Virginia is a symptom of GOP woes, not a Dem solution
Jon is absolutely right to draw attention to Virginia and to suggest that the GOP should be concerned by the election results there, but I think he's drawing the wrong conclusion. Although there has unquestionably been a partial shift in the demographical and political balance of power from Richmond and the Tidewater up to Northern Virginia, and the latter region has turned increasingly blue, the transformation has not yet reached the point where Virginia can supplant Ohio and Florida as the swing state. Virginia may be in play in 2008, but only in the event that the Democrat wins a substantial victory.
Tim Kaine won the 2005 Gubernatorial election because he ran a better campaign and was a better candidate than Republican Jerry Kilgore. While Kaine won, Republicans won narrow victories in the lower-interest, lower-information Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General races. These contests had the characteristics of a generic party ID, and the Republican victories (in the face of a Tim Kaine headwind) show that as of 2005, the state was clearly more red than blue. Jim Webb's win in 2006 had more to do with George Allen's implosion than it had to do with Virginia.
It's tempting to say that the Democrats' conquest of the Virginia Senate (the House of Delegates remains securely in Republican hands) is conclusive evidence of the state's new purpleness. But this ignores the fact that red states such as North Carolina and Alabama have Democratic majorities in both houses of the state legislature and Democrats hold one house in many other red states . Furthermore, the 2007 gains had less to do with a general blue-ing of the state and more to do with the (a) the awful national climate for Republicans and (b) the extremism of the Virginia GOP. Wacko Republicans who said mental illness is linked to demonic possession and called for the end of government involvement in education lost races in red districts. If the Republicans had run rational human beings in those races, they would still control the Senate. Sen. John Warner ripped his own party after the election for its far-rightward tilt and abandonment of moderates.
Barring scandal or his withdrawal from the race, Mark Warner will be elected to the Senate in 2008. But this has more to do with his popularity than it does with any broader trends in Virginia. Certainly his place on the ballot will help other Democrats running in 2008 (perhaps most notably in the 11th CD, which will be very competitive if Tom Davis retires from Congress), but it's not clear how much of a boost that would give to the top of the ticket.
As the Clinton poll numbers show, Virginia might be in play in 2008, which is great news for Democrats. But Survey USA polls also show Clinton with bigger leads in Florida and leading in states like Missouri. If we see that shifting demographics is only a relatively small piece of Virginia's story, we see that the trends that are at work in Virginia are at work in many other states. Thus, Virginia is a symptom of what could be a Republican cataclysm, not a new battleground.
Copyright 2004-2007 Harvard Law School Democrats.
