Dems want Biden to go big, his campaign is being more cautious

[ProudModerate2]

Being cautious to just those states is smart.
Maybe he would like to wait a month or two, and then expand the map to two or three additional states. To be continued.

[redjohn]

Very smart. I know there's a lot of users here who'd rather Biden also be investing heavily in TX/GA/OH, but if election night is close early on in the night, you will be glad that Biden has pursued this strategy.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

What does he want Mitch McConnell to be senate majority leader and block everything? Morons!

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

What does he want Mitch McConnell to be senate majority leader and block everything?

Given the proposals Biden's coming out with these days, I wouldn't be surprised if some of his "allies" are hoping for that.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Biden is probably waiting until Labor Day. If he is still up by double digits then he will probably go all in, especially in states with competitive senate races.
Besides that, I don't see why not invest in cheap states like Iowa, Montana, and Alaska where even if he eventually loses, a reduced margin will go a long way to help Greenfield, Bullock, and Gross. 

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

I'm afraid the Biden presidency would be neutered even if Democrats narrowly retake the Senate. After all, Obama needed 60 votes to get through a weathered-down healthcare bill, and anybody hoping that the GOP would suddenly open itself on "working across party lines" is pretty delusional.

They always were good at obstruction, and Democrats always lacked the balls to try go nuclear. The Biden presidency would most likely be about repairing damage after Trump and not doing stupid things, while unsuccessful in getting through a big agenda.

[politicallefty]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

I'm afraid the Biden presidency would be neutered even if Democrats narrowly retake the Senate. After all, Obama needed 60 votes to get through a weathered-down healthcare bill, and anybody hoping that the GOP would suddenly open itself on "working across party lines" is pretty delusional.

They always were good at obstruction, and Democrats always lacked the balls to try go nuclear. The Biden presidency would most likely be about repairing damage after Trump and not doing stupid things, while unsuccessful in getting through a big agenda.

That's probably true unless Democrats can get a big win in November. I would never bet on getting rid of the filibuster, but the best case scenario for that happening is probably getting up to at least 53 in the Senate and Biden winning at least 350 electoral votes. I'd agree that a more narrow win would doom efforts from the start (52 seats would be a serious uphill battle, and anything less would be automatically doomed I think).

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

Respectfully, This is just such a stupid take that I can’t even.

OVER-SATURATION IS A THING. And even then, people generally aren’t influenced by ads anyway at the presidential level. GOTV is a much better investment, and there’s plenty of money for Biden and the Dem committees to blanket all of AZ,  PA, MI, WI, FL, NC, GA, TX, IA, OH, ME, and even boost Senate candidates in MT and AK

Electoral coalitions tend to evolve, and we’re at the point where places like the Sun Belt could potentially vote to the left of the Rust Belt as soon as this year in the event of a standard poling error.

[Non Swing Voter]

Biden's strategy of focusing on the 6 important states is a good balance.  PA/WI/MI is the safe route, but you get diminishing returns after so much investment.  If for some reason Trump can hold onto one or more of those states because of demographic trends then the other three AZ/FL/NC represent the inverse, where demographic trends would benefit Biden in reverse.  I don't think he needs to give serious focus to much more than that.  The Clinton states are all very solid, with the exception of maybe 1 or 2 which don't have many electoral votes anyways. 

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Very smart. I know there's a lot of users here who'd rather Biden also be investing heavily in TX/GA/OH, but if election night is close early on in the night, you will be glad that Biden has pursued this strategy.

And if the Georgia & Texas Senate races go GOP by <5%, Mitch McConnell will be glad Biden pursued this strategy too.

I don't think trying to go for a landslide was what doomed HRC. She went all in on Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, Iowa & Florida and still lost those four states. Hell, she spent over 7 times as much in Nevada & New Hampshire as Arizona, Georgia & Texas. Those 2 states ended up not meaning much electorally but it meant a lot to the Senate races (Perhaps giving credence towards aiming for the 2 Georgia races & maybe the Texas seat).

If Biden is outraising Trump & ads/rallies are a lost cause this election, GOTV funding could be a very worthy endeavor in tons of states

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Very smart. I know there's a lot of users here who'd rather Biden also be investing heavily in TX/GA/OH, but if election night is close early on in the night, you will be glad that Biden has pursued this strategy.

And if the Georgia & Texas Senate races go GOP by <5%, Mitch McConnell will be glad Biden pursued this too.

I don't think trying to go for a landslide was what doomed HRC. She went all in on Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina & Florida and still lost those four states.

Yeah, it annoys me to no end. Clinton spent a ton of time in Pennsylvania and Florida and look what happened. Doing a few more events in Wisconsin or Michigan wouldn't have done anything.

[Mr. Illini]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

These Senate campaigns are up to the DSCC, not Biden's outfit. You're (correctly) making a case for better funding of that group as opposed to the presidential campaign.

Right, we’re talking about where the Biden campaign is spending their money to help Joe Biden win the Presidency. It would be a huge mistake to assume he’s got it in the bag and to start using money to help secure the Senate for his presidency. He may never get a presidency.

Plus, the Senate is very unlikely to be decided by Georgia and Texas anyway. Just because you like the idea of flipping those states doesn’t mean it’s a good idea strategically for Biden to invest there.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

These Senate campaigns are up to the DSCC, not Biden's outfit. You're (correctly) making a case for better funding of that group as opposed to the presidential campaign.

Right, we’re talking about where the Biden campaign is spending their money to help Joe Biden win the Presidency. It would be a huge mistake to assume he’s got it in the bag and to start using money to help secure the Senate for his presidency. He may never get a presidency.

Plus, the Senate is very unlikely to be decided by Georgia and Texas anyway. Just because you like the idea of flipping those states doesn’t mean it’s a good idea strategically for Biden to invest there.

I disagree, especially with Georgia. An over performance in the sun belt could make both states more competitive than they seem to be relative to the rest of the Senate and a significant overperformance in GA could flip two seats at once.

[Mr. Illini]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

These Senate campaigns are up to the DSCC, not Biden's outfit. You're (correctly) making a case for better funding of that group as opposed to the presidential campaign.

Right, we’re talking about where the Biden campaign is spending their money to help Joe Biden win the Presidency. It would be a huge mistake to assume he’s got it in the bag and to start using money to help secure the Senate for his presidency. He may never get a presidency.

Plus, the Senate is very unlikely to be decided by Georgia and Texas anyway. Just because you like the idea of flipping those states doesn’t mean it’s a good idea strategically for Biden to invest there.

I disagree, especially with Georgia. An over performance in the sun belt could make both states more competitive than they seem to be relative to the rest of the Senate and a significant overperformance in GA could flip two seats at once.

I think it’s unlikely that the balance of the Senate will rest on GA according to the current polling. The electoral college is unlikely to be decided there either. To move in there now would be to assume that the election is in the bag, here on July 12.

The Biden campaign can always expand the map in the Fall and begin investing in these states, but I don’t blame them for being cautious about July polling.

Talking about 2016 is overdone, but it’s true that moving into these states prematurely would mirror mistakes made by Hillary’s campaign.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

These Senate campaigns are up to the DSCC, not Biden's outfit. You're (correctly) making a case for better funding of that group as opposed to the presidential campaign.

Right, we’re talking about where the Biden campaign is spending their money to help Joe Biden win the Presidency. It would be a huge mistake to assume he’s got it in the bag and to start using money to help secure the Senate for his presidency. He may never get a presidency.

Plus, the Senate is very unlikely to be decided by Georgia and Texas anyway. Just because you like the idea of flipping those states doesn’t mean it’s a good idea strategically for Biden to invest there.

I disagree, especially with Georgia. An over performance in the sun belt could make both states more competitive than they seem to be relative to the rest of the Senate and a significant overperformance in GA could flip two seats at once.

I think it’s unlikely that the balance of the Senate will rest on GA according to the current polling. The electoral college is unlikely to be decided there either. To move in there now would be to assume that the election is in the bag, here on July 12.

The Biden campaign can always expand the map in the Fall and begin investing in these states, but I don’t blame them for being cautious about July polling.

Talking about 2016 is overdone, but it’s true that moving into these states prematurely would mirror mistakes made by Hillary’s campaign.

HRC's lead was smaller and less stable by this point and it often existed as low numbers for both with a high % of undecided as to the current Biden >50% we see in current polling.

As for Senate control, the current Democratic path I predict (to control) does not involve either GA seat, but flipping both while losing ME, MT, NC and IA is realistic. All it would take is for Greenfield to fail overperform Biden by much, Cunningham to underperform or NC to vote to the right of GA (plausible but unlikely), and Daines to tie Bullock too tightly to Biden/Schumer or Collins to significantly outrun Trump. These seats should be absolutely critical to the Senate Majority PAC.

[MT Treasurer]

Very smart. I know there's a lot of users here who'd rather Biden also be investing heavily in TX/GA/OH, but if election night is close early on in the night, you will be glad that Biden has pursued this strategy.

How are GA and OH even comparable? Even if the election is tight, GA will be close.

[Mr. Illini]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

These Senate campaigns are up to the DSCC, not Biden's outfit. You're (correctly) making a case for better funding of that group as opposed to the presidential campaign.

Right, we’re talking about where the Biden campaign is spending their money to help Joe Biden win the Presidency. It would be a huge mistake to assume he’s got it in the bag and to start using money to help secure the Senate for his presidency. He may never get a presidency.

Plus, the Senate is very unlikely to be decided by Georgia and Texas anyway. Just because you like the idea of flipping those states doesn’t mean it’s a good idea strategically for Biden to invest there.

I disagree, especially with Georgia. An over performance in the sun belt could make both states more competitive than they seem to be relative to the rest of the Senate and a significant overperformance in GA could flip two seats at once.

I think it’s unlikely that the balance of the Senate will rest on GA according to the current polling. The electoral college is unlikely to be decided there either. To move in there now would be to assume that the election is in the bag, here on July 12.

The Biden campaign can always expand the map in the Fall and begin investing in these states, but I don’t blame them for being cautious about July polling.

Talking about 2016 is overdone, but it’s true that moving into these states prematurely would mirror mistakes made by Hillary’s campaign.

HRC's lead was smaller and less stable by this point and it often existed as low numbers for both with a high % of undecided as to the current Biden >50% we see in current polling.

As for Senate control, the current Democratic path I predict (to control) does not involve either GA seat, but flipping both while losing ME, MT, NC and IA is realistic. All it would take is for Greenfield to fail overperform Biden by much, Cunningham to underperform or NC to vote to the right of GA (plausible but unlikely), and Daines to tie Bullock too tightly to Biden/Schumer or Collins to significantly outrun Trump. These seats should be absolutely critical to the Senate Majority PAC.

It’s literally mid-July. Expanding the map because of what the polls say right now would be foolish. It’s smart of Biden to stick to the original game plan until the Fall campaign. Then you can re-evaluate whether it’s worth moving into states based on their role in the Senate elections or expanding your victory map.

[GP270watch]

August, September, and October. If Biden gets out hustled in the last 90 days of the campaign he will be making the same mistake as HRC. You have to turnout the vote you can't just hope for Trump to continue self destructing.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Honestly, with how things seem to be going right now I think the Biden campaign needs to just keep with what they're doing for now.

[wbrocks67]

Honestly, with how things seem to be going right now I think the Biden campaign needs to just keep with what they're doing for now.

Yep. And I feel like they know they can compete in GA, TX, IA, OH, etc. - and I'm sure they will if we're at September and things still look like they're looking right now

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

I agree with your take on Florida. However, I am happy about the campaign’s reluctance in Georgia and Texas. It’s likely that the race will narrow and even if it doesn’t, you have to prepare as if it will. If it does, it’s unlikely that his path to victory would be through Georgia and Texas before the Rust Belt. Keep going hard in WI/MI/PA and lock those states up.

I hope you realise that if Mitch McConnell keeps the Senate, nothing will happen in the next 2 years. Have you forgotten 2015 or Merrick Garland?

Georgia has 2 Senate seats up in November, ignoring them while knowing that a Biden presidency without the Senate is neutered would be almost criminal.

Sorry it's just no ready yet in Georgia. Georgia will flip in 2072, and TX in 2096.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

Honestly, with how things seem to be going right now I think the Biden campaign needs to just keep with what they're doing for now.

Yep. And I feel like they know they can compete in GA, TX, IA, OH, etc. - and I'm sure they will if we're at September and things still look like they're looking right now

By then it will have been too late to put money into start registering people in Texas. I can’t speak for other states.

[Adam Griffin]

At the moment, Mr. Biden is airing TV ads in just six states, all of which Mr. Trump won four years ago: Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina and Florida. The campaign included perennially close Florida only after some deliberations about whether it was worth the hefty price tag, and when Mr. Trump’s struggles with older populations made it clearly competitive, according to Democrats familiar with their discussions.

Damnit, they almost got it right!

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

At the moment, Mr. Biden is airing TV ads in just six states, all of which Mr. Trump won four years ago: Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina and Florida. The campaign included perennially close Florida only after some deliberations about whether it was worth the hefty price tag, and when Mr. Trump’s struggles with older populations made it clearly competitive, according to Democrats familiar with their discussions.

Damnit, they almost got it right!

You could even argue that Florida gives you less bang for your buck than Texas does because there’s maybe one House race that could flip there, and that’s solely because of Ross Spano’s problems. Texas has about 10 potentially flippable House seats, the state House chamber,  a Senate race, and more electoral votes.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

With President Trump’s poll numbers sliding in traditional battlegrounds as well as conservative-leaning states, and money pouring into Democratic campaigns, Joseph R. Biden Jr. is facing rising pressure to expand his ambitions, compete aggressively in more states and press his party’s advantage down the ballot.

In a series of phone calls, Democratic lawmakers and party officials have lobbied Mr. Biden and his top aides to seize what they believe could be a singular opportunity not only to defeat Mr. Trump but to rout him and discredit what they believe is his dangerous style of racial demagogy.

This election, the officials argue, offers the provocative possibility of a new path to the presidency through fast-changing states like Georgia and Texas, and a chance to install a generation of lawmakers who can cement Democratic control of Congress and help redraw legislative maps following this year’s census.

Mr. Biden’s campaign, though, is so far hewing to a more conservative path. It is focused mostly on a handful of traditional battlegrounds, where it is only now scaling up and naming top aides despite having claimed the nomination in April.

At the moment, Mr. Biden is airing TV ads in just six states, all of which Mr. Trump won four years ago: Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, North Carolina and Florida. The campaign included perennially close Florida only after some deliberations about whether it was worth the hefty price tag, and when Mr. Trump’s struggles with older populations made it clearly competitive, according to Democrats familiar with their discussions.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/11/us/politics/trump-biden-2020-election.html

Interesting that Biden's campaign was reluctant to even put up ads in Florida because they thought it wasn't worth it. You would think it's a no-brainer given how close it is to being the tipping point state.

Biden needs to flip the Senate far more than he needs a landslide in the EC. There's no Senate seat in Florida this year.

Arizona and North Carolina have more to offer than Florida for the Democrats this year. Worrying about Florida is only important if it looks like the Presidential race is closing up.