Small state has bigger clout

[davidinalameda]

http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Editorials/200309253

In the 2000 presidential campaign, national Democrats and their state counterparts took West Virginia for granted. They assumed the Democratic state was “safe” — and that it was too small to be of much significance.

West Virginia has only five members of Congress and thus only five electoral votes to cast for president. Compared to California or New York, West Virginia can slip to the bottom of candidates’ travel priority list.

But Republicans did not take the state for granted. George W. Bush visited several times, punctuated by a stream of visits from his father, Dick Cheney and Charlton Heston. They convinced enough voters that Al Gore would take away their guns, or support abortion, or favor pollution controls that hurt coal.

[alexwcovington]

1. That's not a small state

<====THAT's a small state!

[cherryperry]

2. Excellent reminder, dwickham!

Democrats need to stop missing these things. It's tough, but we have to start thinking like the repigs to ensure our victory in 2004 and beyond.

Thank you for posting the editorial!


:thumbsup:

:hi:


:kick: :kick:

[LuminousX]

3. You mean start thinking like Democrats

where you care about EVERYONE even if they are in bufu Montana and it takes three hours to drive out to the ranch in order to shake the hand of that loyal party member who takes the effort to drive the three hours to town to cast his vote.

[cherryperry]

4. You are correct in reminding everyone

that democrats do indeed care for everyone, however, democrats have made some poor calculations in the past on just which states are in the bag thereby handing them over to the repigs.

[dfong63]

5. but isn't this mostly true?

They convinced enough voters that Al Gore would take away their guns, or support abortion, or favor pollution controls that hurt coal.

i'd hope it is true that Gore would have supported abortion and favored pollution controls. as for guns - i dunno about "taking them away", but my impression is that Gore would have been sympathetic to the case for more restrictions.

if in order to pick up 5 electoral votes, Gore had to promise not to support abortion rights, or not to support more pollution controls on coal - i'd say it's not worth it. if he'd done that, Gore might have lost more than 5 electoral votes elsewhere.