iI spoke with a prominent GOP consultant yesterday, one who has helped Republicans win elections in Virginia and in a number of other states. I asked him how he saw 2009 shaping up.
Ths is what he told me.
He said he thought that 2009 should be a good year for Republicans in Virginia for two reasons.
First, he suggested that the Republican base, at least the moment, is more excited about McDonnell (and perhaps simply about winning again) than the Democrats are about Deeds. In a close election, this might be worth a couple of points.
More importantly, he contended that independents are looking more like Republicans than Democrats for the first time in years. In 2006, the war and a generalized anti-Bush sentiment pushed independents into the Democratic camp. In 2008, the economy, an even stronger anti-Bush sentiment, and Obama’s message of hope compounded GOP problems with independent voters.
This year, by contrast, polls are showing something very different in multiple states. Independents are most concerned about the economy and this is followed by worries about government spending. With Obama’s job approval rating way down, Republicans are the benficiaries of the issue landscape.
In Virginia, he felt that McDonnell’s campaign was taking advantage of these trends while Deeds has yet to fully calibrate his efforts in the new environment.
Specifically, he contended that Kaine’s role at the DNC was making it difficult for Deeds to run as a “Kaine-Warner” Democrat without being weighted down by some of the national baggage impacting Democrats- cap and trade, card check, anxiety over health care reform.
He acknowledged that Warner was very popular, but maintained that is a popularity sans coattails.
He said that Warner’s numbers were personal (as a result of positioning himself somewhere between the Republicans and Democratic activists) and that it was simply impossible for much of this to rub off automatically on anybody else.
He concluded by noting that while the race would get closer, he felt that Deeds still has to find a way to recast the campaign if he is to stand a very good chance of winning.
Insight or just a bunch of GOP spin?
I think that he’s right about where the parties’ respective bases are at the moment, though Democrats would argue that this is often the case in August and that Democratic mobilization often comes later, witness Kaine in ‘05.
Perhaps more troubling for the Democrats, his observations about independents point to a shifting opinion landscape that is hard to deny.
My one reservation is that it may not automatically play into Republican hands. McDonnell has done a superb job to date putting Deeds on the defensive about the economic implications of cap and trade, card check, etc. But I’m not sure that the public has yet concluded that the GOP has the answers to their own economic anxieties. And before the end of the campaign, I’m certain that the Democrats will be talking about fairness, the rejection of stimulus dollars for the unemployed, and who’s most likely to keep the big boys honest.
Mark Warner?
It looks to me- from ads, campaign rhetoric, and insider gossip- that he’s the person that the Democrats believe can help transform the campaign, that if he’s willing to go on the stump and aggressively label McDonnell an extremist, the campaign might just turn around.
But it’s not clear whether he’ll do so and what the impact would be if he does.
The bottom line is this.
While there may be some weaknesses in the GOP analysis, the shifting concerns of independent voters have created a very different environment.
It is not an environment in which Republicans automatically win, but it is one to which the Democrats are still adjusting.
The Republicans are seriously underestimating Mark Warner’s ability to affect the governor’s race. He is the single most important factor in the race beyond the candidates themselves.
It’s fair to ask why the sitting governor isn’t the biggest factor. Tim Kaine’s importance has been on the wane as more and more voters question what he really accomplished over the last 4 years. It may be true that the Republican - led House of Delegates stymied Kaine’s initiatives. However, voters think in terms of what “the governor got done” not “what the legislature got done”. So, Creigh Deeds stops talking about governing in the Kaine - Warner tradition and starts talking about governing in the Warner tradition.
Mark Warner will have to decide how involved he wants to get with this year’s election. I’ll bet he gets very involved. The off-year elections in Virginia nd New Jersey are a harbinger of things to come. President Obama’s popularity is sinking, his health care plan is in jeopardy and the economy is still a very big question. President Obama cannot afford to go 0-2 in this Fall’s elections. It sets a trend that will still have momentum in November, 2010 when the entire US House of Representatives and 1/3 of the US Senate stand for re-election. President Obama is a skilled politician and he’ll press Mark Warner to get involved in what still looks like a “winnable” election. Certainly, Tim Kaine will push for this involvement unless his ego has completely overwhelmed his common sense.
What will Mark Warner do?
Mark Warner will be 61 years old when the presidential election of 2016 is held. The upside for Warner is the possibility of being on the national ticket in 2016. Arguably, as a long shot, President Obama might even be in the market for a new VP in 2012. Either way, Mark Warner has substantial political “headroom” as they say. The downside is that Warner discredits himself by being unable to help Deeds win the election. He’ll be somewhat discredited at the highest levels of the Democratic Party. However, he’ll be a lot worse off if he just says no. He’ll be somewhat discredited with Virginia’s voters. But he doesn’t have to stand for re-election in the US Senate until 2014 - a year after Deeds or McDonnell are gone. How much will people remember this governor’s election after the next one has come and gone.
I believe the political calculus clearly favors an aggressive effort by Mark Warner on behalf of Creigh Deeds.
What should the Republicans do? They should be discrediting Mark Warner now. It should be done through surrogates and not by Bob McDonnell. The Republicans should be reminding voters that Warner repeatedly said he wouldn’t raise taxes while he was running for governor and then presided over a huge tax hike once elected. They should be pinning Sen. Warner to national issues where Virginia’s independent voters generally disagree with the national Democratic Party - card check, immigration, health care, offshore drilling. They should be publishing photographs that show Mark Warner with Nancy Pelosi and/or Harry Reid.
Warner is a skilled poltician just like President Obama. He’ll play the “blue dog Democrat” card. You know, “We’re a diverse party with room for honest and appropriate debate. I don’t always agree with the party but it’s a whole better than what we were getting under Bush.”. That’s probably true. It’s also probably irrelevent. This is politics. The Republicans can’t kill Warner (in a political sense). They can’t even really hurt him much. But they can reduce the importance of his influence in this election. And that might be just enough in a close race.
Warner has a big problem with the heart of the Democratic activists right now. This group polls as making up 7% of the 10% fall in Obama’s poll numbers. They are disillusioned with the lack of action on several issues.
In Warner’s case, it appears that he is very close to United Health Care in developing his opposition to the inclusion of a public option in the Finance Committee bill. If he votes to exclude a public option but include a mandate/free rider provision, progressives believe it will be a $60 billion windfall for the insurance companies.
Such a course of action would completely demoralize the activists within the party on whom Deeds and others will rely to win in November not only to vote but to work to get out the vote.
If only 3% stay home and inactive, McDonnell wins and the Republicans pick up 8-10 seats in the House.
Warner is running a dangerous game by appearing to be in the pocket of the insurance companies.
I expect Senator Warner and Virginians-first will remember this vote, especially the name in ALL CAPS.
HB 5018 Tax reform; changes provis. for pass-thru entities, estate, cig., income, food, record. & sales tax.
floor: 04/13/04 House: VOTE: PASSAGE (52-Y 46-N)
YEAS–Alexander, Amundson, Armstrong, BaCote, Barlow, Baskerville, Bland, Brink, Bryant, Callahan, Carrico, Councill, Dillard, Ebbin, Eisenberg, Fralin, Hall, Howell, A.T., Hull, Hurt, Ingram, Johnson, Jones, D.C., Jones, S.C., Keister, Lewis, Marshall, D.W., Melvin, Miles, Moran, Morgan, Nutter, Oder, Parrish, Petersen, Phillips, Plum, Pollard, Reese, Rust, Scott, E.T., Scott, J.M., Shannon, Shuler, Sickles, Stump, Tata, Van Landingham, Van Yahres, Ward, Ware, O., Watts–52.
NAYS–Albo, Athey, Bell, Black, Byron, Cline, Cole, Cosgrove, Cox, Drake, Dudley, Frederick, Gear, Griffith, Hamilton, Hargrove, Hogan, Hugo, Janis, Joannou, Kilgore, Landes, Lingamfelter, Louderback, Marrs, Marshall, R.G., May, MCDONNELL, McDougle, McQuigg, Nixon, O’Bannon, Orrock, Purkey, Rapp, Reid, Saxman, Sherwood, Spruill, Suit, Wardrup, Ware, R.L., Weatherholtz, Welch, Wright, Mr. Speaker–46.
ABSTENTIONS–0.
NOT VOTING–Abbitt, Putney–2.
When the roll is called up yonder -
HB 5018 is a good example of where the Republicans should be undermining Mark Warner. You correctly point to Bob McDonnell as a NAY. If you looked at the Senate vote, you would see Deeds as a YEA.
It should also be remembered that this final vote was consummated after a special 6 day session called by then Gov. Warner. He emerged after the tax hike carried beaming with pride over his deception. “I will not raise your taxes” during the campaign and then pushed for a tax hike once elected.
Here’s a video of the habitual liar on the campaign trail in 2001:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CA1wQ2_aH-8
And here is the official statement from Mark “I will not raise taxes” Warner after he successfully pushed through the largest tax hike in Virginia history:
http://www.norfolk.gov/city_hall/warner_statement.asp
Yes, Creigh Deeds will probably govern in the Warner tradition.
But it gets worse. First Warner (the candidate) said he would not raise taxes. Then, Warner (the governor) did raise taxes. As always, tax hikers have a good reason why the government needs to take more of your hard earned money. This time it was education (a favorite of the tax-and-spend crowd). But did the money earmarked for education go to education? Not really. Or, at least, a lot was diverted. Here is an excellent analysis:
http://www.forwardfairfax.com/papers/withdrawals.html
The education funds were largely diverted into real estate tax decreases for 40% of Virginia’s localities. The kids didn’t get more money for school. The parents got more money for beer.
Mark Warner fully understood this scam. Here is a key quote from the article referenced above:
“The same thing had happened during the administration of Governor Gerald Baliles when many localities drastically reduced their local support for education as state aid increased. It was an action that led to creation of a “maintenance of effort” clause when Governor James Gilmore signed a K-12 education increase into law to ensure that localities did not use increased state aid to reduce their local support.
But neither Warner nor the General Assembly proposed such a clause in 2004. Nor did any member of the General Assembly propose such a clause on either the Senate or House floors.”.
It seems to me that Warner might have gotten a number of the Republicans in the General Assembly to vote for the tax hike by promising that they would be able to lower their local real estate taxes and still get more state funding from the tax hike.
Gilmore showed how to write a law where a tax increase for education is actually spent on education. Warner showed how a dishonest politician can reverse himself on his campaign pledges, push through a massive tax hike by deceitfully claiming it is for education and then write the law so it takes money from one group of Virginians and transfers it to another group largely bypassing the children it was intended to help.
You’ve got to admire a good con job when you see one.
Gentlemen, I might point out to you that governors, in fact, cannot raise taxes–only legislatures can, and they often do. The governor has the pulpit, for sure, but only the congregation can chip the collection plate. Warner’s skill was–and is–working the center isle. The increase you reference came about only because a handful of Republicans got religion and said ‘Amen!’ Of course, they were promptly hung from the nearest tree at the first decent break in the weather. Republicans are particularly adept at eating their young–as are some grades of spiders. Groveton, glad to see you on this site. Make it regular. You raise the game. Best. BKD