Trump campaign considering putting resources in the crucial state of....Oregon

[McGarnagle]

This would be a foolhardly and futile endeavor

Democrats have a better shot at Indiana in 2020 than the Republicans have at Oregon

[redeagleofficial]

Only if he legalizes weed by exec order...

[Senator Spark]

Clearly, this is just like Wisconsin, which was a SAFE D  state before 2016 and is now TRUMP COUNTRY.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

If he really goes for this "expand the map" strategy he's going to be at serious risk of losing in a similar fashion to Clinton in 2016. this is the same failed strategy she implemented.

Expand the Map strategy worked out nearly perfectly for Obama in 2008. The only failure for him there was in a very narrow loss in Missouri.

[Alben Barkley]

It'd be a great investment, Clinton barely got over 50% of the votes. If you add up all the Johnson/write-in votes to Trump's column, a couple of independents, he could be withn 4-2 points away from winning the state.

Just watch this video but replace every instance of the word “Bernie” with the word “Trump” and it sums up every single thing I’ve ever seen you post perfectly:

https://youtu.be/NHS-K7OuLAc

[NOVA Green]

There's definitely a base of Obama-Trump WWC voters in Coastal OR/ the nothern Willamette valley but not enough to flip the state.

I'm honestly a little surprised that Trump is aware that Oregon is a state. Hard to think of a state that's so much different from his personality and his interests.

But I was thinking the other day... is it possible that team trump spending money in CO/NM/VA/MN actually a good strategy for putting the Dems on the defensive and divert resources there?  

Naturally, the media will still portray CO/VA swing states because of course they will, even though we know better.

In a WTA system yes that is a waste of money. With the exception of MN Dems won't have to do very much defense there because Republicans are not popular and the the limited base of voters to mobilize isn't as big as the margins they'll have to overcome.

edit: also looking forward to beautiful Atlas-Red Deschutes County in November 2020 😍

The only way this would make sense would be to potentially flip OR CD-04 and CD-05.

Haven't checked out the '20 numbers for State House & Senate Chambers, but doesn't appear likely unless I hit the Bong (Not my bag--- juicer not a head in my mid '40s)....

My suspicion is that NAM (National Association of Manufacturers) that used to be a hard-core Goldwater outfit back in the days that are now heavily Koch Brothers and also the former head of a major Oregon Pulp & Paper (Weyerhaeuser) outfit as their new figurehead....

Old tricks from the '30s > '70s are still the same bag from the bosses that wanted "Free Trade" in their own interests, while all the while wanting to gut the New Deal and Labor Movement behind the sacred alter of "the Right to Work"

https://www.piworld.com/article/afpa-names-former-weyerhaeuser-exec-new-president-ceo/

[Alben Barkley]

Clearly, this is just like Wisconsin, which was a SAFE D  state before 2016 and is now TRUMP COUNTRY.

Yes, Oregon also voted for Republican Senators and Governors in multiple recent statewide races! It's totally comparable! They're basically the same state!

[UWS]

It could be scare tactics by investing in such blue states and he could possibly do so in NM and CT in order to force the Dems to divide their efforts to defend these states, giving him enough time to attack in toss-up states.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Oregon had one McCain GOPer, Gordan Smith elected, who was pro environment and stopped ANWR and would have Keystone XL

Trump is anti environment.

[Progressive Pessimist]

It could be scare tactics by investing in such blue states and he could possibly do so in NM and CT in order to force the Dems to divide their efforts to defend these states, giving him enough time to attack in toss-up states.

If Democrats fall for that, they deserve to lose.

[Some of My Best Friends Are Gay]

It could be scare tactics by investing in such blue states and he could possibly do so in NM and CT in order to force the Dems to divide their efforts to defend these states, giving him enough time to attack in toss-up states.

No Democratic operative, super PAC, or donor is going to pour any resources at all into states like New Mexico or Oregon just because Trump is delusional enough to think he can win them. there's no path to victory for him in either state and anyone with half a brain knows this.

[Some of My Best Friends Are Gay]

If he really goes for this "expand the map" strategy he's going to be at serious risk of losing in a similar fashion to Clinton in 2016. this is the same failed strategy she implemented.

Expand the Map strategy worked out nearly perfectly for Obama in 2008. The only failure for him there was in a very narrow loss in Missouri.

That's because he was consistently ahead by 6-8 points in the polls after the Financial Crisis and there was almost no doubt he would win the election. it makes sense to try and expand the map when your victory is all but assured.

[NOVA Green]

Oregon had one McCain GOPer, Gordan Smith elected, who was pro environment and stopped ANWR and would have Keystone XL

Trump is anti environment.

What are you smoking?

Did I misunderstand when you said that Gordon Smith was pro-environment?

Gordon Smith held on not because he was seen as pro-environment, but rather because of upstate-downstate Oregon politics, and also as relatively Moderate on some social issues and "business friendly".....

http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/gordon-harold-smith

https://grist.org/article/getting-mr-smith-out-of-washington/

https://grist.org/article/food-plight/

http://www.ti.org/Moore.html

Now, not all Oregonians vote solely based upon environmental issues which is part of the reason for significant swings towards Trump compared to Obama '12 in certain mill towns and rural areas that did not experience the boons of the Obama recovery that Cities such as Portland, Salem, and Eugene did.....

Now many of these same places have not seen any real economic gain after swing hard towards Trump, so the question is if he is not indicted do they stick with him for another Four Years, or vote for a DEM without the perceived baggage of HRC on Trade and War & Peace Issues that helped seal the deal for these types of voters in 2016?