Okay - name a State that DIDN'T have the resources it needed for the Election...because THAT is what the 50 State Strategy is: State Party development (by that way, it's still a DNC policy). It's not about making sure we have candidates in every district, nor is it about making sure those candidates are sufficiently progressive (in Dean's day, a lot of the candidates that won us the House and Senate were Blue Dogs). So what non-existent problem are you trying to solve?

Since 2009, we have had one. State party support still exists, but it has been cut back everywhere.

The petition text reads as follows:

Nowhere does the petition (or did I myself) say it/we are against "DNC policy". Nowhere do I or the petition say we want to "make sure we have candidates in every district", or about "making sure candidates are progressive".

In case you didn't notice, 11/4 was a rout for Dems. Last time Dems did well was with the 50-state strategy in place. Yes, the strategy does mean making sure states have resources they need. It also, according to the petition text ". . .reached out to engage Democrats no matter where they lived." - I'm guessing that would be organization and GOTV efforts, which Howard Dean and his 50-state strategy excelled at. Having such great organization again would be very useful.

Your criticism seems to be based on a slew of false premises or assumptions made by you. At least some people are trying to solve the problem of a very messed up and ineffective DNC, some apparently very ineffective state-level strategies, and an impotent Democratic Party. You are merely scratching noses and criticizing - and at that apparently based on some erroneous assumption you've yourself made.

If you're not going to do something constructive to at least try to get Dems back on their fighting feet - then please don't criticize others who are trying to do it.

Thanks.

Now excuse me while I go bandage my damn nose.