GnauzBookOfRhymes
Superstar
breh, the difference between winning/losing in those races are rounding errors. that's how close it was. no one would have ever imagined that you'd get within a few points of a dem winning elections in Texas for instance. the votes are there. it's just a matter of turnout. ignoring a state diminishes your possibilities for the future. that money went not just to ads, but building and REBUILDING local networks, political organizations etc, training volunteers for future races etc. many states in the south are seeing HUGE influxes of new residents from places like NY, CA, IL. These are majority Dem voters. Dems won congressional races in TX. All of that money spent by Beto campaign etc, filters down to these local races.
but you don't see that - which is why i said you don't understand politics. it's ironic that you bring up the republicans running the government, but are apparently ignorant of how they managed to get there. they prioritized spending billions on building up their local organizations, took over local/state level governments, thru which they were able to take over the election processes. that by itself delivered more than enough votes in places like Georgia (where something like 1.5 million people were taken off the voter rolls in a span of 2 years).
now, i completely agree that even MORE needs to be invested in the other states, but it can't be to the exclusion of places like TX/GA/AZ and anywhere else there is a Dem that can win - no matter how local/inconsequential the race appears. you keep people engaged/energized by fighting EVERYWHERE.
. Every state matters if hick ass Iowa voted for Obama anything is possible
We can beat Trump and win back the Senate without the Deep South. We just need the Midwest and the rest of the reliable blue states.
