Why does the DLC hate you guys?

[LimpingLib]

I dunno. Just wondering.

That was a smart alec responce to the "you hate the DLC threads" but the right wing is getting tricky and the DLC label isnt all we should look for in rejecting a horrible canidate.And our biggest fear is the 2.5 way where certain right wing Democrats pass themselves off an an inbetween of the DLC and "libruls".This is our biggest worrry.Just look at who the masses and weblogs have been programed to salivate over (without a single issue position hardly ever having been talked about) and you will figure who is threat #1.


Anyway this last election has shown that till 2012 , we are living in a 269-269 nation for 2008.Give all Kerry states to Democrats (unless we nominate a right wing turd whos costs us a few)plus New Mexico , Nevada , and Iowa where in a normal 50-50 election(which this last one was not) we will win. Its 269-269.

The states up for grabs are then Colorado and Virginia. Arizona will be by 2012. Florida can be ours perhaps if we avoid nominating bad DLCish canidates. WE could loose New Mexico again and far more badly if we dont start representing people like minoritys. A progressive can do better in Ohio as well.Next election will be a turning point. Either we splatter the GOP among Hispanics (among others)like 80-20 or consolidate them as a 40%-45% GOP swing constituency.Kerry wasnt a bad guy , but his advisors steered him toward old voting models. Edwards and Dean aside, the alternative to Kerry would have ruined our rebuilding prospects for ever. Kerry at least held our shaky ground and we have another (last?)chance in 08.

Dont let some white moderate male passing himself off as some "2.5 way" "electable hero" ruin our chances in 2012.WE have a chance to make Arizona competitive and seal up New Mexico, Nevada , etc. plus make a strong move at states like Ohio. He will kill us in 2008 and ruin us for 2012.

[Mojambo]

1. FIX BBV n/t

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. I fully agree the southwest is up for grabs

I don't throw out Colorado either. We can make headway in those states if we can frame our issues better, focus more time there, and yes, put a prominent latino everywhere we can.

[LimpingLib]

3. "frame our issues better"

Or we could study the winning strategy and growing movments in Brazil, Venezuela , or Canada.

Throw the old frame away.


We need to actually risk loosing an election or 2 while building a base. I dont know how the 2012 census will effect changing electoral numbers but we are at 269 right now.

Best to just represent the poor and opressed now and build up for a win thats for all time.

EDIT: Anothwords dont assume we can just pick a local candidate in ..say ..um.. Arkansas (for example) and assume that will erase Bush's 10 point win. No goofy electoral strategys. Cut the gimmics.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

4. I don't think we're that far into disrepair.

Despite what the media would have you believe, this was not a landslide, by any rational means. We're not far off, but we need to just tweak the message, and for the love of GOD, actually fight for ourselves.

There's a lot of disillusioned true conservatives out there. I think if we hammer "balanced budget" and "cutting pork" for the next few years, we can sway enough our way.

[LimpingLib]

6. With Hispanics , we are really screwing up.

Bush got 60% of the vote not just in Florida with high numbers of Cubans but also in Texas. New Mexico of all places (where I have been counting on huge voter registration increases and population growth along with Arizona and Nevada to bury the GOP alive)had Hispanics vote 45% for Bush!!!

The DLC must be smiling so hard that the smirk is surly etched into their faces.

New Mexico was in 2000 (where minoritys were undercounted massivly in the census) 55% Hispanic and Indian and the total minority population as of 2005 without undercounts is about 60%.

Nationaly we have clearly lost states like Arkansas , Montana and Louisiana. But the vote totals we got in Nevada , New Mexico , Virginia , Iowa , Wisconisin , Minnesota , and New Hampshire were our best ever (best since 1988 in all cases) measured against the national average.

In Ohio we also did our best ever but that was due to economic conditions. A moderate will kill us there in future elections. We slipped a little in Florida.

We are at 269 for the first time since the 40s I think. First time in my life time.

[blondeatlast]

5. In Arizona, of the major population centers, only Maricopa County

home to Phoenix) is red.

Coconino (northern AZ/Flagstaff) and Pima (southern/Tucson) are consistently blue.

Our state party needs to have a long term push in Maricopa, even apart from any elections.

But our state party tends to be DLC-lite and doesn't quite seem to "get" Arizona voters.

[LimpingLib]

7. Arizona was a 10.1 point loss in a -3.1 national loss.

GOP has a 7 point advantage. (indexed to national averages)

The advantage for the GOP was 6 points in 1996 and 7 points in 2000 so despite record Latino registration plus some slow and steady Latino population growth (large growth but only slight compared to the overall population growth)we have fallen flat.

But Colorado went from +10 GOP in 1996&2000 to just plus 4 in 2004.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. PA is definitely more of a swing state than Virginia

Bush won Virginia by 8% in 2004 and 2000. Kerry only won Pennsylvania by about 2% this year which is smaller than the 4% that Gore carried the state with in 2000. Virginia is staying just as Republican and Pennsylvania is becoming more competative.

[LimpingLib]

9. Pennsylvania finished stonger for us in 04 than it has since 1984&88

Pennsylvania went +2.2% for Kerry when the nation went -3.1% in 2004

Thats +5.3% Dem

Previous years (estimate based on whats in my head)
2004
Kerry 50.8%
Bush 48.6%
+5.3% Dem (Bush won nation by 3.1%)

2000
PA
Gore 51%
Bush 46%
+4.5% Dem (Gore won nation by 0.5%)

1996
Clinton 50%
Dole 40%
+2% Dem (Clinton waon nationally by 8.3%)

1992
Clinton 45%
Bush 36%
+3% Dem (Clinton won nationaly by 6%)

1988
Bush 51%
Dukakis 49%
+5% Dem (Bush won nationally by 7.8%)

1984
Regan 53%
Mondale 46%
+10% Dem (Reagan won nation by 17%)

Pennsylvania is a solid blue state unless the GOP wins nationally by 5% in which case we are a dead horse anyway.

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. So, compared to 2000, PA is less Democratic

[LimpingLib]

12. No it is more Democratic.

The comparison to national averages shows Pennsylvania has solidified in our favor.

For Pennsylvania to be won by Republicans would mean they win the nation with over 300 electoral votes anyway.

5.3% in our favor in 2004
4.5% in our favor in 2000

indexed to national averages.

Had the national race been a 50%-50% tie then the electoral votes would have been 269-269 with Kerry taking Nevada , New Mexico , and Iowa.

Its the measure for where the nation is especially in an open seat without an incumbant.

[LimpingLib]

10. Forgot Virginia

Its +5.1% GOP 2004

And thats down from +8.5% GOP in 2000 and down from +10% GOP in 1992 and 1996.

You can make the argument that the GOP and DEM national average breakdown is slightly more than 50-50 for the GOP and less for us but assuming its dead even then your statment in post #8 is wrong.

Plus you additionally forget that Kerry didnt try and win Virginia where as Bush tried like fuck in PA.