I just wanted to make a point about the difference between ‘16 and ‘20.
As we all know, Hillary has been condemned for chasing votes in red states before securing Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. OK, I offer zero comment on whether that is an apt criticism. Argue amongst yourselves.
However, we see around here spats between those who advocate for going hard after Texas and the like and those who remember ‘16 and are terrified that swinging for the fences will doom the campaign. I suggest that there is no need for conflict on this.
Political campaigns are generally about going out to engage voters on their home turf. The question Hillary faced was whether to spend precious days of the campaign traveling to WI and the like. The strategic question involved a scarce resource: time. Travel to WI and you can’t travel to TX.
This campaign is, of course, different. Candidates’ actual physical travel to places is minimal. Most of the contact is done electronically.
This means that Biden can target Texas and Georgia and the like without shortchanging his connections with traditional swing states. As long as he has money and web resources, he can target a much wider range of places and people than has been possible in the past.
For me, there is not great conflict between reaching for TX and GA and securing the Blue Wall. COVID has changed the rules of the game. Let’s take advantage of this.