Virginia

[Devils30]

Virginia will be a swing state. And given the near misses of the Republicans in 2013 and 2014, there is probably a majority there for a Republican candidate. Romney did not lose that badly in Virginia; he carried 47.26%.

Assuming that as your baseline, a strong Republican campaign can take 49.5% of the state. Which is pretty much what they need to do to win, assuming 1.5% goes to other candidates (as it did in 2012). It's not that far of a leap from 47.26% to 49.5%. In other words, Republicans need just 85,000 more votes to get there, from the Romney total of 1,822,522.

Republicans can compete in Virginia, and Gillespie has demonstrated how a Republican can actually win the state. Particularly the point about outreach in North Virginia. I can't forecast if Virginia will go Republican in 2016, but it is plausible, reasonably so, that it can be Republican.

Except for the fact Gillespie didn't win! This was also with poor black turnout, poor DC metro area Democratic performance and the collapse of Warner with southern whites.

[Skill and Chance]

Virginia will be a swing state. And given the near misses of the Republicans in 2013 and 2014, there is probably a majority there for a Republican candidate. Romney did not lose that badly in Virginia; he carried 47.26%.

Assuming that as your baseline, a strong Republican campaign can take 49.5% of the state. Which is pretty much what they need to do to win, assuming 1.5% goes to other candidates (as it did in 2012). It's not that far of a leap from 47.26% to 49.5%. In other words, Republicans need just 85,000 more votes to get there, from the Romney total of 1,822,522.

Republicans can compete in Virginia, and Gillespie has demonstrated how a Republican can actually win the state. Particularly the point about outreach in North Virginia. I can't forecast if Virginia will go Republican in 2016, but it is plausible, reasonably so, that it can be Republican.

Unless the Republicans make some incredible outreach to Arlington County voters, I don't see the Republicans winning Virginia in 2016.

VA should be inching closer to D+1 in 2016 due to demographic drift.  It's not unwinnable for the GOP, but the last few thousand votes are much harder than in other swing states.

The real trouble starts when the Republicans regain full control federally and start aggressively cutting government jobs.  Enacting the Walker/Ryan GOP platform would irradiate them in NOVA, and if Fairfax starts voting 70% Dem like Arlington, the state will truly become reverse Georgia and fall off the map for good.

[The_Doctor]

The point is, however, consistently, statewide Republican candidates have polled in a fashion within the last 3 years to be competitive in Virginia, across all political stripes. Gillespie finished with 48%, Cucinelli 45% (to McAuliffe's 48%), and Romney (47.26%).

Re: the Arlington remark, there is some evidence in fact, that Republicans can make significant inroads into Loudon, Prince William, and Fairfax Counties (less so than the other counties, but still), while dominating Southwest Virginia, that could compose a electoral coalition enough to win the state's 13 electoral votes.

Losing the Presidential race by 4, governorship by 3, and a U.S. Senate seat by less than 1 suggests, when added up, that Republicans still are electorally viable. It does not mean that they will win, but that they do have, in fact, a route to victory.

Re: the latest post. I don't know about the government jobs situation and while that's a possibility, I dispute that demographic drift is going to accelerate enough from 2012 to 2016 to render Virginia unwinnable. In fact, exit polls in 2014 and 2012 show the same amount of demographics at play (70% white, 30% others).

[Mehmentum]

The point is, however, consistently, statewide Republican candidates have polled in a fashion within the last 3 years to be competitive in Virginia, across all political stripes. Gillespie finished with 48%, Cucinelli 45% (to McAuliffe's 48%), and Romney (47.26%).

Re: the Arlington remark, there is some evidence in fact, that Republicans can make significant inroads into Loudon, Prince William, and Fairfax Counties (less so than the other counties, but still), while dominating Southwest Virginia, that could compose a electoral coalition enough to win the state's 13 electoral votes.

Losing the Presidential race by 4, governorship by 3, and a U.S. Senate seat by less than 1 suggests, when added up, that Republicans still are electorally viable. It does not mean that they will win, but that they do have, in fact, a route to victory.

Re: the latest post. I don't know about the government jobs situation and while that's a possibility, I dispute that demographic drift is going to accelerate enough from 2012 to 2016 to render Virginia unwinnable. In fact, exit polls in 2014 and 2012 show the same amount of demographics at play (70% white, 30% others).

If the share of the white vote was the same in 2012 and 2014, that's actually bad news for Republicans.  The midterm electorate should be much more favorable to the Republicans than the presidential electorate.  If they're essentially the same, that suggests there is a trend toward the Democrats.

That being said, I agree with most of what your post.  I think Virginia is still moving leftward, just not at a pace that would place it out of play in 2016.

[Skill and Chance]

The point is, however, consistently, statewide Republican candidates have polled in a fashion within the last 3 years to be competitive in Virginia, across all political stripes. Gillespie finished with 48%, Cucinelli 45% (to McAuliffe's 48%), and Romney (47.26%).

Re: the Arlington remark, there is some evidence in fact, that Republicans can make significant inroads into Loudon, Prince William, and Fairfax Counties (less so than the other counties, but still), while dominating Southwest Virginia, that could compose a electoral coalition enough to win the state's 13 electoral votes.

Losing the Presidential race by 4, governorship by 3, and a U.S. Senate seat by less than 1 suggests, when added up, that Republicans still are electorally viable. It does not mean that they will win, but that they do have, in fact, a route to victory.

Re: the latest post. I don't know about the government jobs situation and while that's a possibility, I dispute that demographic drift is going to accelerate enough from 2012 to 2016 to render Virginia unwinnable. In fact, exit polls in 2014 and 2012 show the same amount of demographics at play (70% white, 30% others).

Re-read my post.  I don't think it's anywhere near unwinnable, any more than Florida is unwinnable for Democrats or Iowa was unwinnable for Bush in 2004.  I just think it will be a bit more left of center in 2016, but it would probably vote GOP even in only a 50/48 national victory.

[Lief 🗽]

In the last 10 years, since 2004, of the top-tier races in Virginia (President, Senate, Governor), Republicans have won only twice. Democrats have won eight times. Doesn't look like a swing state to me. Of course it will be close, because it is a polarized state, but that doesn't mean it's a toss-up swing state.

[Smash255]

The point is, however, consistently, statewide Republican candidates have polled in a fashion within the last 3 years to be competitive in Virginia, across all political stripes. Gillespie finished with 48%, Cucinelli 45% (to McAuliffe's 48%), and Romney (47.26%).

Re: the Arlington remark, there is some evidence in fact, that Republicans can make significant inroads into Loudon, Prince William, and Fairfax Counties (less so than the other counties, but still), while dominating Southwest Virginia, that could compose a electoral coalition enough to win the state's 13 electoral votes.

Losing the Presidential race by 4, governorship by 3, and a U.S. Senate seat by less than 1 suggests, when added up, that Republicans still are electorally viable. It does not mean that they will win, but that they do have, in fact, a route to victory.

Re: the latest post. I don't know about the government jobs situation and while that's a possibility, I dispute that demographic drift is going to accelerate enough from 2012 to 2016 to render Virginia unwinnable. In fact, exit polls in 2014 and 2012 show the same amount of demographics at play (70% white, 30% others).

The problem for the GOP in Virginia is in order to win they need to count on turnoff drops offs with African Americans and the suburban DC vote.  That happened this year, and while they got real close  and closer than anyone thought it still wasn't enough.  The turnout dropoff is not going to happen in a Presidential race.

[Mr. Illini]

Virginia will be a swing state. And given the near misses of the Republicans in 2013 and 2014, there is probably a majority there for a Republican candidate. Romney did not lose that badly in Virginia; he carried 47.26%.

Assuming that as your baseline, a strong Republican campaign can take 49.5% of the state. Which is pretty much what they need to do to win, assuming 1.5% goes to other candidates (as it did in 2012). It's not that far of a leap from 47.26% to 49.5%. In other words, Republicans need just 85,000 more votes to get there, from the Romney total of 1,822,522.

Republicans can compete in Virginia, and Gillespie has demonstrated how a Republican can actually win the state. Particularly the point about outreach in North Virginia. I can't forecast if Virginia will go Republican in 2016, but it is plausible, reasonably so, that it can be Republican.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You must think the largely Republican voter base who live over 100 miles outside of DC (mostly in SWVA) are particularly dumb to not know who Ed Gillespie is.  I guess Republican voters are just that uninformed about who they are voting for. 

I live in Hampton Roads. Perhaps you've heard of it?  Hint: it's not near Wise County.  We don't get DC Channels here either.  But you are correct, we are all idiots for being less familiar with an unelected political operative than with a former governor of our state.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Thinking 2016 will be the last chance for Republicans for awhile.

[Rockefeller GOP]

They are neither important nor winnable. Look up the election results in 2008 and 2012.


This is an Electoral College tie that will most likely result in a Republican being elected president. And it's the most likely victory in 2016.

I think there's a higher probability of flipping CO than WI, but fair map.

To the posters saying such absolute things, imagine the kind of "trueisms" this board would have been saying that would have been shattered just a decade or two later had it been around in the '20s or '50s or even the frickin' '90s!!  I don't think anyone in their right mind would have predicted Arkansas and West Virginia to be voting like 20%+ to the right of Virginia or Colorado, but here we are!

For the time being, VA is trending Atlas red.  That's not going to just continue until it's the next Massachusetts, most likely.  NOVA was once the most Republican part of the state by far; things change.

[solarstorm]

In the last 10 years, since 2004, of the top-tier races in Virginia (President, Senate, Governor), Republicans have won only twice. Democrats have won eight times. Doesn't look like a swing state to me. Of course it will be close, because it is a polarized state, but that doesn't mean it's a toss-up swing state.

I agree. Virginia has become another Pennsylvania/New Hampshire/Minnesota.

[Person Man]

In the last 10 years, since 2004, of the top-tier races in Virginia (President, Senate, Governor), Republicans have won only twice. Democrats have won eight times. Doesn't look like a swing state to me. Of course it will be close, because it is a polarized state, but that doesn't mean it's a toss-up swing state.

I agree. Virginia has become another Pennsylvania/New Hampshire/Minnesota.

That's probably where it will stay. I would MAYBE include Michigan in that group.  Ohio, Iowa and Florida are probably their own states, too. Wisconsin, Nevada and Colorado are probably in the middle between the two groups.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You must think the largely Republican voter base who live over 100 miles outside of DC (mostly in SWVA) are particularly dumb to not know who Ed Gillespie is.  I guess Republican voters are just that uninformed about who they are voting for. 

I live in Hampton Roads. Perhaps you've heard of it?  Hint: it's not near Wise County.  We don't get DC Channels here either.  But you are correct, we are all idiots for being less familiar with an unelected political operative than with a former governor of our state.

Nice way to re-frame the argument.  Have you heard of Ed Gillespie or not?  And if you haven't, do you consider yourself an informed voter?

Yes, I've known of him for quite some time. I also spend time on a political forum, much like 99% of other people.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You must think the largely Republican voter base who live over 100 miles outside of DC (mostly in SWVA) are particularly dumb to not know who Ed Gillespie is.  I guess Republican voters are just that uninformed about who they are voting for. 

I live in Hampton Roads. Perhaps you've heard of it?  Hint: it's not near Wise County.  We don't get DC Channels here either.  But you are correct, we are all idiots for being less familiar with an unelected political operative than with a former governor of our state.

Nice way to re-frame the argument.  Have you heard of Ed Gillespie or not?  And if you haven't, do you consider yourself an informed voter?

Yes, I've known of him for quite some time. I also spend time on a political forum, much like 99% of other people.

So are you implying that your Republican friends in the state were so uninformed that they voted for someone they never heard of even though he was a national figure from the state?  I guess now I understand why the GOP is such a mess of a party.

Um, no. I responding to your claim that Ed Gillespie had 100% name recognition, and that this proved he was so familiar to voters and potential voters that it put him on even footing with Warner. And then to your humorously dismissive and misinformed attitude toward the rest of Virginia outside of NOVA.

There were some people who voted for Gillespie without any idea of who he was because of his party. That sort of thing is normal in an election. I dare say it probably describes the majority of people who voted for the Democrat in House districts in Virginia won by incumbent Republicans.

[Adam Griffin]

It's gone. In the current political dynamic, it might as well be Wisconsin.

Of course, the Republican Party could moderate in the coming years and that could help put the state back into play - and certainly Republicans will continue to do well in statewide contests for quite some time - but the growth and trends we see in Virginia are too strong for a Generic R presidential candidate to overcome at this point. Frankly, I believe the tipping point for Virginia in presidential elections was reached circa 2006 - had it not been, I don't think Obama would have carried the state in 2012.

Now, if we ever get an actual leftist running for President, that might be enough to scare those rich NOVA-types back to the Republicans...

[SPC]

You must think the largely Republican voter base who live over 100 miles outside of DC (mostly in SWVA) are particularly dumb to not know who Ed Gillespie is.  I guess Republican voters are just that uninformed about who they are voting for. 

I live in Hampton Roads. Perhaps you've heard of it?  Hint: it's not near Wise County.  We don't get DC Channels here either.  But you are correct, we are all idiots for being less familiar with an unelected political operative than with a former governor of our state.

Nice way to re-frame the argument.  Have you heard of Ed Gillespie or not?  And if you haven't, do you consider yourself an informed voter?

Yes, I've known of him for quite some time. I also spend time on a political forum, much like 99% of other people.

So are you implying that your Republican friends in the state were so uninformed that they voted for someone they never heard of even though he was a national figure from the state?  I guess now I understand why the GOP is such a mess of a party.

Um, no. I responding to your claim that Ed Gillespie had 100% name recognition, and that this proved he was so familiar to voters and potential voters that it put him on even footing with Warner. And then to your humorously dismissive and misinformed attitude toward the rest of Virginia outside of NOVA.

There were some people who voted for Gillespie without any idea of who he was because of his party. That sort of thing is normal in an election. I dare say it probably describes the majority of people who voted for the Democrat in House districts in Virginia won by incumbent Republicans.

I understand that you think you know everything but if you are so convinced that Ed Gillespie didn't have such name recognition in Virginia, please cite some evidence rather than being a dismissive loudmouth.  The only thing humorous is the fact that you somehow seem to think that Gillespie's loss in an off-year election with low democrat turnout is anything but a sign that Virginia is now a lean democrat state. 

Was not the consensus that Warner was going to win by double digits? If so, wouldn't the hypothesis that Vriginia is a "Lean Democratic" state be effectively falsifiable, if the evidence needed to reject the null hypothesis is merely for the most popular elected official in the state winning by half a percentage point against a challenger whose chances were scoffed at?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

You must think the largely Republican voter base who live over 100 miles outside of DC (mostly in SWVA) are particularly dumb to not know who Ed Gillespie is.  I guess Republican voters are just that uninformed about who they are voting for. 

I live in Hampton Roads. Perhaps you've heard of it?  Hint: it's not near Wise County.  We don't get DC Channels here either.  But you are correct, we are all idiots for being less familiar with an unelected political operative than with a former governor of our state.

Nice way to re-frame the argument.  Have you heard of Ed Gillespie or not?  And if you haven't, do you consider yourself an informed voter?

Yes, I've known of him for quite some time. I also spend time on a political forum, much like 99% of other people.

So are you implying that your Republican friends in the state were so uninformed that they voted for someone they never heard of even though he was a national figure from the state?  I guess now I understand why the GOP is such a mess of a party.

Um, no. I responding to your claim that Ed Gillespie had 100% name recognition, and that this proved he was so familiar to voters and potential voters that it put him on even footing with Warner. And then to your humorously dismissive and misinformed attitude toward the rest of Virginia outside of NOVA.

There were some people who voted for Gillespie without any idea of who he was because of his party. That sort of thing is normal in an election. I dare say it probably describes the majority of people who voted for the Democrat in House districts in Virginia won by incumbent Republicans.

I understand that you think you know everything but if you are so convinced that Ed Gillespie didn't have such name recognition in Virginia, please cite some evidence rather than being a dismissive loudmouth.  The only thing humorous is the fact that you somehow seem to think that Gillespie's loss in an off-year election with low democrat turnout is anything but a sign that Virginia is now a lean democrat state. 

I don't need to know everything to know that there are a lot of people who are moderately informed on political issues who do not follow the careers of political operatives, given that I know some of these people. If you need corroboration just Google "Ed Gillespie name recognition"

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.nbcwashington.com/blogs/first-read-dmv/Ed-Gillespie-Announces-US-Senate-Run-in-Virginia-240546921.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/off-to-the-races/ed-gillespie-s-senate-bid-isn-t-as-crazy-as-it-seems-20140120

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/state-regional/close-senate-race-could-have-aftershocks-in-virginia-politics/article_ba100c6c-27ee-57d6-9dd1-29740757d0fe.html?mode=jqm

Given where I live I do indeed find humorous the idea that the only part of the state outside of a 100 mile radius of DC is Southwest Virginia, as it seems like a satirical reflection of both the political pull of the beltway to the detriment of the rest of the state, and a stereotypical outsider's political view of the "new" Virginia. 

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I wasn't saying that you yourself were an outsider to Virginia. I was speaking of your level of familiarity with your state. 

Our median income, and thus our tax contribution per capita, here may be a tad less than yours, but it doesn't stop us from having to pay additional sales and gas taxes to fund local transportation, while public transit funds from the state for here and the rest of the state combined amount to pennies on the dollar compared to the allocation for WMATA.

Try taking a look at some of the polls from the summer. You'll find at that point nearly half either have never heard of Gillespie or don't have an opinion of him, compared to single digits for Warner.  I'd be cautious about forming any conclusions regarding presidential elections from the results of a low turnout midterm, but the one thing one can most certainly not take from a well-known popular former Governor and incumbent Senator barely hanging on is any confirmation that Democrats can be confident they have 13 EVs in the bag.

[Non Swing Voter]

They are neither important nor winnable. Look up the election results in 2008 and 2012.


This is an Electoral College tie that will most likely result in a Republican being elected president. And it's the most likely victory in 2016.

It's amazing how accurate this was in retrospect.

[MT Treasurer]

Democrats have figured out how to squeeze out a narrow winning coalition here. It's like Colorado. Republicans are better off going after states with a lot of swingy white working class voters (Iowa, Wisconsin, Maine, New Hampshire and obviously Ohio).

^Winner. And it didn’t even take the Trump "realignment" for him to arrive at the only right conclusion.

[slothdem]

They are neither important nor winnable. Look up the election results in 2008 and 2012.


This is an Electoral College tie that will most likely result in a Republican being elected president. And it's the most likely victory in 2016.

It's amazing how accurate this was in retrospect.

Minus ME-02, he correctly got the EXACT Republican path to 270 in 2016. That's incredibly impressive and the type of foresight that campaigns spend millions of dollars to do less well. This thread is full of some interesting takes, and it's funny to see how on the mark a lot of people were about this state. It's amazing that more people on this board still don't understand the political reality in Virginia - there are just not enough Republican voters for them to carry the state in all but the most unusual circumstances.

[Non Swing Voter]

They are neither important nor winnable. Look up the election results in 2008 and 2012.


This is an Electoral College tie that will most likely result in a Republican being elected president. And it's the most likely victory in 2016.

It's amazing how accurate this was in retrospect.

Minus ME-02, he correctly got the EXACT Republican path to 270 in 2016. That's incredibly impressive and the type of foresight that campaigns spend millions of dollars to do less well. This thread is full of some interesting takes, and it's funny to see how on the mark a lot of people were about this state. It's amazing that more people on this board still don't understand the political reality in Virginia - there are just not enough Republican voters for them to carry the state in all but the most unusual circumstances.

yes that's right.  Virginia is basically 46% that will always vote D.  40% that will always vote R.  Maybe 14% in the middle or so, so basically everything has to go right for Republicans to win.  Their problem too is that the electorate is polarized largely on education levels so NoVa tends to have higher turnout.  Virginia is not a good fit for Republicans in the current environment.  Though if Dems push too hard on socialism, this will be one of the first states to slip.