In today’s Washington Post reporter Tim Craig writes about what last weekend’s tumultuous Republican Party of Virginia Convention means for the future:
RICHMOND, June 2 — Saturday’s Virginia Republican Party convention, at which conservatives ousted the state party chairman and put a scare into former governor James S. Gilmore III’s senatorial hopes, will have lasting consequences on state policy and the direction of the GOP, several Republicans said Monday.
For the second straight year, social and anti-tax conservatives dominated the nomination process, sending a clear signal to GOP legislators and office-seekers that they need to oppose taxes and abortion to succeed.
“This is a message that the grass roots still have a controlling voice when they choose to,” said Sen. Ken Cuccinelli II (R-Fairfax), a conservative candidate for attorney general. “There was a strong pro-life statement, and I do think there was an unusual show of strength by a base that everybody already knows doesn’t want a tax increase.”
The convention came three weeks before the General Assembly is scheduled to return to Richmond to consider a proposal by Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) to raise taxes to pay for transportation improvements. The results from Saturday will probably embolden the House Republican majority to oppose Kaine’s plan, GOP leaders said.
“It clearly proves our base does not want a large tax increase,” said House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith (R-Salem). “I think anybody who was at the convention got that feeling.”
The question is whether a party that appeals primarily, if not solely, to a base that clearly doesn’t represent the Virginia electorate as a whole is a good thing.
At least some old-time Republicans don’t think so:
[S]ome moderate Republicans fear that they no longer have a place in the party and that the party’s shift to the right is coming as the state is tilting left. They say the GOP has been hurt in recent statewide elections, including Kaine’s and Sen. James Webb’s (D-Va.), because of the orthodoxy.
“I think you are seeing a cataclysmic episode in the decline of the Republican Party of Virginia,” said former delegate Vincent F. Callahan Jr., a moderate Republican who represented McLean from 1968 to this year. “It took us 30 years to build up this party, and now it is slipping away. . . . The Republican Party has gotten out of touch with the general electorate.”
(…)
“We have jumped off the deep end, and we are just going to create a party of unelected candidates if Jim Gilmore isn’t conservative enough,” said former state senator Martin E. Williams, a moderate Republican from Hampton Roads.
To some degree, I think that Callahan and Williams have a point. In three straight statewide elections (Kaine v. Kilgore in 2005, Webb v. Allen in 2006, and the mid-term legislative elections last year), the voters don’t seem to be buying what Virginia Republicans are selling.
I don’t think it’s necessarily about ideology, because most voters don’t vote based upon what can really be called a coherent ideology. Instead, they look for politicians who they think can solve the problems they are having, whether it’s overcrowded schools, congestion on the roads, or crime. For awhile now, Virginia Republicans obviously haven’t done a very good job of putting forward candidates who can appeal to the people who vote that way.
Does the Virginia GOP realize that ? I’m not so sure:
“Everybody is answering to the 3,000 people who show up at party conventions, and no one is answering to the [millions] who want some roads,” said Del. David B. Albo (R-Fairfax), who added that both parties need to be mindful of their base but strive for middle ground.
Frederick, 32, said his conservative views about taxes will strengthen the state Republican Party.
“The citizens, they want somebody who stands for something,” Frederick said.
No, I think they want somebody who will do something.
Thanks to factors having little to do with Virginia, 2008 may well be a lost cause, but, in 2009, Virginia Republicans have a chance to take back the Governor’s Mansion for the first time since Gilmore left office, but they’re not going to do it by appealing to narrow ideological niches.
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:38 pm
If you look at the data and leave all this old woman emotional crap out of the discussion, when Republicans run a strong conservative, who sticks to the core principles, without being a religious zealot or a one note wonder, then the Republicans win the statewide race 52-47.
When the Republican goes wishy-washy, or is perceived to be abandoning the core libertarian-Republican values set forth in the Creed of the Republican Party, then we get results like the recent Allen-Webb race.
The data shows that a Republican that is pro-life, but who doesn’t make that the major or only theme in the campaign is a winner, if he also is a champion for our Constitution and limited government.
Mark Warner skillfully makes himself appear to be, “…just a good ol’ boy from NOVAville.” His hayseed act actually worked last time, but many people see that he is your standard Harvard Liberal now, who will support the appointment of Judges who will further destroy our Constitution.
We who love LIBERTY are left with a pretty lousy choice in the Senate race; either a Liberal who will vote to confirm lefty judges, or a Neocon Bush clone who doesn’t care about individual rights and who will happily send political dissidents off to jail to be tortured. Either way, big corporations win and the people lose.
The only way for this to change in the future is for freedom loving citizens to get off of their ass and get involved in their local Party and help get more defenders of LIBERTY nominated.
June 3rd, 2008 at 1:56 pm
And if Marshall had been nominated then the choice would have been better how ?
We’re talking about a man who supported an amendment to the Virginia Constitution that denies equal rights to an entire class of people.
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Doug, would you have rather he offered a bill? At least withj Marshall, you get a respect for the Constitutional process!!
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:20 pm
I would have rather he not sullied the Constitution of Virginia with a bigoted piece of garbage.
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
I was there to be a part of the debate held at the University of Richmond two years ago. The room had been filled in advance with a majority of gay people, many of whom were saying that Marshall was a bigot, jerk, weenie, etc. before the event began. Once the debate started, everyone who listened heard a very compassionate, honest, Bob Marshall explain his position was not against gay people, but that his position was that marriage was a sacred union between one man and one woman. Bob went on to explain how much of what gay people wanted in “unions” was already available under the Code of Virginia. After the debate, Bob Marshall stayed and discussed specific situations with many of the gay activists. Because of his thorough knowledge of the Code and our Constitution, Bob was able to offer specific remedies to many of the problems that the activists asked him about.
After the debate, many of those same people who had been so hostile to Bob, came away saying what a thoughtful, good listener he was and many were especially impressed how he was prepared with constructive suggestions that would be helpful in addressing their concerns.
Bob is a Christian and I am Jewish. We differ on a number of issues, but I know Bob Marshall, and I know that he will work hard to help any citizen and that he will always defend the Constitution of the United States. With a Senator such as Bob Marshall, all citizens may not get their favorite programs passed, but they we will all be treated fairly and with respect. Bob Marshall will always do his homework to see what can be done to help those on the opposite side of an issue have their needs met. He is truly a statesman who keeps the best interests of our People as his top priority.
Bob Marshall is a genuinely honest man and for his efforts to craft creative solutions, he has been maligned in the Press, when he should be lauded for doing his own homework and creating solutions that can benefit all citizens.
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Tyler,
What you say may or may not be true, but he proved yesterday that he’s a sore loser.
And he would have lost to Warner by margins that would’ve been near historic.
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Never question my integrity.
The polling data published by the Marshall campaign showed that Bob Marshall had the key constituencies to win against Warner.
Also, the historic data shows that when Republicans pander to groups outside of their traditional base, we lose. When our candidates are consistent and take steps to shore up support among traditional support groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans, UDC, libertarian-leaning Republicans (like the Ron Paul supporters) and the Evangelicals, then they win.
Bob Marshall supporters who were at the Convention could see with their own eyes that Bob had the numbers to win the nomination. When the people doing the counting are nearly all working for the other side, it is easy for one to draw the conclusion that the outcome may have been manipulated.
The fact that Bob Marshall is accepting the outcome of such a process, and has vowed to run an even stronger campaign next time, shows what a fine man of character he is.
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:49 pm
And the polling data published by independent polling agencies showed quite the opposite.
If you think that Marshall would’ve done better in the population centers in NoVa and Hampton Roads than Gilmore than, quite honestly, I think you’re kidding yourself.
And if the RPV had chosen a primary and Marshall had run, he would’ve been trounced.
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:50 pm
The fact that he’s explicitly refusing to endorse the nominee of his party tells me that he doesn’t accept the outcome of the process.
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:52 pm
And one more thing, this is one libertarian-leaning Republican who probably would have left the Senate ballot blank if Marshall was the GOP nominee.