in 2000. We're not making up 40 points no matter what we do, and I don't see campaigning there having much of an impact elsewhere.
|
Renew Deal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-05-03 11:30 PM
Response to Original message |
14. I am for it, but it needs to be done right. |
|
We should activly pursue this. But it iw going to take us hittin gthe ground and not stopping. Our candidates can't visit every state, but we can do the dirty work. I think we have the people and the commitment.
|
Lydia Leftcoast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-06-03 12:30 AM
Response to Original message |
17. The candidate should definitely visit each state at least once, but |
|
if money is a problem, make sure that he has a contingent of dedicated volunteers on site to do the rest.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 07:54 AM
Response to Original message |