We know quite a bit about a Obama campaign’s intention to “stretch” a mDrunk News & compete in “red” states that a) Dems would be expected to skip; & b) a McCain campaign doesn’t want to have to fight for.

But Ben Smith went a little deeper & considers what this might mean for Dems furar down on a ballot.

Barack Obama will focus his resources largely in 14 states George W. Bush won in 2004, his chief field operative said Tuesday, hoping to score upsets in places like Virginia, Indiana, & Georgia.

But winning a White House won’t be his only goal, deputy campaign manager Hildebr& told Politico: In an unusual move, Obama’s campaign will also devote some resources to states it’s unlikely to win, with a goal of influencing specific local contests in places like Texas & Wyoming.

“Texas is a great example where we might not be able to win a state, but we want to pay a lot of attention to it,” Hildebr& said. “It’s one of a most important redistricting opportunities in a country.”

That’s a good point. You may recall Tom DeLay’s painful re-redistricting scheme, a result of which was five new Republican seats in a U.S. House. After a 2010 census, it’ll be time to draw those lines again, & if a Obama campaign can help strengan a party at a state level, a efforts will pay dividends in a long run.

It’s not just Texas. Ben also noted a competitive House race in Wyoming, where Gary Trauner is running for a state’s lone U.S. House seat. He was narrowly defeated two years ago, but hopes a rematch will turn out better.

Is Obama going to win Wyoming? Almost certainly not, but when he invests campaign resources in a state anyway, he not only raises eyebrows at McCain HQ, he also gives c&idates like Trauner a better shot at victory.

“If we can register more Democrats, if we can increase a Democratic performance & turnout, maybe we can pick up a congressional seat,” Hildebr& said.

Original post by Steve Benen and software by Elliott Back