Earlier tonight (OK, last night, as we’re now past midnight here), I detailed my troubles (and what I believe are the troubles of most Republicans) with the current crop of presidential candidates. I ended that post as such:
In short, the typical Republican voter will need something extra to be encouraged to vote – and volunteer – for the Republican ticket. I’ll explain why I think that, and how it impacts Virginia, in later posts.
Well, it’s only going to be one post, but here’s why I think “something extra” is required – and by “something extra,” I mean a better candidate down-ballot: asking Republicans to play defense with their vote doesn’t work.
We tend to forget this lesson, and are thus doomed to relearn it, repeatedly. Remember 1996, when we were told legions of anti-Clinton voters would put Bob Dole in the White House? Dole won 41% of the vote. Two years later, we heard the same nonsense about voters angry at the Lewinksy scandal. It turned out Republicans were angrier about the party’s weakness on spending issues, and Clinton became the first Democratic president not to lose seats in a mid-term election since 1934. In 2000, the same logic got the GOP 48% of the vote and a cliff-hanger of an election. Only when Republicans could vote for something (as in 2002 and 2004) did the party regain its footing (only to lose it again by going back on defense in 2005).
We saw the same thing here in Virginia. In 2005, we were all supposed to fall in line behind Jerry Kilgore to stop Tim Kaine. Kaine beat Kilgore by 6 points. Two years later, the sam defensive mentality led to the transportation tax hike of 2007 and the loss of our State Senate majority,
Today, every single Republican candidate (save Paul, whose prospects for victory are minuscule) are hoping to use the anti-Clinton wave to win the White House. The fact that no such wave existed in 1996, 1998, or even 2000 has not deterred them.
The fact remains, however, that Republicans only win when their voters are motivated to vote for their candidates, not merely against their opponents.
This is where our Senate race comes in.
Virginia will be a competitive state this year. The Democrats will be energized by their nominee (either the first women or the first African-American to be nominated by a major party for president). We will need similar energy on our side.
Only one candidate can produce that energy: Bob Marshall.
For anti-tax, limited government voters, Bob Marshall offers a 16-year record of fighting tax increases and government spending, to the point of currently suing to eliminate the unconstitutional regional taxes in HB3202. Jim Gilmore presents an incomplete record on car-tax reduction, a spending increase that was higher in percentage termsthan Mark Warner’s, and absolute silence on HB3202. If this were 1998, Gilmore may still have been able to motivate and inspire limited government Republicans to walk through walls for him. However, it is 2008, and the only candidate who can do that is Marshall.
For pro-life voters, Marshall is the ideal. He is unabashedly pro-life, without exception. Gilmore, by contrast, has an eight-week “choice” window. Pro-life voters may support Gilmore in November, but they won’t move heaven and earth to get him elected; only Marshall can inspire them to do that.
For national security voters, the difference is glaring. Jim Gilmore still hasn’t disavowed his June 2007 op-ed when he came out against the surge. Marshall has done no such thing. The folks at National Review have already noticed this from Gilmore, and have refused to support him as a result. Again, Gilmore will have far more trouble with the “base” on this than Marshall.
Conventional wisdom holds that the Republican perceived as more “moderate” has the better shot at winning the election. I greatly dispute this in every election However, in this election, the CW loses all validity. Nothing we do can keep the Democrats at home on election day, but we can keep angry right-wingers at home by nominating the wrong candidate. Those who think Mark Warner or Hillary Clinton will “scare” them into voting must not forget that such tactics did not work against Bill Clinton or Tim Kaine.
The Republicans need to vote for a candidate, rather than against the Democrat. If they don’t have that at the presidential level, it is imperative that they have it at the Senatorial level. Marshall’s nomination will not only make the Senate seat more winnable, it may be the only way we can assure t Virginia’s electoral votes go to the Republican ticket.
Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal
