How Jim Gilmore Can Win

By Chase | June 20, 2008
Filed Under Campaigns and Elections |

There is no one who disputes that Mark Warner enters the summer with a sizeable lead over Jim Gilmore in the Virginia Senate race, both in the published polls and in fundraising. That said, it is premature to believe that this race is over.

If Jim Gilmore wants to win, there are a number of areas he might highlight.

Without question, Gilmore heads into the teeth of this race with a whole lot of ground to make up. Worse yet, every poll that I’ve seen shows Warner with well over 50-percent, a significant figure to overcome. Warner also enjoys a hearty fundraising edge over Gilmore, with a cash-on-hand advantage to the tune of a ratio of 23-to-1 as of mid-May (See here). This clearly means that Gilmore — at least as it seems now — will be handicapped as far as running television ads to match Warner, particularly in the enormously expensive and voter-rich locale of Northern Virginia.

Any freshman poli-sci student can tell you all of those things, but it takes a little bit more looking-into to see where Gilmore can find his way to victory.

1 - Energy Policy: Warner will be compelled to adhere to the Democrat orthodoxy against drilling for new oil deposits either on the outer continental shelf or on the north slope of Alaska. Gilmore can safely be firmly for it. National polls show that Americans overwhelmingly support aggressive drilling, even among Florida residents (!).

2 - Tax Policy: There is no doubt that Gilmore has copies of the Warner for Governor ads that featured the then-candidate looking into the camera, saying, “I will not raise your taxes.” History, of course, tells us a different story about that pledge. Gilmore, on the other hand, has absolute credibility on the issue of taxes, having fought an often-obstinate General Assembly on his signature campaign promise of car tax relief.

Additionally, it will be a challenge for Warner to oppose Barack Obama’s plan to overturn the Bush tax cuts, which translates into a huge tax increase. With an admitted tax-raiser at the top of his ticket, Warner can be easily tarred with that brush. Gilmore, on the other hand, can comfortably run with John McCain, who says he wants to make the tax cuts permanent.

In this economy, with the price of gas as it is and such things as groceries rising in cost, no Virginia voter would like to hear that his taxes are going up. Gilmore could well benefit from a so-called “tax revolt.”

3 - John McCain: Despite heavy breathing from the media and liberal blogs, it is a pretty safe bet that John McCain will carry Virginia, as the Republican candidate has done in every presidential election since Lyndon Johnson won the Commonwealth in 1964. Talk of some crossover voting or ticket-splitting may be valid, but there is no question that Gilmore will benefit from the top of his ticket winning the day.

4 - The Military Vote: Again, McCain figures into this one strongly. There are slightly more than 800,000 veterans in Virginia. One voter in four is either in the military, has a child in the miltary, is retired from the military or works for the military in some fashion. While he has not yet made it part of his persona as much as he might, Gilmore can lay claim to having been an Army intellegence officer.

Additionally, people who vote along national defense issues are likely to be drawn to McCain, not Obama, which again benefits Gilmore.

5 - Running with the POTUS Nominee: Gilmore will not be shy about running with John McCain as a ticket mate. Warner will likely only affix himself to Obama in places where it is safe, such as Northern Virginia (which, admittedly has a huge portion of the voters). There will be many times when Warner will be asked to agree or disagree with positions Obama has taken, and many times it will be tricky for him to answer, depending on the issue. For example, in Southwest Virginia, how would Warner answer the question about Obama’s support of handgun bans? Tying Warner to Obama in rural areas would be helpful to Gilmore, particularly given Obama’s remarks about “bitter” people clinging to guns and religion. Expect television ads to reflect that exact sentiment.

This is not to discount the tremendous inroads Warner made in the rural areas in 2001, when he ran extremely strong in those places. The challenge for him will be to repeat it.

Gilmore should also benefit from McCain’s strength in the defense industry-rich area of Northern Virginia. Those people know that when military-minded people are in office, it means good, high-paying jobs.

Those are my thoughts at this early stage, nearly five months away from Election Day. Make no mistake, Gilmore has a tremendous uphill battle, but there are avenues he can take to get there. It won’t be easy, and it won’t be pretty. But it is possible.

Comments

20 Responses to “How Jim Gilmore Can Win”

D.J. McGuire on June 20th, 2008 5:14 am

Warner’s already departing from the script on offshore oil drilling.

Gilmore has to hit him on taxes.

Every.

Single.

Day.

For.

The.

Next.

Five.

Months.
Brian Kirwin on June 20th, 2008 7:52 am

Warner has a record on vetoing offshore drilling.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?051+sum+SB1054
Ted on June 20th, 2008 8:46 am

Oil/gas
Taxes
Constitutional rights for terrorists
Illegal immigration
Crystal Clear Conservative on June 20th, 2008 9:34 am

In order for Gilmore to win, he needs to address the energy issue and drill Warner on taxes. It’s easy as ABC 123.
Britt Howard on June 20th, 2008 10:13 am

Gilmore will get my vote. McCain wont. I won’t suffer the lesser of two (evils)liberals any longer. Give me somebody to vote for!

Gilmore kept his word. He fought a princpled fight for the car tax relief and delivered.

Warner lied. Warner conveniently blames Gilmore for what a bad economy did….a bad economy that affected every state not just Virginia! I remember what happend to my 401k! When the stock market tanked that meant disaster for tax revenue.

How about when Virginia was moving out of recession and “Chicken Little” Gov. Warner told us we had a budget shortfall that needed the largest tax increase ever or we were all doomed. Meanwhile reports had already come out in March/April that tax revenues were making a huge comeback and it was projected that the budget would be balanced. Sure enough it would have been! It didn’t stop Warner from continuing to claim the ’sky was falling’.

I agree with other posters, other good issues will be energy policy and illegal immigration.
Crystal Clear Conservative on June 20th, 2008 11:37 am

Britt Howard,

I concur with your remarks on McCain…he will not be getting my vote either.
Spank That Donkey on June 20th, 2008 12:14 pm

Britt:
What if Duncan Hunter was the VP? The guy is 71
Britt Howard on June 20th, 2008 12:49 pm

Morbid thought though a bit funny there Spank. Sad we have to even entertain hopes that somebody will die or become incapacitated to get a decent guy/gal in office.

McCain has served his country. I can only wish him the best of health. Hmmmm…..I could hope he resigns out of frustration or some scandal!
French Donald Mackes, Jr. on June 20th, 2008 1:17 pm

I attended the Republican Party of Virginia convention in Richmond on May 31, 2008 and I voted for Bob Marshall. Jim Gilmore barely won that day. However, he did win it.

Now, I fully support Jim Gilmore for US Senate. He is clearly the superior candidate in this race at this time.

I agree with your strategic advice for Gilmore’s campaign. Money helps but it does not always make ensure victory for the wealthiest candidate.

http://www.votefrench.com/
Terri K on June 20th, 2008 1:58 pm

What!?! Y’all aren’t voting for McCain???? I thought the Paultards were the only ones unhappy with our nominee…

As for Gilmore:

The economy, energy prices and taxes, not necessarily in that order. And a few Perot-style charts might be a good thing.
Chase on June 20th, 2008 1:59 pm

Warner is extremely vulnerable on oil/energy.

As Drudge says: Developing …
Britt Howard on June 20th, 2008 3:03 pm

Terri, you must be kidding! Ok, yes…..Ron Paul supporters don’t like McCain. That does not cover all the people that think McCain is a poor choice. Taking out the fiscal conservatives that voted for Ron Paul, you still have the fiscal conservatives that didn’t vote for Paul but, still think McCain is a McLiberal. Then you have Christians that whether they are Pat Robertson fans or not, don’t care for McCain calling Robertson and Falwell “agents of intolerance”.
Then how about the people where illegal immigration is the biggest issue? How about the people that UNLIKE McGlobal Warming think that Al Gore is inhaling where Clinton left off?
I question why McCain is even in the GOP!
Chase on June 20th, 2008 4:16 pm

Okey dokey. If enough people think like that (which I don’t think is true), then say hello to President Obama.

If so, then, congratulations. You won your little ideological war, but lost the White House.

Good for you.
Britt Howard on June 20th, 2008 5:11 pm

I would rather suffer a few beatings and show the party that real conservatives need to be nominated than sell out and have the party move that far to the left to stay.

As Rush Limbaugh said, a McCain victory brings the risk that running to the left and foresaking our ideals will be seen as the “New” and only way to beat the Dems now.

Are the Republicans a party of principle or are we just two football teams where victory is the only measure of success?
Chase on June 20th, 2008 5:47 pm

I don’t know. What do you measure as success? Winning an ideological war?

Which America is safer over the next four year? Under President McCain or President Obama?

You take your ideological victory if you want. I choose national security instead.
Brian Kirwin on June 20th, 2008 7:17 pm

Ron Paul supporters think that they can get their way even after losing elections. If you’re on the losing side, it doesn’t matter much what your ideology was - it’s not being implemented.

When their “ideological purity” actually wins a big election, let me know. Nationally, it never rises above fringe status, and they can’t seem to figure out why.
Britt Howard on June 21st, 2008 7:45 am

Chase,Ideological victory over national security? First, there is no ideological victory when we have to settle for McCain. Secondly, because Republicans won’t be as motivated to go to the polls and Obama wins there goes your national security anyway. As horrible a scenario as it is,if Hillary was the opponent I think many Republicans would swallow their disdain and go out to vote just to defeat Hillary. Now we have to find reason to bring victory for McCain and those reasons are lacking.

Brian, you are going to be in the exact same position as Ron Paul supporters. If Obama wins your ideology, won’t be implemented either. If McCain manages to win it will be determined that the party must run far left and you will continually have a liberal in the Whitehouse regardless of party. So, unless you’re a liberal in GOP clothing, your ideology won’t be implemented there either. It is a lose lose situation.
The group of people that “can’t seem to figure out why” aren’t the purists. It is the rest of the party that can’t figure out why there are all these Ron Paul supporters here now and why do we have to put up with them. The same people that won’t figure out why turnout for a liberal wing Republican will be lighter than expected. They aren’t all Ron Paul supporters, that will stay home.
Ron Paul and the lack of recent Republican victories are a symptom of a problem that certain people “can’t seem to figure out”.

As for an ideological purist winning a big election……how about Ronald Reagan? Not perfect but, close enough for me. The first term of President Bush was absolutely good enough. At the time all that spending was needed to bring us out of recession. Too bad it didn’t slow down later.

Agree with me or not, the fact that many won’t settle for McCain is a problem that needs to be figured out and solved.
Brian Kirwin on June 21st, 2008 3:47 pm

No, we’re wondering why “all these Ron Paul supporters” were so small in number that they lost primary after primary by huge margins and don’t seem to notice.
Chase on June 22nd, 2008 1:06 pm

Perhaps you misunderstand what I mean by “ideological victory.” By that I mean, you are so dyed-in-the-wool of this candidate or other so as to vote for him at the expense of the candidate who will so obviously win.

Let’s take this very election for example.

John McCain is the Republican nominee, there can be no disputing that. Yet, come November, some Ron Paul types and others may insist on voting for someone other than McCain.

That may or may not swing the election to Obama, depending on what state we’re talking about.

The “idelogical victory” I’m talking about is purely personal and mental among those people who would rather make a point than win an election.

They would rather Obama win to prove their point that they are right — the 10-percent that they are.

To paraphrase Yoda: “Pathetic, I would say, they are.”
GOP Rock on June 23rd, 2008 9:49 pm

Britt Howard and Real Clear Conservative:

Not voting for McCain is a vote for Obama which means:

* Liberal Supreme Court Justices

* With a democrat Congress, the 2nd Amenedment will be weaken beyond “repair”.

* Increased taxes and more government entitlements (e.g. Universal healthcare, etc.)

* No further oil exploration in the US

* ETC. ETC