Rasmussen: Warner 53%, Gilmore 38%
That's a 15-point lead before the first shots have even been fired: In the 2008 Virginia Senate race, the latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds Democrat Mark Warner leading Republican Jim Gilmore 53% to 38%. Both men are former governors of the state of Virginia.
The recent numbers are almost equal to those found in October, when Warner was leading 53% to 38%.
Warner earns support from a greater percentage of women (58%) than men (47%). Interesting also in the poll was Bush's disapproval ratings (41% rated him as "poor"), and Kaine's approval ratings at 50%.
The real kicker is this: Warner's favorable/unfavorable ratings? 63%/32%.
Gilmore's favorable/unfavorable ratings? 45%/47%.
Undecideds were in the 5-8% range... about right, with a 4.5% MOE. Issues on the minds of voters? The economy, Iraq, and immigration (in that order). National security -- the nice way of saying terrorism? -- came in fourth at 16%.
Perhaps instead of navelgazing as to why one candidate or the other can win, we should start exploring how Republicans will be able to win in this climate.
WARNER VS. THE GRASSROOTS
What follows are the completely unsolicited prognostications of a a poor boy from Virginia... who also happens to have run a campaign or twooowenty.
The way you beat Mark Warner is not the way you beat George Allen. Warner will not be "macaca-ed" nor will it take a small, committed group of fanatics bleating on blogs to push the Republican over the top.
It will take grassroots. Not the kind of whiny, infectious, "how come we don't get the credit" version of sissy campaigning we've seen pass over the last five-to-ten years. We need the riled up, true blue conservatives pounding turf, stuffing mail and eat pizza while the kids play on the floor, pass the collection plate twice, door knocking and picnic-style efforts that built the Republican majority during the mid-1990s.
We need the kind of people who care so deeply about pro-life values, who worry about an ever-enroaching government, who work hard in their small businesses and come home to families they want to see grow up with opportunities of their own -- not ones handed out by the government.
In short, we need a candidate that our fiscal and social conservative base can trust.
HOW REPUBLICANS WILL BEAT MARK WARNER
Contrast. Clear, undivided, and unmitigated.
Keep this in mind: Social conservatives passed the 2006 Marriage Amendment by huge margins. Bolling and McDonnell -- social conservatives both -- outperformed Kilgore in the 2005 General Elections. Senate candidates who ran with their conservative credentials rather than against them (Miller's "walking money" notwithstanding) performed well, and in the popular vote Republicans outperformed Democrats in 2007.
This is not a state that is turning Democratic. It is a state whose demographics are changing, but whose values are still deeply rooted in community, entrepreneurship, and the conservative message.
Mark Warner will muddy the waters. The Democrats will pull all the stops, trying to get us to put "partisanship over politics" (translation: do as they want, and there'll be no problems) and paint the Republican as either a tool of President Bush or a extremist quack.
Of course, we have the drop on them.
It is not the extremist who says:
* Taxpayers should keep more of what they earn,
* Our 2nd Amendment is just defended as vigorously as the 1st,
* Free market economics create wealth and opportunity,
* Innocent life is precious at all stages,
* Small businesses deserve a chance,
* Marriage is between one man and one woman,
* Education is a parent's choice,
* The War on Terrorism must be fought -- ruthlessly at times.
To the contrary, it is the extremist who says:
* A bureaucrat will tell you on what and where your tax money will be spent,
* Guns are for bad guys (and you're not a bad guy, are you?),
* Corporations are bad, profits are evil, and wealth is for redistribution,
* Women should kill their children for the sake of convenience -- and call it "choice",
* Small businesses should assume their "fair burden" and tax their profit off the masses,
* The power of government should define marriage,
* The education of your children is the perogative of the state,
* The terrorists hate us because our politicians and soldiers instilled the hate in them during the Cold War.
Think about it. Is this not a summation of the conservative and progressive positions?
Now some might disagree with the way I characterize the progressive/liberal position on many of these issues... but the kicker is (a) it's all true, and (b) the progressive bloggers have set the bar so damn low that it's not hard to rise above.
LET'S GIVE VOTERS A CLEAR DECISION TO MAKE
Either we are serious about our conservative principles, or we aren't. We were serious in the mid-1990s when we were building our majority. We lost that fire over the last ten years, and whether it was the corruption of holding power or the wrong people in office, we've got to find a candidate who feels that same fire.
The last time I experienced a campaign with that kind of fire in Virginia was George Allen's race... in 2000. Before that, it would have been Oliver North's race in '94. Since then, true conservatives have found their time better spent at home rather than supporting so-called conservatives by fiat.
We've been sold this line before... we want a believer this time.
Mark Warner can be beaten. Badly. With sticks, if we pick the right candidate. Conservatives who have become disillusioned with the party are starting to re-emerge from their places of worship and their homes to find a Republican Party eviscerated by infighting and lukewarm leadership. Conservatives want a fresh choice, not a nuance and certainly not a return to the past.
Give us a clear up-or-down fight against Mark Warner, and we'll get the job done. Squish on issues important to us -- abortion, taxes, 2nd Amendment, or marriage -- and we may vote, but we won't be bringing the family.
|
 |
Spank That Donkey 
4 Comments:
He has the statewide visibility from two statewide victories for Attorney General and Governor. A solid record as a governor vs. Warner, and it's just time to close ranks... and push to victory.
I know you are a Gilmore man but what you have to look at is the fav/unfav average. Warner is 63/32 or 2 to I and Gilmore is 45/47 or 1 to 1. To have a 47 unfavorable is absolute certain defeat. Both men are well known and Gilmore is 20 points down in the head to head polling. That means he has to attack Warner hard. When he does it will drive his unfav's up and potentially over 50%. No one, No one, No one can get elected with over 50% unfav. Sorry friend but we need someone else.
I beg to disagree. 47% favorable means, 47% know that Gov. Gilmore was a great Governor that sent the people's money back to whom it belonged; the Citizen Tax Payers!
He has gotten bad press because the GOP Senators he put in power with his 'No Car Tax' movement was stabbed in the back by those very own Senators...
With all do respect sir, if the Senate had used the 05',06, and 07' surpluses to continue phasing out the car tax; I dare say you would have won re-election, and we would still have a majority in the Senate.
The people voted for, and still want lower taxes and limited govt. Everyone is disillusioned with what Chichester and Potts did to the GOP... I fear you were 'duped' into joining them....
Gov. Jim Gilmore swept NOVA twice, and for good reason... he was talking to the taxpayers... and not at them.....
When we see some Senator get up there and belly ache for more taxes during times of surplus... We surely wish we had a Gov. like Jim Gilmore in office and not some Warner - Kaine rah, rah, big Govt.. types egging on GOP Senators, to raise taxes?
Gov. Gilmore is the Leadership the people appreciate... and with this recession looming... they will trust him again!
Mark Warner's record is going to stand up to scrutiny by someone who has been there, and knows what he is talking about?
The new residents to NOVA since his last victory in 97' are begging for a tax increase via the Federal Govt? Hardly.... Quit believing what the WaPo writes... it's a dying newspaper and for good reason....
Post a Comment
Home