The Democrats haven't had a clean majority since we lost ground in the south and we probably won't again until we get quite a bit back. The way to do that is obviously (for Godsakes is anyone really THAT crazy?) to attack the culture of the south which has it's share of plenty good and bad. Similarly he's correct in that the western interior doesn't have the growth or masses to replace the south.

And last, he points out the growth of the hispanic vote, the most vital vote of all perhaps is largely in southern states.

Thanks to Kilgore for telling it like it is.

You will have to drop 'gun control'.

Not just part of it. ALL of it.

I agree with one thread of Kilgore's argument -- progressives should not give ground in any state or region. We need to be in all 50 states all of the time. But other than that, Kilgore's "refutation" of Schaller is wishful thinking at it's most wishful.

Progressives don't have the luxury of wishful thinking. We have to focus on taking back our country and undoing the harm to our republic wrought by the GOP and its unholy alliance of religious zealots and crony capitalists. And to do that, we have to play to our strengths, not our weaknesses.

And we are weakest in the South. And will be for quite a while. It doesn't matter that the South had a progressive tradition: It doesn't have one now. It doesn't matter that the latino population of Texas and Florida is growing: they are still outnumbered by xenophobic, wonder-bread crackers. It doesn't matter that race relations in the South have improved: They started pretty low (Jim Crow, remember?).

Schaller's point, for all the smoke Kilgore blows to obscure it is that progressives need to concentrate where we can make the biggest gains. And we need to have a strategy that doesn't rely on prying a citadel of the former confederacy from the clutches of the bible-beating bigots who will throw their mothers under a bus.

And that is common sense, not regionalism.

Okay, so maybe Democrats do need the South. However, they might as well whistle past it since there is no way (certainly not by 2008) they will get any electoral votes from most of old Dixie. Like Mr. Kilgore, I too live in Georgia and I see no signs of progress for Democrats. Except for parts of Atlanta and maybe a bit of Athens, Republicans have a padlock on power. The hot-button issues here are Anit-Gay Anything, Anti-Environmentalism, Anti-Gun Control, Anti-Taxes (at any cost) and above all, Anti-Secular everything else. If you're at a dinner party and identified as a Democrat, the other guests will look at you with suspicion or curiosity. And face it, it is no different in MS, AL, TN, SC and NC (except for those "high brow" universities). Sorry, Mr. Kilgore, tell Howard to spend his budget where it has a chance to work.

Know why you are wrong? Check the "letter" from the gentleman (woman?) who calls him or herself "Dems Are Dung" (so clever). Then multiply it times 25 million voters or so. I say bring back Barry Goldwater's saw and let Schaller have the first crack at letting Dixie float off. We should have let them secede ... our country would be so much better off today.

Kilgore is correct, but doesn't explicitly spell out why I think he is correct. Those moderate and populist policies that are palatable in the south are also the same types of policies that appeal to swing voters in other winnable states. Democrats must be progressive enough to win sufficient numbers of these swing voters while still turning out their base.

But he does hit one nail square on the head. If you go out and trash southern culture, your are going to alienate the single most faithful block of Democratic voters -- African American voters. It really is simple. You build coalitions by being inclusive, not by running folks off.

This part is fine:

"Democrats should pursue a 50-state strategy with a common progressive message, tolerating some regional differences, and let individual candidates, especially those running for president, target their resources and appeals as opportunities dictate. If that means writing off the South in 2008, fine by me. But please don't prejudge the map based on unreasonable prejudices toward one region, even if it's the one populated by us crazy Crackers." That implies treating the South equally with other regions. Rewarding it or not based on what it does for us and how it fits in our overall (average) thrust. Or how well it bargains with the rest of us to form a coalition.

The problem is, I don't trust the DLC - I think if you're still in it by now, you're a Republican lite, a liar, a backstabber, and a sneak, with a deep hatred for working class people, middle class people, and people with creative talents. That's your history. You're corporate whores par excellence, loyal only to the multinationals, and very much like Republicans, eager to promote reactionary slogans and policies if it will put people to sleep long enough to let big business lift their wallets.

What I most particularly do not trust you DLC people not to do is pander to extremely reactionary politics coming out of, predominately the South (if you thought Utah and Idaho were swayable, it'd be out of there, too). You DLC people seem to me to have the attitude - better to accommodate and pick up one reactionary state even if you have to lose 5 progressive ones. Therefore, while this sounds nice, I simply do not trust you. At all. I think you're pulling the old shell game where it's bigotry to say that, like NASCAR and country music, reactionary machine politics aren't spreading out of the South. I don't trust you, for instance, not to backstab a ticket that has no southerners in it - what if we replaced the obligatory Southerner with a westerner?

I notice Southerners don't like voting for a ticket without Southerners. Californians/West Coasters are not like that. Neither are Midwesterners. Neither are Easterners. There's something about the South that says "we are the victims (ever since The War) and we are the swing region and so we want an outsized portion of our demands met. I note that you're essentially breaking with the DLC, which repeatedly trashed Dean's 50-state strategy. That could be a good sign. It could also be that the combination of the success of that, plus Schaller implying that if we DON'T follow a 50 state strategy, it might be the South that loses out, brought you around.

And like I said in the topic, Carville the Hack really is pushing a Southern and triangulation strategy. Hence, Schaller's response, while it might still be excessive, is not out of line.