« Things I Don't Want to See | Main | What the hell is wrong with O’Reilly? »
November 11, 2005
Tim Kaine's Semi-Pyrrhic Victory
Posted Nicholas Beaudrot of Electoral Math
Before we lionize Mark Warner for dragging Tim Kaine over the finish line, bringing an out-and-out liberal Democrat within thirty thousand votes of the Lieutenant governor's seat, destablizing the Republican coalition in Washington, rallying the stock market, turning water into wine, rescuing Katie Holmes from the clutches of scientology, and all manner of other minor miracles, I'd like to throw a bit of cold water on Kaine's win. I promise a more exhaustive analysis later this weekend.
For now, suffice it to say Warner's 2001 victory represented a significant realignment of the state of Virginia. He won slim majorities in a few rural counties in Southwest Virginia, cut the usual GOP margin of victory in others, and piled up modest wins in the usual Democratic enclaves like Fairfax, Arlington, Richmond, and Alexandria. This year, Kaine won by piling up horse-whipping majorities in places like Fairfax, held on to some of Southwest VA with smaller margins than Warner, but lost several counties that Warner carried in the previous election.
A permanent Democratic majority in Virginia will require both Kaine's higher margins in suburbia and Mark Warner's success in the Shenandoah Valley and the rest of the rural areas of the state. Kaine will have to continue to work hard to maintain Democratic popularity in Southwest Virginia to prevent further losses in future elections.
November 11, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d8342766c353ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tim Kaine's Semi-Pyrrhic Victory:
» WIRELESS TOYZ from Toyz Shop
Customers want to shop the leader - a store that has a proven record with thousands of customers across the nation. Wireless Toyz represents almost every ... [Read More]
Tracked on May 26, 2006 12:38:16 PM
Comments
"Virginia Democrats had a net gain of one seat in the House of Delegates, and defeated a Republican with a Warner-endorsed independent, moving the House from 60-38-2 to 58-39-4. Budgeting will still require lots of bipartisan cooperation, but it will be a tad easier." ...Beaudrot
I'll post the link from Barkley again, since it was likely not read downpage.
"However, beneath the surface it may be more right wing than before." ...Barkley. Moderate Republicans were defeated by wingnuts in several races.
Barkley lives in SW Virginia.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Nov 11, 2005 7:26:13 PM
Yeah. I saw that after I posted. I didn't realize that Warner had to target people who voted with him.
As far as I can tell, the total trade is losing three moderate democrats, one winger, and three moderate republicans, and replacing them with three wingers, one democratic leaning independent, and three [presumably moderate] Dems. So, we're down two moderates and up two wingers. But, its easier to negotiate with the moderates when they're in your own party -- you have more tools with which to gain leverage.
I don't think this will clearly lead to more liberal or reactionary policy. I think we have to see where the chips fall.
But, as I say, the decline of the Democratic party in the Shenandoah is almost certainly a bad thing.
Posted by: Nicholas Beaudrot | Nov 11, 2005 7:48:41 PM
As pessimistic as I try to be about these results... I just keep seeing bright spots - isn't this, really, about Virginia's conversion from solid Republican to swing state? Democrats may not be able to dominate, but Republicans can't win statewide without a better message than they've got now - those two lower races eked out victories, but Deeds may not be done for yet, and Kaine could be pretty successful. It does seem (from here in deep NE territory) as though Northern Virginia, the Richmond suburbs, and to some degree the Tidewater regions have tilted over to more northern looking urban/suburban enclaves, where deeply conservative Republicanism just doesn't play well. Which also can't bode well for parts of North Carolina or Georgia. As much as I think Dems shouldn't gloat, I keep thinking the Republicans are the ones who need to seriously worry. And isn't that an improvement, all the way around?
PS, I know it's heretical and all, but I'm not buying into this whole "Warner is God and he can pick up Republican moderates" line yet. And I worry that Democrats are looking for a Deus Ex Machina leader to drop down and make the whole national election picture better (as long as it's not Hillary), which is a lot for any one politician to carry. I'll be happy if Warner makes the Presidential race competitive, so we can examine a numbe of candidates extensively and then decide wisely. It's a dream, I know, but I'm sticking to it for now.
Posted by: weboy | Nov 12, 2005 12:50:28 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
