Reply #48: Don't make good the enemy of perfect

[Can o Beans]

The fact is that there are some places in this nation that will never elect a true liberal democrat. So, in those places, we have two choices:

a. Concede them completely to the GOP, and never think about them again.

b. Consistently run likable and popular conservative democrats in those areas; people that are generally left of center but stray to the right somewhat regarding a couple of critical issues that are "hot buttons" for the citizenry of that area.

If we opt for (a), we forfeit the fight in red states and counties, and GOP has to spend no or little resources to keep them. We as a party then die of a thousand cuts as they gradually tighten the noose over a generation or so in the blue areas through mass marketing and public relations campaigns with more resources than we have to battle them. In other words, we'd lose Alabama by default and get SwiftBoated in CA, OR, etc. every chance they got.

If we opt for (b), we have the chance to populate places like Montana with Dem governors (a DINO is still better than a hard-right theocrat), get those areas used to the idea that the left is not all that bad, and then we slowly cherry pick areas to "overhaul" with left-spectrum ideas and initiatives (i.e., Nevada and Arizona). Over time, with option (b) we win due to sheer numbers of elderly and motivated grassroots activists in strategic positions.

Our strategy is not unlike that of a regional retailer attempting to go national. You gain a foothold in markets where there is questionable hold on market share, gain name recognition and brand equity through discounting (DINOs) and sales (moderates) while maintaining a perception of product/service quality, and only launch nationwide when you have the capital to back the maneuver.