Democrats divided on whether rural outreach is worth it

Rural areas have voted increasingly Republican over the past two decades, and went overwhelmingly for President Trump in 2016. That record margin has been partly attributed to Hillary Clinton's lack of focus on rural voters. This time around, Democratic candidates seem keener to talk about rural concerns, but should they bother reaching out to rural areas they're unlikely to carry?

"Democrats face an increasingly clear crossroads: Do they spend time and resources pursuing rural voters, who are often socially and culturally at odds with the party’s increasingly liberal direction? Or do they double down on cities and suburbs, hoping to drive up support among the multi-ethnic, younger, more highly educated voters that many see as the party’s future?" writes Holly Bailey of The Washington Post.

Democratic candidates have been reaching out to J.D. Scholten, a former minor-league baseball player who almost beat GOP Rep. Steve King of Iowa last year in a heavily conservative rural district. Scholten advises Democrats to do more in rural areas, even if they lose at first: "We’re becoming the Whole Foods party, when we need to figure out how to win in Dollar General districts like mine," Scholten told Bailey. "You don’t have to win, but you should be able to compete."

Former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, a Democrat, agrees that rural outreach will help bridge the partisan gap: "If we are losing rural counties as we have in the past . . . I don’t give a damn how much you run up the vote in the inner cities and in the suburbs, we’ll be right back where we were in 2016." Vilsack cautions that Democrats should not conflate farmers with rural America, and must address concerns from other rural residents, Bailey reports.

But another faction of Democrats sees rural areas as a lost cause, and thinks the party should dedicate resources to increasing enthusiasm among voters who already share liberal values, especially non-whites. Low urban and suburban voter turnout cost Clinton the presidency, so appealing more to those voters is a better idea, according to this school of thought, Bailey reports.

Democrats might have the best shot with farmers who have been hurt by the trade war, like 32-year-old Spenser Jorgensen. The registered Republican, who also works as a farm-loan officer at a local bank, had to take a federal subsidy to keep the family farm afloat and says he's open to voting for any candidate who might do better for farmers than Trump. 

"It’s not just about me," Jorgensen told Bailey. "I want someone with a vision for the industry, for the community. . . . It doesn’t matter if they are Republican, Democrat, independent. I want someone who really gets what’s going on out here and who has the best plan for the future."