Clinton team expanding operations and campaign stops in AZ, MO and UT. mistake?

[User157088589849]

http://www.sltrib.com/home/4486284-155/hillary-clintons-team-says-it-will

Don't know if this is a good idea. While below 50% there is still a chance a surge could tilt things. I know at the weekends the democrats sole aim is gotv in north carolina, pennslyvania, ohio and florida which is fine but its not in the bag.

[Devout Centrist]

http://www.sltrib.com/home/4486284-155/hillary-clintons-team-says-it-will

Don't know if this is a good idea. While below 50% there is still a chance a surge could tilt things. I know at the weekends the democrats sole aim is gotv in north carolina, pennslyvania, ohio and florida which is fine but its not in the bag.

Replace MO with GA

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

I think MO is a mistake, Az and UT maybe.

I'd focus everything on Florida, North Carolina, PA, Ohio and Iowa.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

http://www.sltrib.com/home/4486284-155/hillary-clintons-team-says-it-will

Don't know if this is a good idea. While below 50% there is still a chance a surge could tilt things. I know at the weekends the democrats sole aim is gotv in north carolina, pennslyvania, ohio and florida which is fine but its not in the bag.

Replace MO with GA

Barksdale is heavily disfavoured in a plastic state... sorry

[User157088589849]

Problem with GA is outside of Atlanta the vote is nothing.

I think the closer Clinton gets to Trump in Missouri the more likely kander wins.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think MO is a mistake, Az and UT maybe.

I'd focus everything on Florida, North Carolina, PA, Ohio and Iowa.

Does ANYONE think the Clinton campaign would be doing this at the expense of any Obama state? Come on. They're trying to expand the map because they feel confident.

[Mehmentum]

MO and AZ are important because of Senate races (though it looks like McCain is pretty safe now) and Missouri's governor's race (ditto for Indiana). Investing in Utah is probably a waste, let McMullin win there.

[Virginiá]

At this point, she would be better off (imo) putting any extra money she has into the Missouri/Indiana/North Carolina (and Florida?) Senate races and the numerous competitive House races in California, New York and elsewhere.

Absent the greatest election year catastrophe in modern times, she is going to be the next president. However, expanding the map just to rack up EVs does not help anything. There will be no "mandate." Republicans will just come up with a limitless number of excuses to justify not cooperating with her and implementing a scorched earth strategy, regardless of how big her win is. That is why she is better off taking down as many Congressional Republicans as possible.

[Hammy]

At this point, she would be better off (imo) putting any extra money she has into the Missouri/Indiana/North Carolina (and Florida?) Senate races and the numerous competitive House races in California, New York and elsewhere.

This doesn't make much sense to me either, but I'm hoping it's to help the senate candidates and not genuinely thinking the states are competitive at the presidential level.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Arizona is worth it, especially if it rockets up turnout needed for the vulnerable and target House seats, as well as for the potential toppling of McCain.
Utah is useful more as a nest egg for the future, especially as it will probably gain a House seat and if Mormon vote becomes permanently swingy.
Missouri really doesn't need a whole lot of exposure to the national campaign.
Georgia is a waste of time, with no flippable House seats and Isakson safe.