The Potts Factor
Lets switch gears from the race for the 26th for a little bit and talk about Russ Potts.
What effect will he have on this election?
Here's my opinion: Every vote Potts gets up to 5% will be votes from Kilgore. If he gets 5-10%, the votes will be evenly split between the 2 candidates. If Potts breaks above 10%, I think he starts pulling Kaine votes 2-1.
My rationale on this is that if he only gets 5%, it probably going to be mostly Winchester, Frederick and Clarke voters who know him personally and like him. That obviously is bad news for us. If he gets beyond that area, he will be getting Kaine voters because of his issue stances.
If he gets major traction in this race (above 10-15%) that will be the death blow to Tim Kaine. I guess there is the remote possibility he wins the race, but I'd say those odds are too far long-shot for right now.
What do you folks think? What do you all see Potts getting here in the valley and statewide? What effect do you all think the valley candidate will have on this race?
What effect will he have on this election?
Here's my opinion: Every vote Potts gets up to 5% will be votes from Kilgore. If he gets 5-10%, the votes will be evenly split between the 2 candidates. If Potts breaks above 10%, I think he starts pulling Kaine votes 2-1.
My rationale on this is that if he only gets 5%, it probably going to be mostly Winchester, Frederick and Clarke voters who know him personally and like him. That obviously is bad news for us. If he gets beyond that area, he will be getting Kaine voters because of his issue stances.
If he gets major traction in this race (above 10-15%) that will be the death blow to Tim Kaine. I guess there is the remote possibility he wins the race, but I'd say those odds are too far long-shot for right now.
What do you folks think? What do you all see Potts getting here in the valley and statewide? What effect do you all think the valley candidate will have on this race?
posted by GOPHokie @ 12:22 PM
10 Comments:
At 8/25/2005 11:23 AM,
Anonymous said…
I think you are essentially right that Potts will draw more from Kaine as his numbers rise. Many of these will be disillusioned moderate Republicans who voted for Warner last time out of a certain despair about the direction of the party in Virginia.
Personally, it is painful to vote for a Democrat (I have a 30-year membership card as a "sustaining member" of the RNC), but I can easily find myself voting for Potts. I like the fact that he is (mostly) keeping his Republican identity.
At 8/25/2005 1:17 PM,
GOPHokie said…
Mark,
Why do you like the fact Potts is keeping his "Republican identity"? If he wanted to be a GOP, he should have done like Fitch and run in the primaries.
I am not attacking you by the way, I am just trying to understand the logic Potts voters are going to use.
At 8/26/2005 12:37 PM,
Anonymous said…
Well, if he knew he would not win a GOP primary, why spend the time and money to compete in one? Looking at third party candidates, they are typically spoilers for one side or the other....they draw enough voters disaffected with a party to tip the election to the other party. They may do this to help their own party they want to win---or to help their own party lose. Sometimes they even run to show a party they can't win unless they return to a particular ideology.
At 8/26/2005 12:50 PM,
GOPHokie said…
I know that, but Mark's contention is that he likes Potts for being a Republican. If Potts was a true Republican, he would have tried for the party's nomination, not run as an "independent GOPer".
At 8/26/2005 5:01 PM,
Anonymous said…
The problem is with what is apparently means to be a "true Republican" these days. The conservative movement has abandoned its roots of personal and fiscal responsibility. I'm not defending Potts or not, I'm just saying the Rs are making it hard for those who aren't obsessed homosexuality, etc., to stay in the party.
At 8/26/2005 5:01 PM,
Anonymous said…
The problem is with what is apparently means to be a "true Republican" these days. The conservative movement has abandoned its roots of personal and fiscal responsibility. I'm not defending Potts or not, I'm just saying the Rs are making it hard for those who aren't obsessed homosexuality, etc., to stay in the party.
At 8/26/2005 5:42 PM,
GOPHokie said…
I will be the first to admit the Republican party as lost control of spending. Not that the dems are any better, but I can't control what they do, we need to fix the GOP.
The reason the Republican party has become the party "obsessed with homosexuality" is thats the only issue thats different anymore.
Abortion is an issue but nothing can really be done until we get a new supreme court, spending is out of control on both sides, we cut taxes so we don't have to fix that, most everyone supports gun rights, and we already do a good job at national security (yes I know alot of people don't like Iraq).
I'm not thrilled about homosexuality being our main issue (contrary to what it may seem like on this blog), but thats about all we can worry about right now.
There is a tide turning in the Republican party regarding fiscal policy and immigration, I just hope it comes to be soon.
Everyone is scared on immigration that they will piss the mexicans off and that whichever party does that will be done for. I hope in the next year or so, our country will realize the true problem we have.
At 8/26/2005 5:44 PM,
GOPHokie said…
Potts is attacked for being a tax raiser by many more people than those who accuse him of not being a social conservative.
By the way, he ran as a 100% pro-life candidate and has voted against every measure in the GA that was pro-life. We should be enraged about that, but we (the GOP) cares more about taxes than abortion.
At 8/26/2005 11:17 PM,
Anonymous said…
GOPHokie, I think the reason Rs are homosexuality obsessed is that they don't want to really lead or really govern, they just want to win elections. Big difference between the two. They'll take their wedge issues and run!!!! I'm not saying the Ds are any better at the leadership and governing thing, but at least they're not pretending that homosexuality is the defining issue of our age.
At 8/28/2005 11:44 AM,
GOPHokie said…
Yea but the dems use wedge issues too. You can't tell me that every nova dem HOD candidate won't try to paint their opponent as pro-life in order to win those elections (with the exception of maybe craddock-caputo).
Gay marriage is just like any other social issue. That just happens to be the one that Republicans win on, so they point it out. I think we can all agree that social issues usually get voters more fired up than fiscal policy or something like that.
If the dems can find a social issue that they can win on, they use it too. The number one purpose in politics is to win elections. I'm not saying thats good, but thats the way it is.
Post a Comment
<< Home