I'll believe it when I see it. For starters, Obama's campaign did the same in 2008...only to dismantle any staff operations in a majority of the days by Labor Day.
Let's also put this into perspective:
This will probably be the reality in a lot of those states if there is truly a "50 state effort". Any allocated resources can help, but it's important to keep grounded regarding the amount of potential benefit. Georgia has had one paid Hillary staffer on the ground for around a year now. The Democratic Party of Georgia has the better part of 20 paid staffers working right now on top of that. How much do you think all of this - combined with volunteer efforts - is going to move the needle in a state like Georgia? What do you think one person is going to be able to provide in a different state?
So I'm just saying...spending $20,000 or so to put one paid staffer in a state and have them coordinate whatever unpaid and inexperienced volunteers that might step forward isn't really what constitutes rebuilding state parties from the perspective of presidential campaigns/the national party. It can be helpful, sure, but it's not these workers are going to be around for years; we'll be lucky if they're there in most of these states through September. When you add to that the fact that these staffers are likely to be exclusively focused on Clinton, it doesn't actually do much to rebuild party infrastructure over the long-term.
If a targeted area for Clinton in a given state has a legislative or countywide race that would otherwise see the Democrat lose by half a point, then maybe it helps there. Otherwise, the only tangible long-term benefit I could see coming from this for a state party is if the Clinton campaign agrees to turn over their VAN data to them so that their records are more up-to-date for future efforts (spoiler alert: many campaigns do not do this; Obama 2012 was the first one to do so in modern times if I recall correctly).
