Dems: Pick a Southern or Midwestern Candidate

One of the inexplicable aspects of this election loss is why, in an election where everyone knew it would come down to the MW and Florida, the candidate was from the NE, the campaign manager was from the NE, and the convention was held in the NE. I think that pretty well sums it up.

In contrast, the Bush campaign featured Bush (TX), Cheney (WY/TX), and Rove (TX). And the only reason the GOP convention was in the NE was because it was at 9/11 ground zero.

The "New Democrat" movement was temporarily derailed when Clinton got impeached, but now everyone realizes that Clinton & co. had it mostly right. The party must become more centrist, be able to win a modicum of states in some swath of the South, and dominate in the MW.

The LA Times ran a story on the topic today:

Reeling from their party's loss in the presidential election, some key Democratic financiers and strategists say they have learned a clear lesson: Next time around, no Northeasterners need apply.

Their voices — if they become ascendant as the Democratic Party undertakes a round of soul-searching after Tuesday's losses by presidential nominee John F. Kerry and key Senate candidates — could dampen prospects for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who has been frequently mentioned as a prominent White House contender in 2008.

"We have to be very careful about the kind of candidate that we nominate and where that candidate comes from," said Scott Falmlen, executive director of the Democratic Party in North Carolina, where Easley won in a landslide Tuesday despite Kerry's lopsided loss there to President Bush. "This party has got to get in a position where it does not write off an entire section of the country."