The Democrats Need a Non-Southern Strategy

Solid Republican victories in the Kentucky and Mississippi governors' races, coupled with Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean's clumsy overture to Confederate flag-waving Southerners, have raised anew the question of whether the Democrats can compete in the South.
They can't.

And precisely because they can't, they should stop trying. Moving forward, the Democrats would be better served by simply conceding the South and redirecting their already scarce resources to more promising states where they're making gains, especially those in the Southwest.

I can imagine the laughter of party strategists -- and the ire of southern Democratic officials -- who subscribe to the prevailing wisdom that presidential elections are decided in the South. Indeed, pundits love to shout into the echo chamber that the last three Democratic presidents have come from the South
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40359-2003Nov14.html?nav=E4

http://www.kucinich.net/afam/



From Kucinich Endorser Danny Glover:

"I have watched Dennis Kucinich not only in the glory of a political campaign, but I have sat and dialogued with him and watched him learn from others, and of all the candidates he stands the closest to my conscience, and I must go with my conscience."

According to Congressman John Conyers:

Kucinich has an "exemplary record when dealing with issues facing the African American community."

Yes, I would like to think we are all people and our needs are the same.But if a southern strategy means an irrational foreign policy, no health care, and bad trade deals; along with anti- labor policies; I would rather loose. Principal first. Then, We must go down the road towards neo Fascism and classism for the rich, until the people learn their needed lessons.
But, if choosing a centrist who ignores health care and, civil rights all the other big issues- then a northern strategy must be followed.
Hopefully adding states together like Ohio, Wisconsin, New York, New England, Michigan, Illinois, California, Oregon,and Washington State can win the day..
Appreciate Florida, Lousisana, and West Virginia making the path easier for us though. If Floridians don't know GOP privitatization of Social Security and Medicare is not in their interests than heaven help us all...

It requires everything to go our way. It means winning NH, OH, and WV. And then winning one of the three of CO, NV, anc AZ.

I disagree that the south is completely impossible. FL and LA are winnable, along with AR, KY, and TN

if we hold all the Gore states, we only need NH and AZ. Actually, I just double checked and all we need is Arizona. Anyone here think AZ won't go blue this time? We just need to have some serious GOTV!!!!

We can win this. We don't need a southern state...granted, I'd like to see us win the south..

Yaron

Even with them stealing Florida, he could have won with either NV, AZ, or NH. And after the way that The Junta lied to them about Yucca Mt., Nevada isn't totally out of the question either.

It's akin to the hardworking spouse coming home from work late with groceries and flowers and finding their spouse getting banged on the sofa with the locks changed and a bogus restraining order pinned to the door.

Life isn't fair and all the good will spooled up in one's life can't be suddenly dumped on an unsuspecting recipient without some kind of negative feedback or shocking reaction.

and with NV, AZ, or NH, he wouldn't have needed TN of FL anyway.

his brother wasn't Governor there.;-)

We have to win EVERYTHING ELSE. And we have to hold onto all the blue states. It gives us ZERO margin of error.

We have several options outside of the South.

The Gore states, plus Arizona, plus Nevada, plus Ohio, plus West Virginia, plus New Hampshire, plus Missouri.. these all total 315 electoral votes - 45 more than needed. So while there is limited room for comfort, it is most definitely possible.

But that does't mean that I agree with an abandon-the-South strategy. That's like letting your opponent in the 100-yard dash start on the 50-yard-line, at least. Not a very smart way to compete.

Still, my vengeful side would LOVE to see a Democrat win the Presidency without a single southern state.. hehe.. :evilgrin:

a New England Liberal that wants to raise taxes, cut defense budgets and promote Gay marriage. But hey, stranger thing have happened...who would have thought an ass grabbing, steroid popping right winger would have taken Caleefornia by storm?

Whoever takes the primary will have to hook a right so fast that they may risk a chance of catapulting the framework off of their southbound vehicle. In the end the beginning will be born.

.Elections should not be fought over states but the votes of the people... When will we have proportional representation or direct election of the president. Elecions would be so different if it was just the vote that counted and not some strategy.
If we can't eliminate the idiotic electoral college..Why not, proportion the votes of each state to have it presidential electors split by the percentage of the vote and award electors accordingly.
Think this could be done state by state..As an example, does not the state of Maine award presidential electors as to how a given congressional district went..So Maine could have a split electoral vote when the electoral college casts its vote?

Think you're already seeing some heartening opinion swings in the service, and current and retired military are concentrated in the South.

Sorry, but come on....

"Outlook Section - The Post's opinion and commentary section runs every Sunday." Moving to E&OA.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
TahitiNut - DU moderator

Those are competitive, but I like a Western+Ohio strategy more.

The South is not hospitiable ground for any Democratic Candidate especially if your from the North East. The North East being the most liberal and least religious.

I have a specific strategy that I will unroll over the next 2 months and before the New Hampshire primary that will show how a "liberal" North Eastern candidate can sweep not only that region, but the Midwest, Mountains and of course the Pacific Coast with out winning 1 state in the South and collect well over the 270 needed to win!!!

The Democratic Party should not fool itself in thinking just because Clark or Graham make the ticket that it will make it any easier for them in the South.

I think the Democrats underestimate the strength of those that espouse "christain" or "judeo-christian" values whether black, white, or latino, and on the reverse the Republicans in general and those in the South do not truely understand how out of touch they are with the rest of the country. The Democrats should take advantage of this.

this is just what we may have to do.

To actually see what we're up against see this great site Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections

Instead of using red or blue, this site shows in much greater detail the votes in each state, county and congressional district.

I live in Tennessee and have been preaching that Dem must try to reclaim the South, but now I see we could win without Dixie.

It's sad, but true.