New York Times: Folkbum is right

A while back I had a nice long post, "Electoral Math is for Losers" (read it with comments over at dKos), in which I wrote

You may believe that the election will be decided in just a few key battleground states and you may want to bother over which candidate you think has a better shot in those few key battleground states.  But that's not what I want.  I want a candidate who campaigns to win the election, not a candidate who campaigns to win, say, Tennessee.

When we start talking about who looks good in the South, or who looks good in the Midwest, or who looks good in whatever pet state you think will be the deciding one in 2004, we lose sight of the big picture.  We are in this election as Democrats, and we will win as Democrats.  We are not the party of one region or another.  We are not the party of one group or another.  We represent the majority view on every major domestic issue in the country, and it's time to win--and win the whole country.  I don't want to hear about how one guy will win one state.  That's loser talk.  I want to hear about how we will win period in 2004.

Well, New York Times columnist Bob Herbert seems to agree. Among other great points about November 2004, he writes

The Democratic Party's circular firing squad has assembled. Everybody's angry with everybody else. [. . . T]he Democrats need more than a candidate or two. The party needs a plan. It needs a coherent, compelling, convincing narrative that shows how voters and the nation would be better off under Dr. Dean or General Clark or Dick Gephardt--take your pick--than they are now.

To regain control of the White House, the Democrats need to give voters, who are frightened by terrorism and disoriented by the pace of 21st-century events, new reasons to hope. That can only be done by a thoughtful, united, energized and creative party. A party with a plan and a ferocious will to win.

It's nice to be vindicated by the Gray Lady, I guess, but it does make me wonder why this whole thing hasn't sunk in with everybody else yet. It's not a matter of trying to win one state or another, or having the most "electable" guy (sorry, Moseley Braunatics). It's a matter of wanting it, wanting it bad, and working for it. What's so hard about that? What's not to get? Can anybody explain it?