VA-SEN: Davis (R) May Not Run
Good news for the VA GOP
By Adam C Posted in 2008 — Comments (33) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Moderate REP Davis (R-VA 10) has been amassing money for many years awaiting a chance for a Senate seat. The open seat in 2008 seems to be his chance. Thus, it comes as a surprise that Davis sounds like he may not run.
Mark Warner (D)'s war chest and the VA GOP decision to nominate via convention are affecting Davis' choice. Further, polls show all Rs about 20-30 points behind the still-popular ex-GOV Warner.
However, the most interesting comment I found in Davis' remarks was that "You've got a very vulnerable guy sitting there in the other Senate seat right now (Jim Webb) who may or may not run in four years." Davis is a calculating politician and he would very likely skip this race if he thinks his chance in 2012 is better.
More below:
From Hotline ($):
Rep. Tom Davis (R) hinted 10/16 that he might not run for SEN in '08, saying at a 10/16 National Press Club breakfast that GOPers nominating via convo and ex-Gov. Mark Warner's (D) money factor into his decision. Davis: "There are other races; this isn't the only shot. You've got a very vulnerable guy sitting there in the other Senate seat right now (Jim Webb) who may or may not run in four years. And you know what? If you don't go to the Senate, so what? I've been a committee chairman in the House. I've got my portrait hanging on a wall. I've been pretty productive legislatively."
Davis "said he thinks he can win a convention dominated by conservative party activists, but he said he would have no name ID coming out of it in June." Davis: "Our calculation has been that, if you can get everything in line, it's a doable race. But if I have to spend eight months slogging through a party convention, talking to 15,000 Republicans around the state where they're going to ask you how conservative you are, that does not set you up very well for a general election. ... I'm reluctant to take people's money for a Senate race that I'm not going to run. There are a lot of factors that we've got to weigh before it's done, and we don't make stupid decisions."
Daivs "said the No. 1 roadblock right now, however, is the continually toxic environment" that GOPers face. "At the same time, he stressed that a lot can change in a year" or even when the WH nominees are chosen. "Davis has said he will make a decision" in Nov, and "he reiterated that promise" 10/16. Davis: "A good environment and a strong campaign -- I'll take that any day, Mark is certainly not bulletproof, but he has a good reputation and he's riding high" because he left office popular in '06 and hasn't had to take issue positions since then (Blake, The Hill, 10/17).
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Whither the Shivs for Rudy? — Comments (63) »
VA-SEN: Davis (R) May Not Run 33 Comments (0 topical, 33 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
A "macaca moment" by definition would require a Virginia and national Press Corps that would run hundreds of stories on that single event, reference it in hundreds more, give space and amplification to any person with any story (no matter how ridiculous) which could be seen to give the "moment" more narrative supporting heft and basically tie it around his neck until any and all accomplishments by Warner is reduced to that one single "moment."
Warner could be found in black face tomorrow and this would never happen.
Because he is a Democrat.
And that thought inspires a diary that I think I may post later this evening.
Something along the lines of "What would Warner have to do to experience a 'macaca moment'?"
I can already say with some confidence that being found in bed with a live boy or a dead prostitute would not be enough. Running a male prostitution ring out of your office would not be enough.
So I'm thinking hard, what would it take?
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
A diary is a blog entry posted by a RedStater. You can post a diary with the blog entry link located under your user name on the left side of the screen.
P.S. Please do not self-recommend your diary (self-recommendation really irritate a lot of the regulars here).
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Could this happen? Clearly Cantor would start off as a bad underdog. But.......
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
Gilmore's not a bad candidate, though he's not a great one either. But Cantor had indicated one reason he would not run is out of deference to Davis...more likely, this will increase the case for drafting Peter Pace (although it always sounds funny to me to "draft" a guy who is just finishing three decades in the Marine Corps).
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
It would be interesting to see how Warner handled Pace as opponent. The nutroots would really want to get into that one and defame Gen. Pace. That would risk "Lamonting" Mark Warner. However, if he blew Kos, et al. off, then he risks offending the base...
“The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men."
He's in sweet with Vis Numar.
-----------
We are all heroes, you and Boo and I. Hamsters and rangers everywhere, rejoice!
I will support Tom Davis over Jim Webb. LOL. That's not a difficult decision to make. :-)
Senators Peter Pace and Tom Davis will be like George Allen and John Warner all over again.
2012 is your year Congressman. Let the GOP win the governorship in 2009 (now that Warner is running for Senate, its very likely unless Allen runs), make your district safer in 2010, and then beat the tar out of Webb.
I can't see how this is good for the VA GOP that our strongest contender may not run.
Davis probably would have been beat by Warner anyway, so it would be smart for him to take on Webb in 2012, I just hate to see Warner win a landslide Senate election. If Hillary loses in '08, he's going to make a run for the White House, and he will be formidable.
The only way I can see the Republicans winning this Senate seat in '08 is if General Pace ran on the GOP ticket.
Virginia seems to be in love with Mark Warner, who has been quite adept at fooling people that he's not a liberal Democrat.
The Democrats are much better at recruiting candidates that can win in Purple states then we are.
Actually, I think Mark Warner could be costing himself the presidency by taking a Senate seat. He will not be able to run away from his liberalism and continue to fool people after he spends at least 4 (possibly 8) years in the Senate casting liberal vote after liberal vote. If he doesn't throw in with his party's caucus then he may not turn out to be much worse than John Warner, but he certainly will have no fans among the activist base.
If Hillary loses, the base will have even more power - it's easy to see that they will blame an HRC loss on the fact that she moved away from the left and started to embrace more hawkish positions - an attempt to shift rightward. They will not be looking for a Mark Warner in 2012.
If Hillary wins, she gets the automatic nod in 2012, and her VP will be the overwhelming favorite in 2016. And by then Mark Warner will likely be as viable a candidate as Evan Bayh - he will be in no man's land - he'll have shown himself as too liberal to connect with independents, but he'll be "too conservative" to win support from the base.
Running for the Senate may be the concession by Warner that he isn't likely to be President.
Every Senator wants to be a President.
My guess is Mark Warner think this Senate seat will keep him on the short list of top tier Democrat Presidential candidates next election cycle, sort of a holding pattern for his next promotion.
I believe Mark Warner thinks Hillary is going to lose in '08, and he doesn't want to run against her in a primary. A Senator can usually keep his nose clean for 4 years, similar to Obama, and have a reasonably moderate voting record.
Mark Warner would have had a much better chance of winning the White House than Hillary would have, he's much less polarizing, and is a more plausible "moderate" candidate.
I'm surprised he dropped out, I wonder if the Clintons have some juicy dirt on him?
Given the meme that 2008 is going to be as bad for Republicans as 2006, is it any wonder that the Democrats are having an easier time of it in the recruiting department? Why would our heavy hitters want to make an uphill climb and likely lose when they could wait a cycle or two and give someone a real challenge?
We seem to be okay in purple NM. The Louisiana seat will get attention once they get through their state elections this weekend, and will likely draw a good challenge to Landrieu. Arkansas is an uphill battle to begin with - Pryor is quite popular. And in a bad environment challenging an incumbant isn't easy. So you're really talking about open seats in purple states. That's Virginia - where Warner is popular enough that even Jesus Christ himself would have a fight on his hands; Colorado - I'm not sure who would be all that much better than Schaeffer; and New Mexico, where we have both our big guns interested. The other states are all incumbents running for re-election in what has been tagged as another Democrat year.
Overall, it seems Democrats are better at fielding candidates in Red states where they shouldn't be winning. There are a lot of Democrat Senators in deep Red states, but only a handful of Republican Senators in deep-Blue States.
Red States far outnumber Blue states, so the fact that the Democrats have control of the Senate, and will likely expand their majority this next election, means Republicans aren't fielding good enough candidates to win in states where we should be winning.
Think of how many Republican Senators there are in the Northeast/New England area, now think of how many Democrat Senators there are in the South.
The Republican Party apparatus should pull out all the stops and do whatever it takes to convince top-tier candidates to capture all the Red States. Recruiting good candidates should be the number 1 priority for the Party.
We need to go after this low-hanging fruit.
Well I count 4 R Senators in the NE (which only has 14 Senators from NY northward).
And I count 5 D Seantors in the South (FL, 2 AR, LA, VA). If you expand to include WV, then 2 more.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Are we going to have after this cycle? 3? 2?
Also...I think New Jersey probably needs to be counted if we're including New York. Although maybe you could toss in Arlen! then.
“I think we are the team to beat in the NL East -- finally.” - Jimmy "MVP" Rollins, 1/23/07
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
You'd think we'd have some Virginia residents here on Red State though.
HTML Help Central for Red Staters
Let's nominate the Nash Equilibrium for President.
So far nothing much in the press or in RPV circles, but the Draft Pace website is here, if you're interested in getting involved.
There is a Facebook group as well.
I have not heard anyone mention Pace’s name in the backcountry.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
One Last Mission is an online effort.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Four years is an eternity in politics. A number of eager men and women are not without ambition. Davis was an ineffective governor who essentially ripped the state apart. He'd be a very hard act to elect.
That is correct, Tom Davis was never a governor
http://tomdavis.house.gov/davis_contents/about/
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
I'm glad Tom Davis is staying in his Congressional District. The GOP could havelost this seat without him. Also, he is smart to wait for 2012. Webb is so ARROGANT, he probably belives he won the seat because of his "excellent" campaign rather than because Allen imploded.
If one has to be in the Senate, then Webb is the least bad of two bad choices. He is reasonable on racial preferences (he actually opposes them on 'diversity' grounds unless poor whites are included; something not even Republicans will say anymore), and might possibly be decent (which is to say, not horrible) on immigration.
Mark Warner would be down the line leftwing on both of those issues.
On almost everything else, they would probably be equally terrible, so the edge goes to Webb.
Of course, Warner would probably crush Davis anyway, so it doesn't really matter. We are going to be stuck with both of them, and the influx of Yankees and immigrants is only going to make Virginia more difficult for Republicans as time goes on.
Warner would need his own "macaca moment" to lose, more than likely.
I'd much prefer Davis to Jim Webb despite the sentiment here at Redstate, mostly because I think Virginia is a purple state these days at least outside of the presidential race.
Oz
www.first-cut-politics.blospot.com