Fundrace 2009

An interesting dynamic is already developing in the 2009 governor's race. So far, McDonnell has raised $10.7 million through 6/30/09, compared to Jerry Kilgore having raised $8.6 million through 6/30/05. While this seems like a positive, the question is whether the party committees are front loading their contributions.

Kilgore's 3 largest donors were the RGA ($2.87 million), RPV ($1.64 million), and RNC ($886,000); with all but $352,000 coming in the late stages of the campaign to fund TV ads and mail. This means only 4% of his funds came from the major party committees in the early going; while the rest came from major donors, PACs and individuals.
Compare that to McDonnell who has already received $1.98 million from RGA and $1.5 million from RNC. This represents 32% of all receipts.

One of the reasons for this is the lack of major donors so far in this campaign. For example, Philip Wendel gave $193,500 to Kilgore through this period; while he has given $20,000 to McDonnell.
Alpha Natural Resources gave Kilgore $82,500 through 6/30 (they also gave Kaine $10,000); while they have given McDonnell $5,000 (and Deeds $11,000) so far.
In fact, the only major donor that has matched their previous performance is Walter Curt at $100,000 in both 2005 & 2009.

Another problem is the fundraisers. Kilgore had a fundraiser at Dwight Schar's McLean residence with President Bush that raised $3 million. Bob McDonnell will not have that luxury, but Creigh Deeds will get the opposite in the form of a joint fundraiser of President Obama and DNC Chair Kaine. In addition, Deeds will get the fundraising ability of Senators Warner and Webb as well as the 3 very powerful congressmen in the VA democratic delegation, compared to Kilgore having John Warner, George Allen, as well as 8 GOP Congressmen (most of which in high ranking positions). The only high-profile person Bob will have is Eric Cantor.

Everyone agrees contributions will be tougher to come by with the economic climate the way it is. Additionally, money will likely pour in from all over the country as the various party loyalists try to launch a "re-emergence" by winning the VA and NJ governor's races. Even so, with the current fundraising ability of the democrats; I fear McDonnell could lose the money war if he cannot raise from individuals and PACs and relies entirely on out-of-state money.

And as I have said before: When the Republicans lose the money war, they lose the election...

Broadband Stimulus Story

The following is guest posted by "The Geek Squad"

While all the focus of the media and blogs these past few months has been about health care reform, another important issue is slowly moving its way through the FCC and Congress. From banks, to the automobile industry, health care, to now the internet. Our government is in the process of shelling out over $7 BILLION dollars in grants as part of the economic stimulus package to phone, cable, and internet providers. OR ARE THEY?
A little over half of the money is set to go towards ‘broadband infrastructure investment over the next two years’, specifically in un-served and underserved areas of the country to both promote broadband usage and to also sure-up public safety communications. This part sounds all well and good.
However, like every other needless service government provides, there is a catch, one that may cause some of the biggest phone, cable, and internet providers (Cox, Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, etc) to say ‘no’ to any of these grants and all of this seemingly ‘free’ government cheese.
The catch; anyone receiving any of this grant money must adhere to the strict net-neutrality guidelines laid forth by the federal government and the FCC. (Sounds pretty similar to the caveats associated with TARP Funds, remember?)
First off, “net-neutrality”, is a mis-coined term, one that is supposed to describe the ability of all data that travels over the internet to be ‘equal’. Achieving complete and total equality though is impossible. Every network needs to be, and currently is, managed. Network management practices provide consumers with safe, reliable, and high quality broadband services to access the internet. The difference here is, do you want your government managing and regulating your internet or your private internet provider?
It should be noted that it is already illegal for any provider block, interfere, or degrade any access to the internet. Consumers can already go anywhere they want on the web, use any tool and software they want, access any content they want, and use any service online they’d like. Everything is available to everyone. What’s does the government think is not equal or not being made available to the public?
I guess one answer to that question, is internet service to rural areas, but instead of buying-off companies with our tax dollars to lay rural broadband infrastructure, the federal government should simply pause, and wait for the private sector with its own money to build it. In the past 10 years, private company investment in broadband networks has tallied over $850 million. Over the past four years, broadband connectivity has skyrocketed to up over 300%, totaling more than 100 million wired, wireless, and satellite broadband connections in the United States. Did you catch that?
Internet connectivity is increasing by over 300%, on a 10-year $850 million investment from private internet companies over the past 4-years. Our government wants to now spend over $7 BILLION this year. What’s the definition of ‘overkill’? Is it any wonder our national deficit is out of control.
I guess we should expect a 2,460% increase in broadband usage over the next couple years. I doubt it though.

Yet another great example of why another stimulus will be about as successful as the last one.

House Leadership

In regards to my previous post, I think we need to begin our search for our next leader of the House of Delegates. Many speculate that this cycle will be Speaker Howell's last, and that he will retire after the 2011 session.
Right now the names as potential replacements are Kirk Cox and Morgan Griffith, the two other current members of leadership. While I know of no particular reason neither of them should not serve in this position; I hope the GOP will look for and choose someone who has all the necessary characteristics.

While there is no question Vance Wilkins has his problems; it is very difficult to challenge his effectiveness. Under his watch the GOP House caucus grew greatly in size (in no small help by redistricting). The other key was the unified caucus he brought to bear that has been somewhat shaky under Speaker Howell's tenture (2004 sales tax among others). In order to be successful, we need someone who can plat a vision and hold everyone together to accomplish their goals.

We need someone else in Vance's vein, someone with a wide knowledge of the state's politics as well as someone who has a job and position that allows them to devote much more time to recruiting and rallying the troops. This has been one diffidult thing for Speaker Howell; as he has a one man law practice that requires a large amount of his time.

At this point I do not have any names to suggest; I just hope we stop the automatic assent strategy employed in the past. That is not always the best way to get the best people in the best positions.

Speaker Howell's Optimism

For those of you out there not on Speaker Howell's email list, here is the latest release...

Dear Fellow Virginian,
After last week's primary elections, we have finalized the best possible slate of Republican House of Delegates candidates to join our outstanding statewide ticket - McDonnell, Bolling, and Cuccinelli - for the November election. We're now less than 5 months away from Election Day and the Dominion Leadership Trust is working hard as the political campaign committee supporting our efforts to expand our majority in the House of Delegates. Growing our majority in the House of Delegates is more important than ever as we work together to stop Virginia's tax-and-spend Democrats. This year, our majority successfully defended Virginia's small businesses from more Democrat-backed regulation and taxes, protecting the backbone of our state's economy. Imagine what we can do when we pair an expanded majority with Republican Bob McDonnell in the Governor's mansion. As Speaker of the House of Delegates, I need you as a member of our team, the Dominion Leadership Trust. We'll be sending you updates on how you can join our efforts to not only keep, but expand our majority in November. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Speaker Bill Howell
Virginia House of Delegates

I have to give it to Speaker Howell, he is an optimistic guy. We have seen 3 consecutive cycles of net GOP losses in the HOD as well as numerous special elections. Apparently we aren't going to simply hold the House of Delegates, we are going to win a net increase in seats. Also, maybe he should refer to his group of folks as the tax/fee/borrow-and-spend Republicans.

While I have very little confidence in this actually happening, it is something people should be focusing on. With the current GOP tally at 53 (55 if you count the 2 GOP leaning independents), combined with a high potential of further seat losses this cycle; there is a real possibility of a democratic takeover. I doubt we will see a 4-6 seat pickup in the 2009 elections; but if Deeds wins the governor's race we could see several appointments like the Preston Bryant one from 2005 that results in a democratic takeover through special elections. Due to the GOP's past track record in special elections, I would give the dems the automatic edge.

I bring this up b/c losing all three branches of government would be devastating to both the GOP and the greater Commonwealth. While the HOD has not done everything as I would have wished over the past few years, I cannot imagine what things would be like were the state government a party rule of the dems like the federal level.

This is what makes it so important that everyone in the House of Delegates run strong races and raise as much money as possible. If not, they may find themselves in a perilous position in January 2010. In addition, we need new blood to emerge as potential leadership in the House for the future. I will discuss that more in a subsequent post.

My Thoughts on the Deeds Victory

Now that Creigh Deeds has unofficially won the democratic nomination for governor (by a pretty impressive margin), I have some thoughts on the state of the race.
First off, two of my best political friends have opposite outlooks; one thinks Deeds is a shew-in, while the other thinks McDonnell now has the race in the bag (both of these friends are obviously Republicans).

As you can see from my past post, I felt Terry McAuliffe was the GOP's worst nightmare in this cycle. Since he has not secured the nomination, we can all probably agree that his fundraising ability will not be nearly as pronounced in this race in Virginia. This takes the money wave off the table and makes it more likely that McDonnell will be able to be competitive or even outspend his opponent.
This coupled with Deeds more rural appeal gives McDonnell a much better chance of performing better in NOVA and other suburban communities than he would have against McAuliffe or Moran. This should prove very important in holding the House of Delegates, since the GOP candidates like Dave Albo, Tom Rust and Tim Hugo will not have to run as far ahead as the ticket. In addition, almost all hopeful GOP targets for pickups in the House are also in those same suburban communities. Speaker Howell is probably the happiest person in Virginia tonight.

Also, I do not think the candidate choice of Jody Wagner really changes the math in the LG's race. The candidates there will likely fare much like the top of the ticket, with Bolling potentially running 1-3 points ahead of McDonnell due to more name ID than his opponent.
In the AG's race, much the same situation exists; with Cuccinelli likely leading the GOP ticket in raw votes. Again, if McDonnell wins or comes close; Cuccinelli is the next Attorney General.

Now the the gubernatorial race. In the next public poll of the race, I expect McDonnell to lead by a 8-10 point margin; much like 2005. Most likely this lead will hold until Labor Day when voters begin to take a more in-depth look at the state of the race. Unfortunately, I am afraid this may result in the GOP being too overconfident early. One of things that hurt the Kilgore and Allen campaigns was overconfidence early; which resulted in a tougher time when polls started to sag.
Also, we will again find out this year if the voters of the Commonwealth continue the trend of awarding the governor's mansion to the party opposite the White House. While I think its probably a conscience, there is a possibility of some sort of correlation.

Advantages for McDonnell in Deeds getting the nomination is on the suburban community front as well as economic issues. Bob will perform better against Deeds in NOVA, Richmond metro and Hampton Roads than he would have against McAuliffe. This should provide an environment where the GOP does not get destroyed in these areas, leaving them a chance for victory.
The other help should be in the "Bob's for Jobs" theme. McDonnell being an attorney most of his career would have a much tougher time convincing the general public that he can be a "business governor" against businessman McAuliffe. Against another attorney in Deeds, this issue will be much easier for him to score points on.
A third, more intangible issue at play is the historical factor. McDonnell defeated Deeds in 2005 despite the top of his ticket being soundly defeated. While it is mostly a mindset, the cold hard reality is that Bob McDonnell has already defeated Creigh Deeds in a statewide election. That can also serve as an advantage.


Now for the disadvantages. The obvious one is the assumed moderate stance of Creigh Deeds. In fact, I dare say that is the main reason democrats selected him as their nominee. To quote a friend "They voted with their heads, not their hearts. No one who voted for Barack Obama would choose Creigh Deeds over Terry McAuliffe or Brian Moran on issues". This may have some minor problems as dems may not be as apt to work hard for a moderate, but I don't see this being a huge issue. As a corollary, this presents a problem for GOP strategy as the traditional attacks regarding gun rights, death penalty and gay marriage will be much tougher to levy against a man who has voted the same as the GOP during his General Assembly tenure.

A second disadvantage is that the recent electoral strategy gets changed; as Bob McDonnell will not deliver blowout numbers in the Shenandoah Valley, Southwest and Southside like he would against McAuliffe or Moran. It is unclear how this will play out in the era of Red State vs Blue State politics that are very evident in the Commonwealth. This favors the dems since they still seem to have a better GOTV operation in light of the success of 2008 as well as the general momentum.

The third disadvantage is the grudge match factor. Deeds, more than any other candidate; can truly convince his supporters that everyone needs to go the polls. Someone who loses a race by ~300 votes out of several million will have a very good case to make under this arena. This coupled with the great ability of Obama's GOTV organization getting out minorities and young voters could prove to repeat history if this same phenomenon occurs again.

Currently, I still do not know who I think will win in November. Before I can make a better guess; I want to see if McDonnell sticks with his theme as well as see what Deeds will do as he switches into general election mode.

Democrats are Pro-Crime?

You would think so listening to some GOPs and their "accomplishments" in the past decade or so.

Another major problem plaguing our party today is the lack of real wedge issues to run on. Historically the Republicans only win the governor's mansion when they run on a specific issue(s) that resonates with the public and is a wedge issue. You saw this with parole abolition from George Allen and car tax abolition from Jim Gilmore.
More recently, the GOP has tried to run on the strength's of their anti-crime stances. They use accomplishments and initiatives like tougher sentences for meth dealers and DUI offenders. While these are noble causes, and are no doubt favorable to the electorate; they do not create a wedge issue to run on. Does anyone really think there are democrats who favor meth dealers or DUI offenders? Of course not.

Where this has greatly been a problem is that the last 4 gubernatorial candidates have been Attorney Generals. Obviously, the major accomplishments on being AG are going to be similar issues; and therefore that is what the candidates have tried to run on. Since the AG has an intrinsic advantage winning the nomination, this has created quite a problem.

I have been told that the McDonnell campaign will not use the same angle that past campaigns have on these issues, and I am glad to hear that. If he does not, I fear Bob will face the same fate as the last 2 AG's who ran for governor.

Terry McAuliffe: GOP Slayer?

In light of Brian Moran's decision to resign his House seat, I would like to cover my (limited) knowledge of Terry McAuliffe and how I see the 2009 governor's race shaping up.
I had the opportunity to attend a town hall type of meeting for McAuliffe at UVA's Darden School of Business several weeks ago. It was billed as a true town hall style meeting, and not meant to be a cheerleading rally; so I thought I would see what he is all about...

Terry McAuliffe is the real deal.

In addition to his ability to fundraise (he is expected to raise $75 million in his bid for governor), I think he has a lot of ideas that will resonate with the general public. His main strengths are being an entrepreneur and having started 27 businesses. I see him taking the same route as Mark Warner and billing himself as the "friend of business". This will spell disaster for Republicans up and down the ballot if he wins the democratic nomination.

What will compound this problem is that McDonnell is an attorney and has no business experience (to my knowledge anyway). I will get into this issue further in a future post, but I think attorney gubernatorial candidates are going to continue to struggle in Virginia over the next few cycles.

If McAuliffe is able to raise the expected level of funds, that will spill over into the downticket and House races, as money will be poured into those races in expectation of a democratic takeover. They will also benefit from a superior turnout/grassroots operation driven by the fund advantage (much like what was seen in the Presidential race this past year).

Kilgore lost by 5 points and almost resulted in the GOP losing the LG and AG's races. A 7-10 point loss will ensure those races are lost in 2009. In addition, that size margin of victory would also equate to a blowout in many GOP held House districts; who will also have a very difficult time running but so far ahead of the ticket.

There is still hope for the GOP. I think a race against Moran or Deeds is winnable (although far from being assured), so the GOP can hope for that to occur. The other way to win is roll out a very ambitious reform message with specific problem solving initiatives. A plan to fix transportation would have to be the centerpiece of that message. Otherwise, I think the GOP is in a very perilous position.

Of course, we could just rest on our laurels on the hope that Virginia always votes for a governor of the opposite party that wins the White House.