Cranky Post-Election Notes
|
|
1. We should thank Jim Gilmore for running. With Warner’s crushing money advantage, there was no one who had a strong chance against him. But Gilmore gamely went ahead and ran. He got out there and put forth conservative ideas, running with a small campaign budget all over the state talking to people, without a whole lot of help from Republican elected officials. In fact, even people who aren’t much involved in politics noted that “not a whole lot of help” coming from elected officials. If said elected officials notice not a whole lot of warmth lately from their constituents, they, the electeds, should wonder if perhaps their disappointing “not a whole lot of help” was noted by said constituents. Yes, of course, politicians have to be self-protective. But one would hope for a little more skill in balancing “helping your friends” and “watching out for yourself.”
And if you think I am writing about you and you ask, “Why would I help him? He didn’t have a chance?” I ask you, if you are an elected person and/or party leader of some kind, how did you let things get to the point where we got a Mega Money guy against Gilmore? Couldn’t you have seen this matchup coming? Could you have taken steps to get another candidate or arrange for more/better money? Exactly what leadership did you show early in 2007, or late in 2006, as you saw the possibility of this matchup coming along?
What did Casey Stengel say, “Doesn’t anybody here know how to play this game?
2. Terry McAuliffe’s run for governor makes McDonnell’s campaign more difficult. The upside: three Democrats spending money to fight each other. But there is a whole lot of Democratic money out there. Think of it this way… Obama spend over half a BILLION dollars to get elected. Yes, there’s a lot of money out there.
3. Got my invitation to the Advance, including details on some “how to” seminars. Pure. Comedy. Gold. No, I’m not going. I have better uses for my money.
on 
on
1. To me, Gilmore was to Mark Warner what Alan Keyes was to Barack Obama. Lamb. And I think some pretty high-up people were ok with that.
2. The first year of the Obama presidency will have more to do with it than McAuliffe.
3. Dontcha love how the ones who run these campaigns bring us together to teach us what they did wrong? And charge us for the privilege?
1. Yes. It was all about the benjamins (and Warner had a lot).
2. Possibly so. Though I am predicting a year-long press honeymoon for Obama.
3. Yes. [rolling eyes]
1) The problem with supporting Gilmore is that Gilmore himself was a lackluster booster for his own campaign. Part of that may have been lack of funds to effectively get himself out there, but it’s hard to convince folks to tie themselves to a campaign that’s going down by thirty points. Selfish? Sure, but it’s it selfish to ask folks to put their tails on the line for a campaign that has little to no hope?
The contentious convention also didn’t help. Gilmore did little to reach out to the Marshall supporters who had no real inspiration to reach out to Gilmore. And if Bob Marshall had been the nominee would Gilmore folks have rallied to his side or dismissed him, too?
A lot of blame has got to fall at Gilmore’s feet for this one.
2) McAuliffe comes in with a lot of money and some heavy hitters on his side. But Brian Moran and Creigh Deeds are no slouches and a LOT of money is going to get spent in this primary season. Combine that kind of publicity with national attention on how Virginia truly leans and you’ve got yourself the makings of one hell of a race next November.
But can Virginia get behind McAuliffe - a Clintonite with little to no interest in Virginia beyond his own aspirations and who sees ROVA (a term I hate, btw) as merely that stretch of land he flies over on his way to Florida? I don’t think Dems can stomach him let alone your average Virginians.
That doesn’t mean that this will be a cakewalk should McAuliffe be the nominee, Bob McDonnell is going to have to run one hell of a campaign no matter who the Dem nominee is, but I fear McAuliffe less than I do Deeds or Moran. McAuliffe brings a lot of baggage to beat him with.
3. Shuffling deck chairs….
1. I agree. There was plenty of talent to run out someone other than Gilmore, but no one had the intestinal fortitude to want to risk their career for a heads-up with Warner.
I like Bob Marshall, but for him to even come close at the convention speaks volumes about the party’s confidence in Gilmore.
Also…for the record…we did say late-2006 and early-2007 that we should consider another nominee when Davis dropped out.
2. If budget cuts do not go well, there also could be a “throw the bums out” mentality in Virginia. While still an outsider to the administration, McDonnell still is seen as a defacto head of the GOP. If House Republicans (which he was a member for so long), don’t follow McDonnell’s lead, then he will have big issues.
McAuliffe can appeal as the “change” candidate. After all, he has NO Virginia legislative experience, which doesn’t bode well for his two Democratic rivals either.
3. I think it’s time to start calling the “Advance” a “Retreat”
We need party leadership to think farther down the road and pick better candidates overall, for all kinds of future races. Seen this?
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/11/the_dems_election_day_aces_in.html
Democrats making major efforts nationwide to elect Democratic secretaries of state. Are we thinking that far ahead and that thoroughly? Not in Virginia, it doesn’t look like.
Jane - Another post on the topic from closer to home and BD contributor Norm Leahy:
http://tertiumquids.blogspot.com/2008/11/people-or-things-left-invests-in-both.html
Dems have been losing so they’ve had to get more creative in their scramble back to the top, focusing on down ticket races that impact their long term aims. Republicans have not had to think that way having been in the majority. Now we’re so far behind we have to quickly do something or we risk falling so far behind we’ll be in the darkness for a long time to come.
Which is why 2009 will be very important for Republicans in Virginia with redistricting on the horizon.
1) Honestly, I think Marshall would have outperformed Gilmore. He had a deeper grass-roots organization; he was better-liked in NoVa; and he could have energized the “base” in a way Gilmore could not.
That said, the Gilmore of 1997 could have done some serious damage to Warner. The Gilmore of 2008 just didn’t seem to have a lot of fight in him.
He had a golden opportunity to whack Warner over the head on health care spending, and he let it pass (Warner’s socialization of lower-income health care was what busted the budget - the dirty little secret of the Dem era here in VA). It was maddening. Warner’s entire campaign centered on his record as Governor, and Gilmore did nothing to challenge it.
The rest was painful history.
2) Terry Mac? Are you kidding me? He may have a lot of dough, but who won’t? Deeds is still the greater threat, IMHO. Even Moran would worry me more.
3) It’s real simple: if the GOP agrees to a tax increase, we lose next year. If not, we win. Just say No Tax Increase in 2009; call off the retreat (hey, that’s what it is!); and save the dough.