I have said for decades now that Democrats can win almost any state federally (except in the Deep South) if:
They pull their candidate/s, have an independent run and secretly (not the whole DSCC is investing in x race or ActBlue donation links that would activate partisanship) support them with an innocent sounding or state centric pac. This is exactly what’s happening in NE-Sen.
Why we haven’t started doing this when we know Democrats can’t win these very red states federally drives me absolutely insane. It’s such a simple formula and it works! Get a Democrat or left/centrist indie to run as an Independent, not a Democrat. Boost behind the scenes. Makes it a way closer race than any D running and who knows, maybe they even win!
The only argument against doing so is that there’s a party loyalty so even if they know they’ll lose, they still run as Democrats because that’s their party. Or that Dem voters want to vote for a Democrat. Which, I mean, great, but I’d rather an Indie come within 5-10 then a Democrat guaranteed to lose by 20.
They can run completely on the Dem platform and have an I next to their name and still gets votes they couldn’t as a Democrat. I’d even go as far to say a more progressive I than Democrats are as a whole, would do better than a Democrat. It’s the I that gets the votes. That’s all that’s needed.
Or Kentucky, West Virginia or the Dakota's at this point. But it could work in Kansas and Nebraska, and in states like Utah, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, and Alaska. I think Tester might be doing better had he made a big deal of switching to independent, maybe piggybacking Sinema, and concern trolled about the Democratic party to signal to low education older ex Dem voters that he was still worth backing over a corporatist out of state hack like Sheehy. Democrats could create a whole, small caucus of these "Common Sense American Party" types.
If Deb Fischer's re-election is actually competitive, that implies that with the right candidate and strategy we could put any Senate race on the map.
I have said for decades now that Democrats can win almost any state federally (except in the Deep South) if:
They pull their candidate/s, have an independent run and secretly (not the whole DSCC is investing in x race or ActBlue donation links that would activate partisanship) support them with an innocent sounding or state centric pac. This is exactly what’s happening in NE-Sen.
Why we haven’t started doing this when we know Democrats can’t win these very red states federally drives me absolutely insane. It’s such a simple formula and it works! Get a Democrat or left/centrist indie to run as an Independent, not a Democrat. Boost behind the scenes. Makes it a way closer race than any D running and who knows, maybe they even win!
The only argument against doing so is that there’s a party loyalty so even if they know they’ll lose, they still run as Democrats because that’s their party. Or that Dem voters want to vote for a Democrat. Which, I mean, great, but I’d rather an Indie come within 5-10 then a Democrat guaranteed to lose by 20.
They can run completely on the Dem platform and have an I next to their name and still gets votes they couldn’t as a Democrat. I’d even go as far to say a more progressive I than Democrats are as a whole, would do better than a Democrat. It’s the I that gets the votes. That’s all that’s needed.
Not Wyoming, Idaho, Oklahoma, Arkansas...
Or Kentucky, West Virginia or the Dakota's at this point. But it could work in Kansas and Nebraska, and in states like Utah, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, and Alaska. I think Tester might be doing better had he made a big deal of switching to independent, maybe piggybacking Sinema, and concern trolled about the Democratic party to signal to low education older ex Dem voters that he was still worth backing over a corporatist out of state hack like Sheehy. Democrats could create a whole, small caucus of these "Common Sense American Party" types.
Missouri seems about on the edge of conceivable, but yes.