Will Hillary give us the same Bob Shrum, blue state, coast to coast campaign in the Fall?

[bluestateguy]

That's what I am afraid will happen. That she will gradually write off the South and the Mountain West to run a campaign that only targets the Northeast, the West Coast and the Upper Midwest. This severely limits the party's prospects for victory by ceding a large section of the country to the opposition, leaving little room for error.

We need a candidate who will run a 40-50 state campaign. Someone who will not be scared away by some bullshit Rasmussen poll showing the Republicans ahead in a given state by double digits. Someone who will make the Republicans fight for every state, for every electoral vote. Someone who will campaign in the most blood red states. I don't see Hillary Clinton as someone who will be likely to do that.

[tritsofme]

1. McCain will likely make the upper-midwest competitive.

Focus on OH, WI, MN ect before you start throwing money around the South and West.

You seem to be coming at the campaign as though resources are unlimited.

[bluestateguy]

4. Hillary will have shitloads more money than Amnesty John

She will opt out of the public financing, while McCain is still bound by the spending limits he agreed to when he took the primary matching funds (which Hillary opted out of).

[tritsofme]

19. Do you have a link?

I seem to remember there being a great deal of ambiguity as to whether or not McCain accepted public financing.

[bluestateguy]

22. Fair enough

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=01&year=2008&base_name=mccains_long_dark_period

MCCAIN'S LONG DARK PERIOD.

Last summer, when he was out of money, John McCain agreed to accept public financing for his primary campaign -- matching funds that require accepting a limit on total spending in the primaries and on spending in each state. He, John Edwards, and several long-gone candidates were officially granted public funds, in December, but have not yet received the cash, though McCain has borrowed in anticipation of receiving $5.8 million in March.

Now that he is the front-runner, McCain is surely tempted to escape that commitment, and raise private funds rather than accept the constraints of the public system, but The Politico reported Tuesday that "it could be tougher getting out than it was getting in." (Hmmm, a little like Iraq, perhaps?):

more

[Demeter]

2. With Any Luck, We'll Never Know

[Cha]

3. There ya go Demeter!

Why don't we cross that Ugly bridge IF we have to go there.

[REDFISHBLUEFISH]

5. Hillary can win the South. Especially Florida. Obama will not.

Obama will not win Florida.

McCain is sort of popular there..Clinton is BIG.

Clinton won it by a large margin even though Obama "mistakenly ran ads there"

Florida after being told in essence that there votes do not count by Democrats would VOTE Hillary through TO GET THEMSELVES COUNTED ....but decline to support Obama if he won the nomination because they and Michigan were slighted.

Like it or not...Hillary is a more viable candidate.
Everyone forgets Obama is left...Clinton is more centered in many postions.

Obama is like Kerry or Edwards or Kennedy...They do not win nationally.

The only people who have recently are in fact the Clintons.

[KittyWampus]

17. florida's fucked up voting equipment= McCain

[Hieronymus]

6. The Democrats need to dump Shrum .. he's lost too many elections.

[Jillian]

7. Hopefully Obama will not follow Kerry's advice either.

[thunder rising]

8. As soon as she fires Howard Dean ... it's the end of this era of the Democratic Party

[jackson_dem]

9. Both will. Neither can compete in the South and many other parts of the country

The media got rid of the only candidate who could run a truly national campaign in the general election.

[bluestateguy]

10. But you have to try

You can't be scared away by some MSM poll that shows you behind in say, Tennessee, by 15 points. If you ignore the state, then that deficit will turn into a 25 point deficit by Election Day.

[jackson_dem]

12. I doubt they will try

Edwards was the only candidate who could have run a truly national campaign like Bill Clinton did in 1992 and 1996.

[OKNancy]

11. She might. she doesn't need the south

so why waste money?
She only needs the Gore states plus one medium or two small states.
I think she would have a chance in border states though.

[paulk]

13. I thought I'd already seen all the weakest "don't vote for Hillary"

arguments - but I guess I was wrong.

[bluestateguy]

14. Please tell me why the argument is weak?

Do tell.

[MonkeyFunk]

15. Yes

that is a concern when dealing with a political neophyte like Clinton.

If only she had people in her inner circle who knew something about electoral politics.

[jillan]

20. lol!

[KittyWampus]

16. yup, the same fucked up Carville strategy. Screw bringing over enough indies/moderates to form

an actual MAJORITY.

See, Reagan got Dems to cross over but Democrats (in Clinton's world) can't.

This is because the Clinton/DLC is about protecting their own little empire. They're all too happy to let the GOP fascists have all the rest.

[Nedsdag]

18. Of course she's giving up the south and the mountain states.

She's playing the 50+1 percent strategy.

It's a strategy that will be fatal to her campaign.

Plus, there's no guaratee she'll win the purple states (Michigan, Pennsylvania, the Upper Midwest states of Wisconsin and Minnesota).

Ohio? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

[MonkeyFunk]

21. I'm curious

What information are you basing your evaluation of her GE strategy on?