I think it is good. It formulates why the rural population should support Democrats but don't today and does so in a manner that should not be offensive to the urbanite social 'winners'.

But I think the text has a problem in that it is written from the candidates perspective (with your strenghts and needs dominating the picture), rather then from the perspective of the donors you want to reach out to. Why should a small donor outside Washington give you money when there are important races in their home state? Some things that I think could be improved to change that:

• The bigger picture. Something in the beginning about how the Republican strenght on a national level depends on these rural areas and that challenging them there is an effective way to undermine their national strenght. Washington being the perfect state to start this process in, and the succesfull example can then be used all over this great nation.

• That the politics of Washington is likely to change in a good way once your group gets elected. Which is good for the national political discourse.

• That this relatively small sum of $10,000 will buy victory and thus start the Democratic capture of the countryside. Sort of like: "With the means we have we will reach  democratic base and many independents. But to ensure victory we need to reach more independents. Ads in local newspapers is the way to do that here. If we can raise just $10,000 we will be able to launch a series of ¼ page ads that will focus on the issues that we know will bring the votes. Join the ruralevolution, donate today!" (Perhaps a bit over the top there at the end.)

I hope this can be of some use.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se