Login HereI believe it will, in huge ways. The press is still obsessed with the same states (which mirrors their obsession with white working-class voters). This is not to say the states about which they are talking are important. I happen to live in one of them (Ohio).
But Ohio Pennsvlvania and Florida are not the only paths to victory. The Democrats have seen huge gains in Colorado and Virginia, improvements in North Carolina and Indiana (where we won multiple House seats) and can certainly bring Iowa, Missouri and New Mexico back into the Democratic fold. Nevada, Montana, North Dakota and yes, even Texas, are ripe for investigating (anyone see the polls there with McCain only up single digits?). And with Bob Barr on the Libertarian ticket, Georgia may be in play. Finally, it is about making the GOP spend time and money competing in places that were once locks for them:
Added Democratic pollster Celinda Lake: "I think the 50 state strategy put in play a lot of western states that are extremely good for Obama, because they are change oriented and increasingly Democratic. Though no one noticed it, the west is purple."
Obama's task, however, is not just to flip states into his column, but rather to make enough areas competitive so that McCain and the Republican Party are forced to drain their resources. In this regard, Dean's vision may prove more successful.
Take Idaho. In 2006, the Democratic Party was able to field an aggressive challenger in what had been, since 1994, a safe GOP district. With help from on-the-ground staffers and the influx of small but strategic resources, Larry Grant forced his Republican opponent, Bill Sali, to turn to Washington for money and two separate appearances by Vice President Dick Cheney.
Grant ultimately lost, but ripple effects were felt on other races. Among the Obama folks, the lessons from that 2006 race apparently still resonate. According to the state's Democratic Party chair, the Illinois Democrat has pledged to open an office in Idaho for the fall -- an unheard of development in recent presidential elections.
"Bear in mind that I received assurance when I was back in Chicago that they would have paid people on the ground in Idaho," said Idaho Democratic Party Chairman Keith Roark. "Now clearly they won't have the same presence in Idaho as they do in Colorado and New Mexico where Obama has a chance of winning. But they will have people on the ground here and we haven't had that since 1964. If you mix that kind of operation with what our state party already has, who knows what is going to happen."
There is no doubt the innovation of Dean and his people will provide multiple roads to victory for Obama. Which does not mean he should forget about Ohio and Florida, but with the resources he has, should be looking to contest 35 states at least, so he will have a mandate if he is to win in November.
Share This 
Spotlight
Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Campaign Silo
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
Did the fifty state strategy pay off in MS-1 in a recent special election? You bet!
recall, Dean had hired folks to wander around Utah and Mississippi to pick their noses…
whether they did that or not I don’t know, but they certainly increased democratic registration in MS and won an unexpected victory
Linking the folks on the ground, put there by Dean and the folks working now specifically for Obama will indeed pay off for Democrats.
Of course it will - it already has - he’s the nominee. Obama didn’t ‘forget’ about the small states like Montana and those pesky caucus states because they’re too much trouble to organize. Delegates anyone?
I also think all the pundit/MSM hype about the Hillary voters is just hype. There are certainly some people out there like Harriet Christian - no question. But all of ‘Hillary’s voters’ are not angry white women like that. Don’t forget all of her ‘hard-working white’ men voters, all the Hispanic men voters, all the other kinds of men voters. And yes, all the women who are voting for Obama because he’s the better candidate - not because they are anti-woman.
Polls in California say that if the primary were held a couple of weeks ago instead of on Super Tuesday - Obama would have won by double digits - so there are a lot of people out there who have already switched camps.
And I think a lot more will - they are NOT going to vote for McBush, even if they are slightly suspicious of Obama’s middle name - or have a distaste for Jeremiah Wright. They’ll vote Dem - even if they have to hold their noses while they do it.
And finally, Obama has a lot of cross-over Republican voters also - and these voters are choosing him because he’s a better candidate - and they WILL vote for him in the GE, unlike a lot of Hillary’s Rushbot voters.