Why Obama Rocks in Red States

There’s one explanation about why Obama does better in so-called Red States rather than traditional Blue states that I haven’t heard that should actually be quite obvious.  Hillary has the inherit use and advantage of the 90s organization that was put together by the 92 and 96 campaigns by Bill.  He only focused on those few states that were deemed winnable and ignored all the others to the point that we Red State Democrats were left flapping in the wind by ourselves, abandoned by the National Party and left to fight on alone because it was thought Republicans will always rule the day out here.  So Hillary has a head-start over Obama where Bill has historical supporters and organization, and is far behind Obama where Bill never showed up in the 90s and where Hillary never intended to try this time around until it became apparent she should maybe pay attention.  

A lot of us rural Democrats have always thought this was and is a bullshit strategy... jump the fold to see an example of Obama's help taking place on Friday...

And Barack Obama (and Howard Dean) believe that stategy of cherry picking just enough states to win is bullshit as well.  And they have acted on changing this misguided notion, and are willing to compete in all states... while Hillary has to play catch-up out here while still implying we "don’t matter."  

Take for instance tomorrow.  Barack Obama is attending the North Dakota Democratic-Non-Partisan League state convention in Grand Forks ND and is expected to fill the house to the rafters... and this is after ND has already held their caucuses.   Obama is holding a fundraising reception for the state party at 4:30 pm prior to his keynote address at 5:30 pm.  Think the party appreciates that???  Hillary has now decided to attend as well and will address the convention at 7:30 pm.  And don’t get me wrong, it’s great that she is finally willing to come out here too.  The North Dakota Dem-NPL is ecstatic about the media attention, including live coverage from all the major television stations in the state, the excitement, and the huge interest by state residents to actually come out and attend their convention.  And the ND Republicans are green with envy.  This type of thing is being repeated all across the rural states.  

Don’t for one minute think that the rural Super-delegates aren’t aware that but for Obama... they’d be ignored once again.  

A 50 state strategy will pay huge dividends for rural as well as urban Democrats as Republicans are forced to defend every damn congressional seat rather than focusing on picking off supposedly weak Democrats.  Mark my words... there’s going to be some big surprises come the first Wednesday of November when more than a few long-time Republican held House and Senate seats have fallen to rejuvenated rural Democrats.  

•  Red States are turning Purple...

  by Prairie Logic on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 08:59:04 AM PDT

  •  Agreed.

    I discussed this in a detailed entry with electoral maps.detailed entry with electoral maps

    by Republicus on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:00:37 AM PDT

  •  Agree!

    by Char on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:41:47 AM PDT

  •  hell, Texas might be in play! /nt

    by schroeder on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:11:52 AM PDT

•  yep

  Hillary does well where she can utilize big Democratic machines.  These machines are, almost by definition, in the big Democratic cities, especially the old ones.  Hence her good performance in those states.  Without the machines, Obama wins.

  There is an additional, related reason as well. The Hillary / Mark Penn style of campaign only recognizes certain voters and demographics as worthy of pursuit - such as the classic soccer moms and the like.  They write off huge (demographic) sections of America - hell they aren't even fully aware these people exist!  But they do, and they're voting for Obama.

  by fizziks on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:03:32 AM PDT

  •  The machines

    And of course, when Hillary is eliminated and Obama is the nominee, those machines will be put to work helping Obama defeat McCain. Which is why Hillary's "Obama can't win big states in November because he didn't win their primaries" meme is such nonsense. Hillary's machine and supporters will, in the end, support the party and its nominees, including Obama. And Obama will still be competitive in states where Hillary would have no chance, like Montana, Wyoming and maybe North Dakota.

    by Korkenzieher on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:45:57 AM PDT

•  He's like Sheriff Bart in Blazing Saddles

  We Red State Residents are the old lady that bakes him a pie after he saves Rock Ridge from Mongo.

  But then we ask him not to tell anyone we actually spoke to him.

  by Utahrd on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:13:07 AM PDT

•  Concentrating only on the "important" states

  leaves untapped the amazing resources of all the Democrats in this country. It also misses the sense of unity and shared purpose which comes from including all the states.

  North Dakota played an important part, along with many other states, in helping Obama win on Super Tuesday. And Democrats in the Red States continue to show everyday that their support is valuable.

  One wonders if HRC is beginning to reconsider some of her dismissive comments.

  by js1781 on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:16:03 AM PDT

  •  HRC never reconsiders

    If really pressed, maybe we'll get an Iraq War Vote-type, "I wouldn't do it again, but I'm not sorry I did it, but I didn't know what I was doing, but I wasn't tricked into doing it, but I did it on purpose, but... but... but..."

    by schroeder on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:15:20 AM PDT

•  Nice diary

  I think you are on the money.

  by Blue Orb on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:17:38 AM PDT

  •  Thanks... n/t

    by Prairie Logic on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:43:06 AM PDT

•  hillary doesn`t care

  she doesn`t give a crap about states she can`t win and that is exactly how she would govern, not giving a crap if there is nothing in it for her.

  by JOEL1954 on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:22:52 AM PDT

  •  this is why I was never in her camp

    Every candidate in the race has a narrative.  Edwards' was eliminating poverty.  Obama's is uniting the country.  Richardson's is experience (real experience, not Sinbad experience).  Cliton's is that she really, really wants to be President.

    Although I have no doubt that things would improve for a lot of Americans if she got in (especially compared to a McCain administration), I really can't believe that that's her raison d'etre.  She wants to win.  She wants to be in power.  That's her motivation.  Whereas I can believe that Obama genuinely wants to make the country a better place.

    by schroeder on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:17:56 AM PDT

•  as a Mississippian...

  ...I wholeheartedly agree with you.   Bill Clinton did nothing to earn our respect or loyalty.  He pretty much pissed on us, and told us our support wasn't needed.  

  That's fine... he won't have it.  But other Democrats will!

  by shadetree mortician on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:27:28 AM PDT

•  I Grew Up on a Ranch

  Most of the country people I knew were Dems socially, conservatives (in the old sense) fiscally and believed in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and harbored deep mistrust of most lawyers and banker (with good reason)...

  Obama looks people in the eye, shakes their hand recognizes the person in front of him... the guy was community organzier... and country communities respond to genuine warmth and honesty same as city communities..

  As for the race card, I have an idea that most folks have moved beyond most of that... there's always a few yahoos talking trah, but most folks I know listen and watch the person... they can spot a fake, charlatan and bullshitter from 10 miles away on a curvy road at midnight... and Obama is no bullshitter...

  by miguelmas on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:49:15 AM PDT

•  The Obama campaign will be studied for years...

  as THE way to run a campaign from here on! He's breaking new ground with his 50 state strategy. All Americans should have a stake in the direction their country goes, not just the ones HRC has deemed worthy of her efforts.

  by Liberal Kansan on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 09:50:49 AM PDT

  •  Howard Dean changed the game

    Obama's doing so well in part because he recognized that, and the others haven't.  It's not just the 50 State Strategy - it's the small donations, grassroots support, big organization on the ground, no lobbyists or PACs.  Hell, John McCain's whole campaign is run by lobbyists.  And Clinton's still about the big-money donors.  You can't win that way anymore, as Clinton's finding out, and McCain certainly will in November.

    by schroeder on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:20:01 AM PDT

•  Obama believes Democrats are a national party

  I want to thank the original poster and agree with many of the comments.  I've thought about making a diary of this and have never gotten to it.

  I've come to believe that Democrats from eastern states have no comprehension of what it is like to be a Democrat west of the Mississippi River (exception for California).  It is not easy.  Political conversations often start out with the assumption that everyone at the table is a Republican.  It is assumed that, "since you aren't a raving lunatic, you must be Republican".  To make any progress or conversation at all, we often have to nudge the conversation about issues instead of labels (e.g. liberal vs. conservative).

  Western Democrats are used to being pissed on by the Republican majority.  We don't like it.  Nobody likes to be marginalized and ignored.  When our own party starts adopting the same tactics, it really rubs us the wrong way.  Are we a national party or not?  Are we just lap dogs that are supposed to quiver and shake with delight with the decisions that California and New York make for us?  I don't think so.

  To paraphrase Mr. Dean, "I think it's a sign of respect to go ask people for their vote."  That's very true in the west.  Obama has done that and we appreciate it (see results: Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, etc.).  And, yes, as another poster said, westerners can spot a phony a mile away.  

  by DesertCat on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:25:32 AM PDT

  •  you said many mouthfuls here...

    I've come to believe that Democrats from eastern states have no comprehension of what it is like to be a Democrat west of the Mississippi River (exception for California).  It is not easy.

    I tried running as a Democratic state legislative candidate out here in the 90s... it was pure hell.  Especially 1998.

    Western Democrats are used to being pissed on by the Republican majority.  We don't like it.  Nobody likes to be marginalized and ignored.

    They do... and use the DNC as a reason to ridicule us because "the national party ignores you... why don't you just admit they don't care and join us"... like its a viable option to join Limbaugh type nut cases... the Republican party in some of these states is much more reactionary than the population as a whole... and most of the people are much more open to Democratic ideals than most urban people would think.

    by Prairie Logic on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:51:47 AM PDT