Maybe the article isn't very diplomatic, but he's essentially saying the same thing. Any demographic group that is highly partisan is basically dumb in their tactics whether they be on the left or right. Because they are so partisan they are safely ignored, though they get enough rhetoric to keep them dreaming someone is going to do something for them.

It's a bit like the old joke of a mule with a long pole and a carrot attached to its head. Any partisan group wants the carrot but the system is set up so they always want but never get it. The Blue Collar males for example would be better off by posing as swing voters, then both sides would offer them more for their votes. Blacks would also be the same, if the Democrats thought they would switch sides they would get a lot more benefits.

I make exactly this case about guns in the same thread. There's no incentive for Republicans to loosen gun laws any more because that demographic will back them regardless and they would just lose swing voters from it.

I don't think the case against Bush is invented, this seems to be a group that really doesn't get its fair share, but there are plenty of groups like that. Tactically this group is in play in the sense they will be appealed to in terms of being ripped off. In the same way Bush will appeal to other Democrat groups and try to claim they are being ripped off.

So generally the more partisan a group the more ripped off they are. If you look at Bush's policies they almost perfectly fail to give any partisan Republican anything he wants. Of course this is the same accusation against the Democrats, that they don't really give their base what they want either.

The real problem is with polling each party can very accurately work out how many insincere words will keep each partisan group on side, and the bare minimum to actually do something for them. Then with the swing voters the rest of their funds and the budget is devoted to buying their votes. This is all precisely done mathematically to the point the whole process can be completely automated.

There are other factors, such as for example how much money each side has and how good a candidate. In this process a line becomes drawn in the approximate center where each party goes against its principles to capture the swing voters and leave their partisans in the lurch.