Hillary Clinton Going For 50 State Strategy To Rebuild Democratic Party

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Via HuffPo

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign will maintain staff in all 50 states during the general election with an eye toward overwhelming Republicans in the fall and rebuilding the Democratic Party’s infrastructure thereafter.

The strategy, described to The Huffington Post by Clinton campaign aides, is a continuation of the Ramp Up Grassroots Organizing program that the campaign applied to the Democratic primary. But unlike that approach — which had the immediate objective of competing with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in each state contest — the current one carries risk.

Many states in which Clinton will be employing staff and spending resources will almost assuredly vote against her anyway. She could end up wasting money that is needed to win swing states. But her staffers say the investment is well worth it.

“This is something that needs to happen every presidential cycle. It needs to be sustained. And I think if we continue to do that, we will help build the party long-term,” said Marlon Marshall, the Clinton team’s director of state campaigns and political engagement. “I truly believe we have a historic candidacy with Secretary Clinton, and we can use this opportunity to bring more people into the party.” 

Democrats have long been divided over the efficacy of a 50-state strategy. When he took over the Democratic National Committee following the 2004 election, Howard Dean implemented an across-the-map approach to rebuilding the party, arguing that Democrats could only regain a foothold in lost territory if they put people there. Congressional leadership bristled, arguing that resources were better spent on toss-up races and not unwinnable contests in Mississippi or Alaska.

“I think it is important to lay a foundation for the future,” said Marshall, who has worked in the Obama administration and pushed Dean’s 50-state strategy as an organizing staff member in Kansas in 2005. “State House members are going to be your next folks running for Congress or running for governor, and one of them may be your next president of the United States.”

“The 50-state strategy worked. It gave us the majorities in the House and the Senate, and then it was abandoned because Obama chose to go with OFA [Organizing For Action], which did not work, and the DNC scaled way back on it,” Dean, a supporter of and consultant to Clinton’s campaign, told HuffPost. “But I’m very pleased it is going to be rebuilt. I think they totally get that her legacy depends on having a Democratic Congress and that she has to start now.”

Already, Clinton has made moves to put her plan into action. Her campaign has begun overhauling the DNC, with a lingering question of whether she will keep its current chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), in place.

Her approach has the notable side effect of placating Sanders, who argued this past week that the party “had turned its back on dozens of states in this country,” allowing “right-wing politicians to win elections in some states with virtually no opposition.”

Clinton enjoys the benefit of having to add relatively few personnel for the general election. Many in-state staffers simply remained in place after their primary or caucus concluded. Their focus will now shift slightly toward organizing general election volunteers, hosting events, mobilizing turnout and registering voters. In time, the hope is, that work will provide the foundation for a President Clinton’s governing agenda.

[Sid 6,755]

Why weren't they campaigning in every state to begin with?? I agree with Marshall, even if the effects aren't immediate, at least more people will be aware and informed of the party's stance on issues and it could potentially help Democrats gain more positions in EVERY state. 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

6 minutes ago, IWantTheFame said:

Why weren't they campaigning in every state to begin with?? I agree with Marshall, even if the effects aren't immediate, at least more people will be aware and informed of the party's stance on issues and it could potentially help Democrats gain more positions in EVERY state. 

Well they have campaigned in all states during the primaries.

During the general election, they focus more on battleground states which may swing in either direction (purple states), while maintaining minimal presence in states that are more or less guaranteed to take a side (blue and red).

Hillary's 50 state strategy can theoretically be quite effective at winning House and Senate seats, strengthening the Democratic Party's position.

It's still a risk.

[Sid 6,755]

5 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Well they have campaigned in all states during the primaries.

During the general election, they focus more on battleground states which may swing in either direction (purple states), while maintaining minimal presence in states that are more or less guaranteed to take a side (blue and red).

 

 

Do they campaign at all in between presidential elections? I feel like they should keep at least some sort of presence/campaign in each state at all times to support the myriad of other elections that happen all the time. Or are they solely focused on supporting presidential candidates? I guess I'm wondering what the actual magnitude of the DNC is, if they would be able to maintain something like that.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

5 minutes ago, IWantTheFame said:

Do they campaign at all in between presidential elections? I feel like they should keep at least some sort of presence/campaign in each state at all times to support the myriad of other elections that happen all the time. Or are they solely focused on supporting presidential candidates? I guess I'm wondering what the actual magnitude of the DNC is, if they would be able to maintain something like that.

Well the down-ticket candidates typically run their own campaigns. This is Hillary's campaign we're referring to. Of course a massive proportion of the DNC funding goes for the presidential election, since that is the grand prize.

What she's doing is maintaining staff in states that are typically abandoned during the presidential election because they technically serve little purpose towards winning the election, which is a reasonable stance. The swing states are where the big investments go.

With the 50 state strategy, the benefit will mainly be for the down-ticket Democratic candidates in Republican-dominated areas, as well as potentially flipping some states that are assumed to be red, especially since the Republicans are in disarray.

[Spyro 8,438]

As much as I love her, I would rather her stick to campaigning hard in the swing states, while campaigning now and again in safe blue states.  I think Nixon lost his first election because of this iirc.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, Spyro said:

As much as I love her, I would rather her stick to campaigning hard in the swing states, while campaigning now and again in safe blue states.  I think Nixon lost his first election because of this iirc.

Normally I'd agree, but the GOP is in such disarray that she has a good chance of pulling it off.

[Sid 6,755]

6 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Well the down-ticket candidates typically run their own campaigns. This is Hillary's campaign we're referring to.

What she's doing is maintaining staff in states that are typically abandoned during the presidential election because they functionally serve little purpose towards winning the election, which is a reasonable stance.

The benefit will be for the down-ticket Democratic candidates in Republican-dominated areas.

 

 

I get it now. I was hung up on the part where they were talking about winning back the House and the Senate and got confused  I think Hillary's on the right path, the party needs to build support across the map and I'm sure she has Trump outstaffed enough already to win the big swing states. 

[Spyro 8,438]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

Normally I'd agree, but the GOP is in such disarray that she has a good chance of pulling it off.

You know what would be perfect?  If Johnson manages to get at least 15% in the polls, he should start campaigning in smaller red states such as Utah (state that he's most likely to win at this time) or Arizona (though, he's governor in New Mexico, which could take one state away from us, but NM only has 5 electoral votes).  I just feel like, even though Johnson takes more Clinton voters than Trump voters, he can help us more in red states than hurt us in blue states.  Though, I'm far from saying we need a 3rd party to get POTUS Hillary elected.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

5 minutes ago, Spyro said:

You know what would be perfect?  If Johnson manages to get at least 15% in the polls, he should start campaigning in smaller red states such as Utah (state that he's most likely to win at this time) or Arizona (though, he's governor in New Mexico, which could take one state away from us, but NM only has 5 electoral votes).  I just feel like, even though Johnson takes more Clinton voters than Trump voters, he can help us more in red states than hurt us in blue states.  Though, I'm far from saying we need a 3rd party to get POTUS Hillary elected.

Sounds reasonable for the most part.

There is a risk he will end up being a spoiler though

[ALGAYDO 35,115]

I swear I need glasses. I read that as "Hillary Clinton Going For 50 Shades Strategy" 

 

And I agree with them. Presidential candidates should've always done it this way, even if some of the states are Red States, because they still hold a lot of democrats, just not as many. But this could increase democratic-voter turnouts in the long run. Big picture.