Obama going for a FIFTY STATE strategy

[mudesi]

Perfect!

That is exactly what I wanted to see. Almost 50% of the population does not bother to vote in any given election. Who do you think those people are? Most of them are apolitical and apathetic. They don't really pay attention to politics because they never see anything change. Whether the Democrats or the Republicans are in power, nothing ever gets better for them, so why bother to vote?.

These people are exactly the people Obama is targeting with his message of change. They are the block that have no voice because they choose to keep their voices silent. They need someone to inspire them and to make them believe that change is possible.

This is why the red state vs. blue state line is a lie. When your turnout is 46%, that means even in a so called "red state" like Texas, for example, only twenty eight percent of the voting age population voted for George W. Bush.

(Link: Texas 2004 election turnout: 46.11%)

(Link: Texas 2004 general election results: 61% Bush)

(Math: 46.11 X 0.61 = 28.13% for Bush)
(Math: 46.11 X 0.39 = 17.98% for Kerry)

Barack Obama energizes new voters. This is what he does and he does it well. So just how many of that 53.89% of Texans who don't bother to vote would Obama need to convince to show up at the polls for him?

If we pretend that the 2004 results were to remain constant, Obama would only need to increase voter turnout by 11% to win Texas. That translates to only having to convince 1 in 5 non voting Texans to show up to the polls and vote Obama.

(Math: 17.98% + 11% = 28.98% Kerry versus 28.13% Bush)
(Math: 11% / 53.89% = 0.20, or 20%, or 1 in 5 non voters)

Remember that these results were Bush vs. Kerry back in 2004, when Kerry was successfully swiftboated by the GOP, the Iraq war was not nearly in the disastrous stage that is in now, ditto the economy, and John Kerry is hardly as charismatic or as gifted a speaker and campaigner as Barack Obama. Not to mention election fraud.

Link: Record Texas turnout holds Dem promise

Link: Texas on Pace for Record Voter Turnout

If Terry McAuliffe were still chairman of the DNC, he'd dismiss a state like Texas as "unwinnable", a "GOP stronghold", "not worth the time". Thankfully, we have Howard Dean and Barack Obama taking things in the proper direction.

Every state is a state that the Democrats can win.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. Nice talking point

but let's so how many events he holds in Wyoming.

[MadBadger]

6. I feel bad for the campaign worker being sent to Utah

Its like being sent on special assignment in Siberia.

[MonkeyFunk]

12. lol

yeah, could you imagine?

[Hawkeye-X]

21. Hm. SLC is pretty liberal

He should be comfy there.

[Buzz Clik]

9. Fifteen hours and nine minutes.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[democrattotheend]

47. Holding events is only one barometer of competing

Spending money on field staff is another. And the money on field staff is probably more important, as it will help down-ticket Democrats, such as Gary Trauner in Wyoming. Even if Obama does not campaign there he is helping the party by sending staff there.

[The_Casual_Observer]

2. Utah & Idaho?

[IDemo]

16. Idaho may actually surprise

I said may. :)

If you really want to see cultists, you should see some of the Ron Paul supporters here. He won a quarter of the vote in the Republican primary, his best win yet.

Then there's the relatively few votes that the Non-Paul libertarians (there are a lot of libertarians here) will cast for Barr.

Plus the look of disgust I've seen on the faces of conservatives when speaking of McCain.

And don't forget, this is the state where Obama got his highest primary percentage win, with 80 percent.

The number of registered voters is way up, and I don't think it's because they're all McCainergized.

[The_Casual_Observer]

32. Today's Libertarian = Clinton era militia member

[IDemo]

35. Nope

Most of them (militia-types) were never politically active to begin with, unless you want to count leaving propaganda leaflets on driveways at nighttime.

The Libertarians I know and work with are generally pretty decent types, just with a greatly different viewpoint than mine on the role of government.

[Major Hogwash]

36. I agree.

And I'll bet 80% of those libertarians don't even go to the polls and vote regularly because they are so disgusted with politics.

I haven't run into hardly any hard-core McCain supporters.
Most of the Republicans I work with don't want to talk about politics anymore.

LoL

I've got my money on LaRocco this year, but Risch is going to be hard to beat.
Did you read the Idaho Statesman the other day, Popkey's article, where it said Risch is worth between $16 Million dollars and $80 Million dollars?
I didn't know that.
I knew he was a millionaire, but I had no idea he was that well off.
He's a prick, I've met him in real life, and he has a serious Napolean "short man" complex.
He expects to be the next Senator simply because he is running as a Republican and people here have a knee-jerk reaction at the voting booths to vote for anyone with an "R" behind their name.

I think Bill Sali is history in Congress, too.
I really like Walt Minnick's chances this fall.
Walt is an excellent campaigner and I hope he goes right after Sali's shitty voting record in the House.

I'm going to distribute literature for Minnick's campaign as well as LaRocco's and Obama's.

[IDemo]

38. I ran into Risch in the Emporium store years ago and got a snarl from him

Must have been a reflection of my expression! That, or he was having a real bad day. :rofl:

No, I didn't know he was that well off. He's going to be all but impossible to beat, I'm afraid. I can still remember the reign of terror he and Tom Stivers ran in the Idaho House.

I would love to see Bill "absolute idiot" Sali voted out as well. Maybe Minnick will benefit from some of the 'coattail effect' from Obama.

[Major Hogwash]

46. They refer to him as "the Little Prince" in some GOP circles because he is so machiavellian.

In his 25 years of stabbing others in the back in the state legislature, he has made a lot of enemies within his own party. When he was finally defeated for re-election to the Senate in the late 90s because he was such an asshole to work with, a lot of Republicans were happy, and relieved. And they resented the fact that he was appointed to his old seat years later by the party big wigs to replace the Senator who resigned to take a position with the Governor's office.

It was the only way that little weasel could get back into the state legislature.

[dubeskin]

3. "Every state is a state that the Democrats can win."

I really like what you said there.

This strategy focuses all around action. I think what would be most useful is if Obama actually got people to go out to states and start campaigning there. Find people willing to relocate for the election. Granted, I think that there are a few states that will pretty much be Republican and Democrat no matter what, but I think we need to give McCain a run for his money...or lack thereof!

[Cha]

4. Yay Dean for pioneering it..Yay Obama

for Perfecting the 50 state strategy.

There was a thread on here the other day that mentioned only "25 states" and some were wondering what happened to all 50..well, here they are!

Thanks skynyrd.

[LSparkle]

5. Jim Hightower pointed this out in a book a few years ago

There's a HUGE group of people who've either given up on the
electoral process or never bothered to register. We need to
get THOSE potential voters mobilized, not pander to the holy
grail of "swing voters." The Repugs have gone after disaffected
voters and have been effective in drawing out fundamentalist
Christians that now comprise a big chunk of their base. We
should follow their example (as we have this cycle) and try
and expand participation, not just win over those who are
already part of the process.

[BzaDem]

7. You are assuming that all of the new people that turn out will vote for Obama.

Historically, that just does not happen. If you are one of those that says we should just ignore history due to some simple cliches ("NOT THIS TIME"), then I guess nothing but November is going to convince you otherwise. But if you are willing to look at history, you would see that new voters never vote for 100-0 for anyone. Even Obama's 300,000 newly registered PA voters only broke 55-45 for him.

Obama is going to have offices in 50 states, because he already has them from the primary season. Having a 50-state strategy in a proportional democratic primary is brilliant, and it is why he won (among other things). But in the GE, the only reason he is going to maintain those offices is because he has a huge amount of money, and he can force McCain to spend money in places he wouldn't ordinarily have to. I guarantee you that he is going to put much more money in the traditional swing states (possibly more this time around, but not more than 25 or so) than in states that we have no chance of winning. If he had less money, his strategy would be very similar to Kerry's.

[genna]

8. I've heard that the 50 state strategy is cost prohibitive. I hope they try as hard as they can.

They need hope.

Their children should be able to know there is something truly different out there.

[OzarkDem]

11. Agree, at this stage its very expensive

with limited chance of a payoff.

GE is different from primaries. I hope they fully realize that.

[Hawkeye-X]

25. That is why DNC is also helping out.

They *KNOW* Obama can't do it all by himself, so they are sending out their own people to help work for Obama.

Obama is expected to get a BIG jump on the money (Analysts says about $100M for June alone), so it will be a GREAT start.

We, the people, are going to fund Obama through everything and see this thing done.

Hawkeye-X

[Gore1FL]

29. Long term investments always pay off

this isn't just for 2008, just as the 50 state strategy employed in 2006 was not just for the mid-terms.

[OzarkDem]

39. I prefer to win 2008

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is getting old.

[Gore1FL]

42. I prefer to win in 2008 and beyond

repeating failed strategies over and over is getting older.

[OzarkDem]

44. One election at a time

[rocktivity]

33. The fifty-state strategy is meant to pay for itself in the long run

in the form of Dem victories where they were once considered impossible. And even if the Repub wins anyway, the strategy digs in a foundation for future conquests. Of course the conservative/DLC Dems didn't like it--it deprived them of corporate backing and fat consulting fees. But there's no way that Obama could be in the position he is now if the strategy hadn't worked so well in '06.

:headbang:
rocknation

[genna]

40. There are 2 reforms that have to happen simultaneously

Finance campaign reform.
Making the democratic party a catalyst for democratic reforms like running Democrats in 50 states.


The deal with me saying it is cost prohibitive is that the DNC's efforts have yielded us 4.4 million dollars to do those democratic reforms compared to $40M for the Republicans.

I like Dean.
I like the 50 state strategy.
I think corporations should have a proportionate voice (as opposed to all the say in the world or no voice at all) in government and pay their fair share for doing so.


Dean deserves credit for trying to be democratic and reach all 50 states. Since he does not have corporate money, he deserves the respect due his convictions too because he is willing to meet his beliefs by sheer force of will.

Obama and Dean doing that together means Obama really may be able to add cash to that worthy endeavor. The public policy concern is tempered in perception by the media's constant onslaught that it can't be done.

I recognize the revolution of an actual democracy won't be televised but I am more concerned by the number of varied ways, their efforts alone are being lampooned.


I want Obama and Dean both to try like hell to get this thing done in 50 states. I am watching the level of propaganda given to fight their efforts. It is phenomenal that we live in a democracy that doesn't want to act like and be an actual democracy.

[knixphan]

10. Get out the vote!

I'm with skynyrd-

All of us need to reach out to the unregistered among us and wake them the hell up!

Numbers, baby! There is no 'red'...

...ok, maybe West Virginia, but everybody else, get the vote out!

[GoldieAZ49]

14. Geeze he went to 57 states in the primary

not including Alaska and Hawaii.

So he is cutting back for the national campaign...because?

[Hawkeye-X]

26. I hope you got your favorite site all fired up..

Just sayin'.....

[RBInMaine]

15. ABOUT DAMN TIME ! GOD BLESS HOWARD DEAN AND OBAMA !

They have showed us how to run election again !! This is a 50-state party, not a god damn 20-state party. NOW LET'S KICK ASS !!

[jcinccal]

17. yeah im sure we'll do well in utah

[Carrieyazel]

18. Obama's down -13 in Texas. In the time it'll take to convince Texas

to go with him, the whole election will be gone to McLame. Bad strategy.

[slick8790]

20. It's not about winning 50 states.

Which I'm surprised people don't get. It's about making Texas close enough (I'd say 8 points or lower) to force McCain to dedicate resources to a place which should be safe ground. If you spread him thin enough, he has to make choices whether to solidify his base states, or hope they stick with him and focus on battlegrounds.

We have a money and manpower advantage, so we can afford to send a few dollars and staffers to Texas, Georgia, South Carolina. Republicans, if forced to seriously defend these, will be spread too thin to mount an effective campaign.

[Hawkeye-X]

27. Exactimundo - Make all states competitive

So McCain and RNC, RNCC, RSCC, and whatever R's come up with needs to spend $$ to keep the state red.

That's why the 50 state strategy is brilliant.

Can you imagine McCain *HAVING* to spend $$ in Arizona to DEFEND his home state and Obama winning it anyway? That would be a COUP.

(And Arizona is slowly, but surely going purple at this stage)

I live in the Mountain West, and it's a battleground state this year, and the Four Corners (with maybe an exception to Utah) may be in play.

Hawkeye-X

[Buzz Clik]

22. You miss the point.

The point is you don't ignore any state or any constituency. That doesn't mean you sink your biggest efforts into the states where you're farthest behind. You evaluate each state and its potential individually. Take no state for granted but don't conceded any state, either.

So, Texas isn't ignored, but neither would Obama invest a dispropotionate of time and resources in a hopeless cause.

When you consider the amazing inroads Obama made in so many states -- like Texas -- during the primaries, you certainly cannot simply shrug off his strategy.

[mudesi]

28. Wow. ONLY 13?

You make it sound like that is so insurmountable.

Obama has come up from behind much larger percentages than that.

[Inuca]

19. 50 states stratefy does not mean

that he expects or will try to win in 50 states, nor that they will invest equally, nor that he will campaign heavily in Utah or Idaho as mentioned upthread (though he may pay some visits to such states early on as opposed to when the campaign is in full swing). What I think it means is several things, in no particular order, and far from a complete list.
- build the party infrastructure
- help down-ticket candidates
- build up the popular vote, which will give Obama more of a mandate even if the EV difference ends up being small
- force McCain and the RNC to spread out their meager resources

Smart, I think!

[RBInMaine]

23. SPOT ON !! Need to play EVERYWHERE, There are Dems even in Utah and Idaho !!

[Buzz Clik]

24. Exactly.

It's easy to see the wisdom of this approach when you aren't consumed with skepticism.

[Gore1FL]

30. It's analogous to the strategy Grant used to win the civil war

except in this war of attrition, instead of creating dead soldiers, he is spending dead presidents.

[Major Hogwash]

37. There's only 146 days left until we vote on November 4th. That's not much time.

When you think about how many times Obama has to go to the really big states to campaign there in order to make an impact, it cuts down on his visiting other smaller states.
Electoral vote-wise.

I wouldn't bother making another trip to Idaho, if I were Obama, and if he does, he should drop in at Pocatello because then it is only a short hop over to Salt Lake City and he can visit 2 states on the same day.

Some states demand more attention.
Like in 2004, Kerry went to Ohio and Florida about 20 times each, and wound up getting ripped off in Ohio.
So, there are going to have to be other Democrat surrogates and supporters get Obama's supporters energized in some of the other states.

Out here in the West, we understand that, we're used to it.
We don't wait around for our nominee to show up.
Kerry only came out here once in the 2004 campaign and then only to go to Sun Valley to rest up in August of 2004. But, you couldn't get near him then.
I know, I tried.

Ha ha.

[Inuca]

41. Absolutely, they will need a pack of

powerful, effective, and very active surrogates. I am sure Kerry will be one of them (when he is not running for his own reelection).

[mudesi]

45. Wouldn't it be nice, though?

"Out here in the West, we understand that, we're used to it.", says you.

But wouldn't it be great if a candidate didn't justify such low expectations? As for there being only 146 days left, well, we all know whose fault that is, don't we. :evilgrin: (Hey, there are a couple of hours left before GDP is history, I had to say it.)

[rocktivity]

31. Well, duh.

the fifty-state strategy has served all the Dems well since Dr. Dean came along. Why in the world would Obama fix what's not broken?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Rosa Luxemburg]

34. PERFECT!

[shadowknows69]

43. Fucking A

This will be Dean's and Obama's biggest legacy IMO. I'm sick of anyone telling us we can't win this state or that or we need one or two of only four states to take it. We can erase the map with this one folks and make them fight to keep territories red. It's ours to fuck up.