Progressive Democrat Issue 114: VIRGINIA, INDIANA AND MONTANA FOCUS

Yes, this is unusual in that I am combining states here, something I don't usually do. But I want to highlight one of the MANY under-read Daily Kos diaries which looks at all three states as being very good places for gaining support for Democrats. These three are supposedly red states that have sure been acting somewhat blueish these days. This comes from Daily Kos. Interspersed are my comments:

Montana

Bush may have won here handily in the past two elections, but this state is not nearly as red as some people think it is. Both of the state's US senators are now Democrats, the governor is a Democrat, and Democrats control the state senate and are down only one vote in the state house. This state has a definite independent streak!

As a state that is used to being ignored by presidential candidates, a Democrat who takes the time to campaign there could earn points for showing up even if Montanans don't agree with his or her views. Let's not forget that Clinton campaigned in Montana in 1992 and he won there. Granted, this was made possible in large part by Perot, who got 26% of the vote. But even without Perot, I believe that if the Democratic presidential candidate campaigns there he/she can at least make it competitive. Granted, Montana is only worth 3 electoral votes, so depending on the political climate in the fall of 2008 it may not be worth it. But don't discount the small states...if Gore had won Montana in 2000 he'd have become president without Florida.

I have been focusing on Montana as a great place to bring together progressive and populist politics. Jon Tester really kicked ass as the poster stud for the moderate-progressive alliance. And I would add that in 2006 Wyoming, Dick Cheney's own base, was showing signs of following Montana's lead. If you want to help turn Montana and Wyoming (YES, EVEN WYOMING!) Bluish, go here for groups to support.

Indiana

I'm not going to lie: this is an uphill battle. The last Democratic presidential candidate to carry Indiana was Lyndon Johnson in 1964. But like neighboring Ohio, Indiana has been hit hard by the loss of industrial jobs, which many people attribute in part to the economic policies of Reagan and the Bushes. The unions are pretty strong in Indiana, and can mount a massive get-out-the-vote campaign if the polls are close enough to make the effort seem worth it. Indianans are culturally conservative, but 2006 showed "Reagan Democrats" in places like Indiana and Ohio beginning to wake up and realize that their jobs and economic prosperity are more important than whether same-sex couples are allowed to get married, enabling Democrats to knock off three Republican incumbents. If John Edwards is the nominee, his populist message just might resonate in Indiana, and if he or whoever the nominee ends up being puts Bayh on the ticket, we might actually have a shot.

This mainly focuses on Presidential politcs. But let's face it: we picked up THREE Congressional seats in Indiana in 2006!!! That is a huge shift in Dan Quayle's state. I don't know which Democratic presidential hopeful will be best suited for leveraging Indiana (arguements could be made for Edwards...and Clark) but turning Congressional seats blue and picking up seats on the state level are really possible. And if nothing else, we can certainly turn Indiana into a battle ground for its electoral votes. I also should note that I am already seeing Republican pundits predicting taking back the Indiana Congressional seats that we picked up. Truth is, I think the candidates who won are really ones who will appeal to their constituents and we don't have to worry much about losing those seats soon. But I also don't think we can ignore the danger. So, here are some GREAT groups, (including the Indiana Women's Caucus and Indiana Progressives) that are working to turn Indiana Bluish.

Virginia

This post wouldn't be complete without mentioning my new home state, the state that inspired the name of this blog. Virginia is changing, and it's becoming less red and more purple as the DC suburbs expand beyond Arlington and Alexandria to areas as far as 50 miles away. These areas start out Republican, but become more Democratic as they become more populous. I was pretty surprised that Webb won Loudon County in 2006, but his victory there affirms Ruy Teixeira's theory that as exurbs become more populous and begin to transition into emerging suburbs, they become more diverse and more Democratic. As the DC suburbs expand, Virginia is becoming less of a southern state and more of a mid-Atlantic state.

Interestingly, while Virginia has gone Republican in every presidential election beginning in 1968, it was only in the last 15 years that they made headway in state politics. 1999 was the first time since the Republican Party came into existence that it controlled both houses of the Virginia legislature. Virginia evolved toward the Republicans the same way other southern states did, and I don't have a lot of hope that we will win back the type of voters who abandoned the party in the 1980's. As the maps below clearly demonstrate, a Democratic victory in Virginia today does not look the same geographically as it did in 1964 when Lyndon Johnson won it.

(GO HERE FOR THE MAPS)

But Mark Warner demonstrated in 2001 that campaigning in rural areas that were not hit by the wave of growth in the 1990's can pay off, and Webb showed that Virginia can be winnable for Democrats when the DC suburbs turn out in high enough force.

Not just Warner. Jim Webb did just fine in 2006. Virginia is a mix of some pretty nasty, corrupt, racist Republicans and some conservative-leaning but basically excellent Democrats. I agree that Virginia can be won over and that is why I have been focusing on it since 2004. In 2008 we have another Senate race in Virginia. And I am already pushing to unseat the nasty Republican, Warner.


Click here to go back to THOUGHTS section and Table of Contents for this issue.