Virginia 2009 Megathread

[War on Want]

My opinion of Schweitzer has gone down quite a bit. I dislike blatant oppurtunism.

[Rowan]

I loved the RGA's response:

Who is Brian Schweitzer?

[Lunar]

Ironic because:  What is the RGA?

[JohnnyLongtorso]

It's obvious, ain't it?  Terry has hella national connections and Schweitzer is ambitious.  Terry's backing could jumpstart a presidential campaign from a nobody to a second-tier candidate overnight

But he is also the DGA chair. And losing a swing state governorship under his watch isn't going to exactly endear him among the Democratic establishment. Especially now that Obama controls it, not the Clintons.

wasnt Schweitzer a obama supporter in the primaries anyways? i think his endorsing terry probably has alot to do with terry promising to raise alot of money for governors or something like that.

Schweitzer endorsed Obama in June, at which point Obama's nomination was all but assured, so he was not an enthusiastic Obama supporter.

[Rowan]

Ironic because:  What is the RGA?

Uhh, the Republican Governor's Association. You know the counterpart to the DGA, which Schweitzer is the head of. DUH.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Ironic because:  What is the RGA?

Uhh, the Republican Governor's Association. You know the counterpart to the DGA, which Schweitzer is the head of. DUH.

You're really sharp, aren't you?

[Rowan]

Ironic because:  What is the RGA?

Uhh, the Republican Governor's Association. You know the counterpart to the DGA, which Schweitzer is the head of. DUH.

You're really sharp, aren't you?

My mom says I'm special.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Ironic because:  What is the RGA?

Uhh, the Republican Governor's Association. You know the counterpart to the DGA, which Schweitzer is the head of. DUH.

You're really sharp, aren't you?

My mom says I'm special.

I can assure you, she is right.
Just not in the way you seem to think.

[Meeker]

Ironic because:  What is the RGA?

Uhh, the Republican Governor's Association. You know the counterpart to the DGA, which Schweitzer is the head of. DUH.

You are sooooo stupid.

[Rowan]

Hey, I don't care if you think I'm lying. I could provide a link to prove it, but it's not worth it.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Hey, I don't care if you think I'm lying. I could provide a link to prove it, but it's not worth it.

AKA it doesn't exist.

[Rowan]

Oh, this doesn't exist?

http://www.buenavistatownship.org/Media_Links_2007/School%20News/jun_2007.htm#Buena%20Regional%20graduates%20ready%20to%20help%20fix%20the%20world%206/12/07

Do you want a copy of my speech too?

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Hi, can you please keep your pissing contest out of my Virginia thread please?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Deeds signs are going up all over Arlington.  He's got huge momentum, and I think he will do much better in NOVA than I had previously thought.

[Rowan]

I can't believe how badly Terry has imploded. I'm worried about facing Deeds.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Deeds signs are going up all over Arlington.  He's got huge momentum, and I think he will do much better in NOVA than I had previously thought.

Good to hear. I've seen zero Deeds signs in Hampton Roads and a whopping three Moran signs. McAuliffe has a bunch of signs in Chesapeake and I've seen some in Suffolk, Hampton, and Virginia Beach as well.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

McAuliffe seems to be very focused on signs.  He has a massive amount in this area; it's very irritating.

[Lief 🗽]

Here's why I think that Deeds won't win, and someone who thinks he's going to win can disagree with me if they want. Deeds' entire strategy, and indeed probably the reason he's surged so much, has been putting money into a lot of TV ad buys, to the point that he's laid off staffers. This (along with the WaPo endorsement maybe) have caused his numbers to surge in the past few weeks. However, I have a hard time believing that this new support is not soft; I would guess that they're largely Democrats who've seen Deeds on TV and liked what he's saying. But these aren't the people that are going to turn out in a primary with literally less than 10% turnout by themselves. And Deeds now lacks the staff to get these people out to vote. It's also pretty much impossible to ID these people who have switched to Deeds within the last week or two purely based on ads, so he couldn't GOTV them even if he wanted to.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Here's why I think that Deeds won't win, and someone who thinks he's going to win can disagree with me if they want. Deeds' entire strategy, and indeed probably the reason he's surged so much, has been putting money into a lot of TV ad buys, to the point that he's laid off staffers. This (along with the WaPo endorsement maybe) have caused his numbers to surge in the past few weeks. However, I have a hard time believing that this new support is not soft; I would guess that they're largely Democrats who've seen Deeds on TV and liked what he's saying. But these aren't the people that are going to turn out in a primary with literally less than 10% turnout by themselves. And Deeds now lacks the staff to get these people out to vote. It's also pretty much impossible to ID these people who have switched to Deeds within the last week or two purely based on ads, so he couldn't GOTV them even if he wanted to.

The thing is, Deeds is leading among the die-hard primary voters (people who voted in the 05, 06, or 07 primaries), who are going to go and vote without prompting by any of the candidates. Besides, if turnout is above, say, 5%, McAuliffe will almost certainly win, because that means he'll have gotten the 08 primary voters to come out.

Also, it's not as if Deeds has laid off his entire staff. It's not like you need a huge number of people to turn out an extra few thousand voters.

[Lunar]

the url function was created for a reason

[Eraserhead]

I find it a little weird that nobody here is even talking about the possibility of a Moran win when he is essentially in the margin of error with the other two. I don't think he'll win but it's definitely possible. I hope he shocks the Atlas Forum Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections board on Tuesday. God speed, Mr. Moran.

[Keystone Phil]

I can't believe how badly Terry has imploded. I'm worried about facing Deeds.

[Lunar]

I don't know why people want Moran to win.  If he wins it's only because he ran enough negative ads that he deteriorated his opponents' images more than "going negative" destroyed his own.

He's run a horrible campaign and politically he's not the type of candidate in the mold of Warner, Kaine, and Wilder who is going to be able to beat McDonnell.  Deeds is a bit fumbling, but he's smart and authentic.  Even if he's 15%-40% more bluedoggy than desirable or what have you, he'll have probably a four to five times better chance at beating Bob in November.

Off-year elections in purple states are not about putting forward the most liberal candidate possible.

[Eraserhead]

Most elections are about putting forth the most liberal candidate for me. I vote based on ideology 90% of the time. I don't usually vote based on "who has the best shot at beating so and so" scenarios. It's just too depressing and dull.

Granted, I do favor Deeds over McAuliffe but that isn't because he's more electable. It's just because McAuliffe is basically The Devil.

[Lunar]

Most elections are about putting forth the most liberal candidate for me. I vote based on ideology 90% of the time. I don't usually vote based on "who has the best shot at beating so and so" scenarios. It's just too depressing and dull.

So you don't think it's important to nominate good candidates?  It doesn't matter if someone is a horrible campaigner who will likely lose?

Club for Growth thinks like that