I must be missing something here, because the crux of the man's argument is that Democrats are better off talking about "effective and efficient government" instead of how big or small it should be. Yet, is that not what Democrats capitalize when they campaign regardless of the state or region they're in? Did Mark Warner and Tim Kaine build that strong coalition in Virginia all by themselves? Or, did national Democrats decide to actually contest their races and get determined to turn Virginia into the next Florida or Ohio?
The problem is that Democrats have abandoned the 50-state strategy. We don't bother contesting races in Wyoming or Kansas or Tennessee anymore - three states which, of course, had Democratic governors not too long ago. We write off those states and more before campaign mode even begins. 2008 was the last year Democrats poured anything into hostile territory. Indiana and North Carolina wouldn't have swung if those state parties were left on their own. Democrats need to do more than talk about money - they need to spend money.
We are doing just that by focusing on key senate seats in KY, Ga and AK, the 50 state strategy, for senate control.
