As Trump stumbles, Clinton weighs a striking choice: Expand the map or stick to the plan

[Liberal_in_LA]

Source: Washington post

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton faces a striking choice in the final three weeks of the campaign: to expand her efforts to states that Democrats haven’t won in a generation, or to stay a current course that, if conditions hold, would deliver her a resounding electoral college victory.

After two tumultuous weeks focused on Donald Trump’s behavior toward women, Clinton is ahead in nearly all of the key battleground states where her campaign has directed the most resources, according to many recent polls. But some once-solidly Republican states — notably Arizona, Georgia and Utah — now also appear to be in play.

Clinton aides said they see advantages to running up the score in the electoral college, where 270 votes wins the White House. Victories in unexpected places could boost that total, handing her more of a mandate come January and decreasing the potency of Trump’s complaints of a “rigged” election.

But victories in core battleground states such as Pennsylvania and New Hampshire would almost assuredly cut off Trump’s path as well. Those states are also home to key down-ballot races that will determine control of the Senate, an important factor in how much support Clinton would have while launching an agenda in January.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/as-trump-stumbles-clinton-weighs-a-striking-choice-expand-the-map-or-stick-to-the-plan/2016/10/16/f0f77470-93a7-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_electoralmap-7pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

---

?uuid=R-kJxpD5Eea8ABqXVtQRGw

[oberliner]

1. Stick to the plan

The plan is good.

[rpannier]

17. Agreed

Move that money and resources to senate and house races in NH, PA, and so on

[C Moon]

25. +1

[Farmgirl1961]

2. First and most important step is to lock Trump out

and make it statistically impossible for him to win. She's got many options and he's got a few. I want to see her her probability in the mid to high 90's before she expands the map.

However, having said that -- if and when possible, sending out her wonderful surrogates to these "new" battleground states is a wonderful idea.

[JoePhilly]

3. Expand where we get Senate seats.

[Missn-Hitch]

5. Stay on with NC, maybe a little more focus on MO?

[JoePhilly]

6. Yup ... try to steal a few more senate seats, or house seats.

But Senate is more important.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

13. Yes! Definitely!

I realllllly want the senate to go blue blue BLUE!

House too, but Senate first.

[rpannier]

18. Those two would be good

I'd prefer that and stay out of GA and Utah
There doesn't appear to be any coattail effect in those states

[Missn-Hitch]

20. Good point. NV, MO, NC. My two cents.

[calimary]

15. YES!!!

Let's take back the Senate. That will help us take back the Supreme Court!

[blm]

4. Stick to the course that wins us the WH and the Senate.

.

[TygrBright]

7. Stick to the plan, but if there IS room to move...

Priority #1 is a decisive White House victory.

Priority #2 HAS to be the Senate: as many seats as possible.

Beyond that... well... If we could only expand in ONE state...?

Texas, please.

I would just think I'd died and gone to heaven if we could turn Texas blue...

wistfully,
Bright

[alfredo]

8. Expanding would force Trump to spend money in that state.

[rpannier]

27. At this point I do see the problem being Trump

The RNC is moving money away from the presidential campaign (much as they did in 96) and toward preserving their most vulnerable senators and house members
Trump is going to lose and he and his quislings seem to be the only ones who haven't gotten the message
It's senate races in NC, AZ, NV, PA, NH that I worry more about
2018 will not be kind: off year election and I think we hold a +10 or so on senate seats up for grabs
Winning the electoral vote in states like GA or UT may be embarrassing to Il Douche, but it means nothing without getting those senate seats

[alfredo]

35. It means nothing if we don't hold a supermajority in the Senate, and majority in the house.

[rpannier]

39. Super-majority or no it still doesn't change what Isaid

Winning Georgia and Utah means nothing if we don't control the senate
The money is better spent on down ticket senate and house races

[alfredo]

40. Still, we can work with a simple majority in the senate. I know the DNC is not spending in Ky.

We are so red it is not worth it.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

14. ^

I'm not anywhere near Texas, logistically...but I'd be thrilled too if Texas got blue!

[Volaris]

23. On the money. Texas is the GOPs California, if we flip it,

They will KNOW they screwed the pooch and all they have left is the Deplorables (and good luck with that lol).

It would demoralize the fuck out of their crazy base.

It would (geographically) cut off the old south from the new Republican west, and turn the GOP into a system of regional factions...easier to defeat later, I think.

If you're going to dump cash into a red state because the swing states are in your column already, Texas it is.

[alfredo]

36. Eventually we will flip it. Time is on our side.

[TXCritter]

9. Expand. Imagine if we could do 1984 in reverse.

[img href=""]

That election did severe and lasting damage to liberals in America and the DP. reversing 1984 would allow us to start making progress again.

[rpannier]

19. THe problem with the expansion is the moving of resources and people

NH, NC, PA have very competitive senate races
At this point (IMO) those are more important than winning a few more states on the electoral map
Win by 1 or 1 million you still win
w/o the Senate and/or house it's a modest victory

[Ruth Bonner]

32. Wow. 1984 was my first year in college and I apparently wasn't paying attention...

Mondale appears to have gotten the most humiliating beating in the history of U.S. Presidential races.

[BlueStreak]

12. Run some ads in UT. Leave GA and TX alone

Utah is actually a possibility, and would be a significant statement. I don't believe GA or TX is winnable this time. Very expensive states to advertise in.

Remember Obama had a very expansive win in 2008 and it didn't prevent the GOP from opposing his every move. There just isn't a lot of upside in pushing for a landslide. What is absolutely needed is a decisive win, but if they can get PA, CO, FL and VA , and either OH or NC, this will be extremely decisive such that nobody will ask Trump his opinion about "fixed" elections.

[TXCritter]

38. You've got it backward. She won't win Utah

Utah is still a 17 point split. Trump is losing votes to Johnson but Clinton isn't gaining any.

TX, on the other hand is now a true battleground state with polls within the margin of error. She could win Texas

[DAMANgoldberg]

16. HRC has enough surrogates and resources to do both.

Trump having to defend safe spots such as Texas will take money away, most of which he doesn't have available to him, and his party won't help, for that matter, most of the outside groups won't help either. I say go for the jugular, hit them a lick, harder, harder. {An old HS cheer}. Also, Run the Ball, Run the Ball, Run the Damn Ball. Run it until he stops it, and he can't. Last sports metaphor, Ground and Pound Trump into submission; make the referee call off the fight in Round 3.

Clinton def Trump via submission (Rd 3, 2:23) #andnew

[BlueMTexpat]

24. This ...

especially, where it could help with down-ticket Dems in the state.

But I have full confidence in Hillary's judgment.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

21. How about Outsourcing?

To a few "Never Trump" Republicans in red states?

[Coyotl]

22. Go after a House majority so we can govern.

[Volaris]

26. That won't happen for another 2 years,

IF the WH and a Blue Senate backs a real, liberal legislative agenda (Public Campaign-finance, Public Option, free tuition in some kind of form, breaking up banks, unscrewing the tax code, etc) and a red house is still playing at blocking, we can run on it in the mid-term, and then we get the House back. That should be the goal for the first 2 years...to make those hateful fuckers the epitath of every American that's been dicked over by McConnels INTENTIONAL obstructionism to the point that they CANNOT keep the House. We need to spend the next 2 years proposing so much good legislation that we get to make them own not passing it.

[Coyotl]

34. The House Is Back in Play

The House Is Back in Play

This from a week ago: The House is so much more in play this week than last, it is really remarkable. This was the swiftest shift in political fortunes I've witnessed, a concession of the Presidency race for all practical purposes. But a Clinton victory was going to happen anyway. What has really shifted is the overall picture for the Republican party. Now every candidate has to declare their position on Trump. For Republicans, there is no winning that inevitablity.

What a five-point shift could do = 455-83
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512496668

2016 House Race Ratings for October 4, 2016
Cook Report: Summary
Solid Seats: 202 Rep, 177 Dem
Likely/Lean Seats: 25 Rep, 7 Dem
Toss Up or Worse: 20 Rep, 4 Dem

October 6: Poll Update = Clinton 46%, Trump 39% (Morning Consult 9/30-10/2)
2016 National House Race
Asked of 1778 Likely Voters
Democratic candidate 46%
Republican candidate 37%
Don't Know/No Opinion 17%

[alfredo]

37. They can't even rely on the slave states. LBJ said we would lose them for a generation.

[OnDoutside]

28. My thoughts would be

1 Widen the margin of victory between Hillary and Trump, by keeping the foot on the gas.

If they can get more distance between them,

2 Gary Johnson voters may realize the futility of voting for him, and switch to Hillary

3 People like to say they voted for the winner, so she may pick up more there too.

[killbotfactory]

29. As we have seen for the past eight years, Republican's don't give a flying fuck about "mandates"

Hang Trump around their necks and get as many of them out of congress as possible.

[LisaM]

30. Stick to the plan...but be flexible.

I don't buy into these either/or choices. Reality is more diffuse.

[Proud Public Servant]

31. Go after AZ, otherwise stick to the plan

Utah is deep red, and it's being in play this year is an anomaly; TX will be purple someday, but probably not for a generation. OTOH, Obama lost NC, AZ, and GA by single digits in 2012. NC is already in her corner; AZ is a strong possibility for a pickup at this point, and worth the effort. I'd say the same about Georgia if HRC were polling better there, but she's still trailing by 5% (though there's been very little polling, and only one this month). So I think The Plan + AZ would be the best use of resources.

[KewlKat]

33. have to say I'm also for "STICK TO THE PLAN"