Oh No, Not Again

On September 28, 2016, I emailed Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Chairman, John Podesta. It’s opening line ended with “'my red team strategy' is working… all too fucking well for Trump.”

The next paragraph read: “The margins in the 18 bluest states plus DC have shrunk so dramatically that Obama’s 4 million vote victory in the popular vote four years ago has been erased. Those [RealClear Politics] polling averages now put Hillary 645,000 votes BELOW the president’s performance four years ago.”

That email continued: "In fact, as the attached spread sheet indicates, Dem-Rep Vote Margin in those 19 states is down to 4.6 million from Obama’s 2012 margin of 9.3 million and his 2008 margin of 18.7 million. As you so well know, the other 32 states are where Republican nominees always build up their own margins… I know you and your team are focused on the battleground states, and correctly so. But you do need to deal with this new threat of losing the popular vote. I am confident that you can and you will..."

I received a two word response. "Thanks, Rick.” But, for all practical purposes, the response was steady as she goes. The Clinton campaign maintained its course and heading without making any changes.

And the final results reflected that inertia. The 1.6 million increase in California’s net margin was offset by the 550,000 decrease in Ohio, 459,000 decrease in Michigan, 327,000 decrease in Pennsylvania, 186,000 decrease in Florida, 181,000 decrease in Minnesota, 160,000 decrease in Missouri, and 80,000 decrease in North Carolina.

Written in April 2016, that “red team strategy” argued that Trump would NOT run a traditional battleground state strategy. Instead he’d focus on the 25 largest media markets in quote, unquote the biggest Deepest Blue and Battleground States. And his highest priority would be “cutting President Obama’s margins in those top 25 media markets by just 25 percent [and putting] Trump within striking distance of winning the popular vote.

“More importantly, it places him within 120,000 votes of winning Ohio, Florida, North Carolina and Virginia… Achieving a 25% reduction in Obama’s margin from 2012 is not all that difficult. Trump would be trimming the president’s vote tally by only 2.5% in Pennsylvania, 0.6% in Ohio, 0.4% in Florida, 2.3% in Colorado, 1.8% in Virginia, and 1.1% in North Carolina."

But Trump, as we learned much to our dismay on Election Night 2016, gave Hillary Clinton far more than a 25% haircut. Obama’s net margin percentages shrank by over 400% in Ohio; over 100% in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Michigan; 90% in Minnesota; and roughly 50% in Colorado, Oregon, and Connecticut. Trump failed to achieve that 25% haircut only in DC, Missouri, Massachusetts, and California.

That was then. This is now.   

Last night, in updating my 2024 Mega-Democratic States spread sheet with the latest polling results, the column Increase/Decrease in 2024 Net Margin tallied a minus 1,735,000. Almost three times that 2016 negative number of 645,000. But it also meant, mathematically, the Biden-Harris 2020 raw vote margin had shrank from 11.9 million in those twenty mega-Democratic states to 7.9 million and without recent polling data from New Jersey or Massachusetts!

For me, the fire alarms started clanging — all five of them — and, yes, that’s a firestorm requiring 21 engine companies and 11 ladder companies.

And yet, the only changes over the last eight years in my spread sheets were the addition of Texas and Wisconsin, plus the subtraction of the District of Columbia.

Once again, those 2024 net margins are equal to the 2020 total vote times the current polling’s net margin percentages for each state. That number is then subtracted from the 2020 Dem-Rep Raw Vote Margin. But the math problems are now almost irrelevant.

The political problems are what must be solved. And solved quickly. For example, the Harris-Walz campaign must:

1. Send Kamala and Tim home for a couple of days. California is trending towards a 1.25 million DECREASE in votes over the 2020 raw vote margin! That 2020 margin HAS to grow to over 6 million votes. To do that the next president needs to excite, not ignore, the low intensity voters voters in California. In Minnesota, the net margin is STATIC even with a favorite son on the ticket. Minnesota ought to be generating a net margin over 300,000 votes and, again, it’s those low intensity voters who need to be turned out.

2. Get Democratic Governors working fast and hard to increased their state’s 2020 net margins by 20%. If they met that goal, it would increase the net margin by 2.7 million votes. That’s not a heavy lift: California (1.0 million), New York (397K), Illinois (205K), Pennsylvania (16K), Michigan (30K), North Carolina (15K), New Jersey (145K), Washington (158K), Massachusetts (243K), Minnesota (47K), Wisconsin (4K), Maryland (201K), Colorado (88K), Oregon (76K), and Connecticut (73K). But it does add up and it is a game-changer.

3. Urge major Democratic funders to dig deeper and do what Elon Musk is doing for Trump — spending $45 million a month to turn out MAGA voters. But instead. they’d collectively be focusing on improving the Democratic candidates' ground games in Texas, Florida, Ohio, and Missouri. They would be helping not just Kamala Harris and Tim Walz improve their net margins in those states. But they’d also help Senate candidates like Sherrod Brown, Collin Allred, Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, and Lucas Kunce beat tough opponents.

By expanding the Harris-Walz net margins in the popular vote, Democrats would strengthen their governing coalition — holding on to the U.S. Senate and winning control of the House of Representatives. And, if those twenty mega-Democratic states margins grew by 20%, that will necessarily increase the momentum in the most vital battleground states — Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and North Carolina — producing a Democratic victory in the Electoral College.  

That’s easy to write but winning that trifecta is difficult in the extreme. It takes a decision to “change course” but not all that many degrees to port. (Or LEFT for landlubbers like me.) But that decision is actually not up to the campaign chairman or campaign manager(s). It can only be made by the candidate herself. Vice President Kamala Harris has to give the thumbs up or thumbs down. No one else can.

Unlike eight years ago, I have no “friends in high places.” So, if you know someone, do something. Forward this post. Urge Kamala and Tim to go home for a couple days. Get those governors to fight harder; so they can win bigger in ’25 and ‘26. Lean on those major funders for GOTV dollars in a few big red states; for it’s now or never-never land. And...

Vote! Vote!! Vote!!!