Whenever we talk about adding more Swing Districts to our map, we get pulled in opposite directions—go big or stay focused. Because we’re a grassroots organization, we’re asking you, the people who helped build Swing Left from the ground up, to help make this decision.
Up till now, we've added Swing Districts based on 2016's election results in each district and where big clusters of volunteers live. But things are changing rapidly. Read more about the pros and cons of each choice below, then cast your vote. We’ll let you know where we wind up on this important decision!
Vote to Fight in More Swing Districts
The Big Blue Wave keeps getting bigger, and this might be our chance to elect a bulwark of Democrats that can stand up to the GOP for years to come. Conor Lamb’s victory in PA-18 showed us there are a lot of red seats we can flip in November. And with so many Republicans retiring (40 and counting, including Paul Ryan), the field of winnable districts is bigger than ever. The bottom line is there are progressives everywhere who are eager to win, and more districts mean more of them that can get involved.
Vote to Stay Focused (and Keep Our Map the Same)
The best argument for sticking with our current map of 71 Swing Districts is simple: we should concentrate our resources on the tightest races. Adding redder districts could take attention away from the ones that are more clearly winnable. We’re less than seven months away from Election Day, so expanding now means less time to organize, raise money and kick butt in these new districts. All in all, we only have to flip 23 more seats from Republicans to Democrats to take back the House, and we already have twice that number of Republican seats on our map. In other words, the argument is that we should double down on the tightest races where we’re already active.
We know that when our strategy is aligned and we work together, we win. That’s why we’re checking in with you on this. So, let us know what you think and please share your vote with your friends so they can weigh in, too.