VA-Sen: Gillespie in next week

[RogueBeaver]

Per NYT. Warner will stomp him if he somehow gets through the folks who loved Jackson.

[windjammer]

Mark Warner= the next casey. Overestimated, hé will win decently but not by a landslide

[RogueBeaver]

Gillespie thinks he'll be fine in a convention. Warner's a hard charger who relishes a good fight. Ridiculously easy oppo book: BUSHIE LOBBYIST. Especially LOBBYIST.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Mark Warner= the next casey. Overestimated, hé will win decently but not by a landslide

Warner's popular for a reason. He will actually campaign, and loves doing it.

[MATTROSE94]

I'm still thinking that Mark Warner easily wins re-election with around 55-60% of the vote.

[moderatevoter]

Warner will win, barring the climate getting incredibly toxic, but I think the margin will not be what it was for him in 2008. I'm thinking Warner gets between 53% (low estimate) and 57% of the vote.

[henster]

It won't be 2008 but even in a wave Warner would still win. It's a joke that Republicans think Gillespie could make this competitive.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Warner will win, barring something completely unforeseen, but I think the margin will not be what it was for him in 2008. I'm thinking Warner gets between 53% (low estimate) and 57% of the vote.

Well, it's near impossible for the environment to be as favorable as in 2008 and for his opponent to be as inept as Gilmore.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

It won't be 2008 but even in a wave Warner would still win. It's a joke that Republicans think Gillespie could make this competitive.

Gillepsie will make Warner compete, but as somebody already stated, Warner loves to campaign and would do it if he was the only name on the ballot, so it is not like Gillespie is the one forcing him on the trail...

[Devils30]

I'm thinking 55-44 Warner. Just don't see Gillespie winning Appalachian Virginia by anything even close to Romney or cucinnelli. And the DC burbs are gone for the GOP as is henrico and soon to be Virginia beach.

[Tender Branson]

Last poll by a Republican company was Warner+20 or so over Gillespie.

I think it's Warner by 55-60% in the end.

[LeBron]

This is awesome. The Republicans already handed a victory to Warner with this trainwreck of a candidate giving the DSCC positive light in not having to put a lot of money into here. Democrats really lucked out here to in not getting Obenshain or Bolling as the nominee because that would be competitive. This won't and I'm already calling it for Warner. Warner may want a competitive race, but we really need to put the money where it could be much more worth while like Montana or Kentucky.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Gillespie thinks he'll be fine in a convention. Warner's a hard charger who relishes a good fight. Ridiculously easy oppo book: BUSHIE LOBBYIST. Especially LOBBYIST.

Gillespie supports The Update? Endorsed.

[RogueBeaver]

Sabato: Safe D -> Likely D. Also, long Politico article on T-Mac and Warner as frenemies.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

61-38 Warner

[Vosem]

The point of Gillespie isn't to win; it's to be able to raise money and expand the fight to Virginia, draining money to what would otherwise have been a safely Democratic seat from more competitive places. It may also be to raise Gillespie's own name recognition for a future run for some other office (akin to Mark Warner's own unsuccessful Senate campaign in 1996). Even in a landslide, it's doubtful Gillespie could win (unless Warner seriously stumbles, which is doubtful).

[RogueBeaver]

The point of Gillespie isn't to win; it's to be able to raise money and expand the fight to Virginia, draining money to what would otherwise have been a safely Democratic seat from more competitive places. It may also be to raise Gillespie's own name recognition for a future run for some other office (akin to Mark Warner's own unsuccessful Senate campaign in 1996). Even in a landslide, it's doubtful Gillespie could win (unless Warner seriously stumbles, which is doubtful).

Except Warner's a 9-digit man like Romney. Money sink is irrelevant.

[Vosem]

The point of Gillespie isn't to win; it's to be able to raise money and expand the fight to Virginia, draining money to what would otherwise have been a safely Democratic seat from more competitive places. It may also be to raise Gillespie's own name recognition for a future run for some other office (akin to Mark Warner's own unsuccessful Senate campaign in 1996). Even in a landslide, it's doubtful Gillespie could win (unless Warner seriously stumbles, which is doubtful).

Except Warner's a 9-digit man like Romney. Money sink is irrelevant.

Hasn't Warner frequently been a significant donor to Democratic candidates in the past? Money Warner is forced to spend on his own election is money that can't be pumped into competitive races, now or in the future.

[free my dawg]

So? Like the Beaver said, when you have that much money and you're that popular, you can get by with self-funding.

[Vosem]

So? Like the Beaver said, when you have that much money and you're that popular, you can get by with self-funding.

It's money that Warner won't be donating to Democrats in other, legitimately competitive races and won't be able to use in a future campaign. This is Republicans expanding the playing field onto Democratic turf; it cannot be spun as a positive for Democrats.

[IceSpear]

Mark Warner= the next casey. Overestimated, hé will win decently but not by a landslide

Well, that might happen if Warner does nothing the entire year like Casey. But if Warner actually runs a campaign, he'll win in a landslide.

[morgieb]

Gillespie isn't a strong candidate anyway, Warner does not need to run much of a campaign to beat him.

[henster]

So? Like the Beaver said, when you have that much money and you're that popular, you can get by with self-funding.

It's money that Warner won't be donating to Democrats in other, legitimately competitive races and won't be able to use in a future campaign. This is Republicans expanding the playing field onto Democratic turf; it cannot be spun as a positive for Democrats.

Warner is worth north of 200 million dollars he can spend 30 million in this race and still drop 5-10 million in other races believe me money won't be an issue he'll still be writing checks to the DNC.

[Kevin]

It won't be 2008 but even in a wave Warner would still win. It's a joke that Republicans think Gillespie could make this competitive.

It was also a joke McAuliffe would win.

That being said Warner will probably win imo barring a strong wave for the GOP. However, it will probably be comparable to Bob Casey's win in 2012, i.e. comfortable but very underwhelming in comparison to his first term win.

[henster]

E.W. Jackson may be considering running if it's Gillespie vs. Jackson in the convention I'd say Jackson would have the edge. Now a Warner/Jackson race would be 2008 no doubt Warner would probably do even better than he did in 2008.