Great MindsPat Hynes from Ankle-Biting Pundits has
a superb column in today's Manchester (NH) Union-Leader on Howard Dean's 50-state strategy, which the libs are all aglow about after Paul Hackett's deferred victory in Ohio's second district.
There is a reason Democrats haven't spent a great deal of time, energy and resources in states like Mississippi and Utah in recent elections, just as Republicans have largely ignored, say, Vermont. Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman would love to make next year's Vermont open seat Senate race competitive by dumping hundreds of operatives and millions of dollars up there. But not only would such an effort be for naught, it would also rob genuinely competitive races of those resources.
Same for Dean's Democratic National Committee. Imagine all the DNC's resources for 2006 are a pie. Dean could cut that pie into 20 pieces and give healthy portions to the truly competitive states. Or he could cut the pie into 50 smaller portions and give every state a little piece. By choosing to distribute small pieces to more states, Dean might starve the candidates that can make the best use of resources. Exactly! By furnishing resources to candidates who are going to lose by 20 points or more, you are denying them to candidates who are going to lose by 5 points or less. This is Poly Sci 101 stuff. Dean (along with much of the left wing of the Democrats), apparently believes in what I like to call "The Lost Tribe" theory, which is that there is an untapped group of radicals around the country who would vote Democratic, but nobody's speaking to them, so instead of voting they stay home.
This seems quite dubious at best, but let's assume they're right, and there's another 5% of non-voters who would be energized by a more Leftist policy from the Democrats. Where do you put your money then? Quite obviously in the closest races; the ones where an additional 5% could put you over the top. Dean and the bozos over at Swing State Project are leading the Democrats to disaster.
