Must read electoral anyalysis - The New Battleground: by Mark Gersh

Those The DLC=Evil DUers obviously don't have to read it and considering it's based in facts and logic and not emotionally charged hyperbole you probably wouldn't enjoy it anyway. It isn't an ideological piece at all anyway. Although I do think this demonstrates that the DLC does do good research.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?cp=1&kaid=127&subid=900056&contentid=252571



<snip>
In all three states, two particular demographic factors require some explanation. The first is the growth in minority voting age population (VAP) since 2000. With some exceptions, the size of this statistic helps Democrats, because roughly 90 percent of African-Americans and two-thirds of Hispanic voters tend to vote Democratic, and there's nothing about the dynamics of the presidential race so far that is likely to change those proportions. The second factor is the relative voting strength of fast-growing "exurban" or fringe city communities like Mesa, Ariz., or the outer suburbs of Atlanta, where, on average, Republicans enjoy about a 2-to-1 majority.
<snip>
According to my estimates, the Hispanic voting-age population in Florida has increased by an astounding 31 percent since 2000. Moreover, it appears that most of that growth has been among groups that tend to vote strongly Democratic, especially Dominicans in southern Florida and Puerto Ricans and Mexicans in the Orlando area. Cuban-Americans gave Bush an estimated 81 percent of their votes in 2000. But the lack of an issue like the Elian Gonzalez flap, coupled with some disenchantment with the administration's policy toward Castro's Cuba, makes it an uphill battle for Bush to match his 2000 performance. Moreover, the turnout in the Cuban-American community may decline, based on 2004 demographic realities.<(!NOMINATE PENELAS!)> Meanwhile, the African-American VAP in Florida has risen an even more surprising 13 percent since 2000 (non-Hispanic white VAP has gone up less than 2 percent). I think the 2000 exit poll numbers on African-American turnout in Florida were significantly inflated, so there's some room for growth that Democrats can try to exploit.
<snip>
Think strategically about targeting states: A message aimed at truly competing in the South, for example, could not only make Arkansas, Louisiana, and Tennessee true battleground states, but could also help appeal to voters in northern Florida, and in culturally conservative pockets of voters in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia. Conceding the entire South to Bush would, most likely, leave the Kerry campaign without a cushion, if one of the closely fought industrial states is lost. Moreover, if the South is uncontested, the Bush campaign will be able to redeploy media money and other resources elsewhere. Above all, remember: The candidate with a message that can both energize the party base and appeal to a majority of swing voters will almost always win, on any battleground, in any year.
<snip>

.

The conclusion that you win by both energizing the base and attracting new voters doesn't seem very profound.

How about telling the truth for a change, and addressing real issues of money and power? If they were smart about that, that would resonate with a lot of people.

tool and and a walkthrough of the challanges we face and opportunities that have arisen electorally.

"telling the truth for a change" good grief. The truth to you I suspect is what you agree with all of the time.

being called a DLC apologist. Some people don't even bother to LOOK at the information before attacking the source.

The information, while not profound is interesting.

I might disagree a bit with their analysis to some extent, but overall it makes sense.

?

.