Reply #88: wyldwolf, I admit that *I* am petrified of that.

[ieoeja]

Yes. I *am* petrified that Rahm will be given credit for a House victory. Why?

I believe in the 50-State Strategy.

Winning the elections gain us NOTHING if the public does not want us to do what we want done. Look at the State Board of Education in Kansas. Running stealth campaigns religous nutjobs took over that board and forced their agenda into the schools. Next election they were kicked out of office and their agenda overturned.

This isn't exactly a once-in-a-lifetime example. Because other nutjobs in Kansas managed to pull the exact same stunt a second time. And a second time they were booted from office and their agenda overturned.

So, yes, we can win elections by finding out what the people want, then promising to do just that. But if we're doing that while the other guy is convincing the people that they should want what that other guy wants, then the best we can hope to accomplish is a slow victory for that other guy's agenda instead of a fast one.

What is the fucking point of that?

The 50-State Strategy isn't just about winning elections. It helps, especially with getting out the voter. But it is also about educating the public about our agenda.


Back to the question as you asked it, if Rahm gets credit instead of the 50-State Strategy, then that would mean crediting his strategy. What is his strategy? I know raising more money than his opponent is a part of it. Is there anything else? Is that the whole strategy you hope to credit for victory?

If so, let me remind you of Terry McAuliffe's bragging about victory in 2004 because the DNC outraised the RNC. I don't recall that election being such a wonderful victory. But Terry sure did.

It made me seriously wonder if the DNC Chair is paid on commission.


So, yes. I *am* petrified that Rahm will be given credit for a House victory. Because I believe that credit will do nothing to help Democrats advance our agenda in the future.