From the DLC website, comes a report that basically is a contradiction. The report states that “Republican areas are growing rapidly while Democratic areas are not.” Yet below they prove the opposite.

It is not hard to find examples of “success stories” in which non-presidential Democratic candidates have performed well in Republican-tilting high growth areas through a combination of strategic targeting and a message congenial to voters in such areas. Ken Salazar’s 2004 Senate campaign in Colorado, Mike Easley’s gubernatorial re-election campaign in North Carolina that same year, and Tim Kaine’s 2005 gubernatorial victory in Virginia are all good examples of Democrats who were able to expand the party base in fast-growing areas.

No, the base that expects you to throw money at problems and to support all the underdogs no matter how little they deserve it is dying. But it’s not due to geography. It’s a lack of vision and solutions to real problems.

The DLC offers hope.

The bottom line is that Democrats should not rely solely on demography or mobilization to win close elections at the national level and in many states. Later this year, the DLC will release new public opinion research examining the characteristics and views of persuadable voters in high-growth areas, and the progressive messages and policies best suited to reach them. But for the moment, we believe it is important that Democrats look at the country as it is, and as it is likely to be, and dedicate themselves to an effort to expand their ranks into what has previously been considered “enemy territory.”

Of course, the DLC could just call Del. David Poisson or Sen. Mark Herring, or Del. Chuck Caputo or Del. Shannon Valentine, or…