Why even bother with a 50-state election

[theboss]

In general, I tend to disagree with Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone. His cynicism is often toxic to me.

But I thought he made an interesting point this week in that the Clinton General Election strategy is to secure the blue states, ignore the red states, and compete in two or three battleground states that will decide the election.

This led me to the question of why even waste all the money of having 50 states vote? Let's just have an election in Ohio and Florida (and maybe Missouri) and whoever wins...that's the president.

[KittyWampus]

1. that does expose the REAL goal of the Clinton/DLC strategy- weaken the Democratic party

and leave things so evenly split no real change occurs except by those with access to the Media and largest amounts of money.

[DemzRock]

Sorry duplicate. n/t

[DemzRock]

2. Sadly - the electoral system inspires this crazy but pragmatic strategy...

Unlike the primaries, the presidential electoral system means winner take all, state by state.

In this scenario, Clinton is a much better candidate according to state by state polls.

[Buzz Clik]

3. Uh, yeah. If Al Gore had won his home state in 2000, Florida would have been irrelevant.

I suggest the candidates not try to get too smart.

[Johnny__Motown]

4. To help dems "down the ticket" get elected and build the party in that state for the future of the

party.


States don't just flip and stay flipped. You need to get dems elected into lower offices and allow them to build an organization.

The 50 state strategy is the only reasonable way to run the party. We have allowed southern states to stay uncontested for almost half a century now, this must end. The sooner the better.

[theboss]

5. What I find funny about the "blue state/red state" argument is the recent history of California

Somehow, California is seen as the bluest of blue states.

But this is its voting history:
1960 - Nixon
1964 - Johnson
1968 - Nixon
1972 - Nixon
1976 - Ford
1980 - Reagan
1984 - Reagan
1988 - Bush
1992 - Clinton
1996 - Clinton
2000 - Gore
2004 - Kerry

1996 was the first time a Dem received more than 50 percent of the vote in California since 1964.
Nothing is written in stone. But the Clinton campagin seems to believe that it created the modern electoral map in 1992, and that's the way it should remain.

[knixphan]

8. Right on, Johnny

[Alter Ego]

6. Her strategy is a proven failure

because we did that the last two times and it went over like a lead balloon.

I'd rather try to compete everywhere--spread the Republicans thin and make them compete in places they're not used to competing.

[theboss]

7. At its heart, it is a defensive strategy

And a defensive strategy in politics is doomed for failure.

[kentuck]

9. Because that will keep the status quo in power.

No one Party will sweep all the states if they agree that you can have this state and I will take that state and maybe this time, I will have a small minority and the next time you can have it. It keeps the system frozen in place.