| Note: This is a reprint of a diary I posted to the old Blue Commonwealth back on Jan 1, 2009.
In what is certainly one of the more inapt metaphors I could use on this blog, one of the larger elephants in the room as we head into the 2009 Democratic Party gubernatorial primary (and there are several) is which candidate, Creigh Deeds, Brian Moran or Terry McAuliffe, can make the argument that he is the most electable in November's general election.
This is due, in part, to the relatively minor substantive differences between the policy positions of the respective candidates (notwithstanding the arguably larger distinctions in their respective records), and it is due in part to the fact that virtually every Virginia Progressive agrees that defeating Bob McDonnell is essential. Would any supporter of Deeds, Moran or McAuliffe hesitate to throw their support to another candidate if it could be convincingly demonstrated to them that the other has a substantially greater chance to prevail in the general election?
Like many other issues surrounding this primary, the question of who is the most electable candidate, however, is open to legitimate debate, as each candidate brings different strategic strengths and weaknesses to the table.
In this diary, I want to deal with what I see as on of the more pernicious falsehoods surrounding Creigh Deeds' electoral performance in 2005 and what it portends for 2009, should he be the nominee.
(more on the flip) |
| Deeds argues that as the most centrist Democrat, and the sole Democrat from outside Northern Virginia, he has the widest appeal and is, therefore, the strongest candidate in the general election. A separate, but related addendum to this case is the fact that Deeds is only of the three Democratic aspirants to have run a statewide campaign, and despite being outspent he nearly won.
His detractors argue, however, that Deeds has indeed already run against McDonnell -- and lost. Further, these critics argue, Deeds' showed his weakness as a candidate, in part, because in losing to McDonnell he failed to capitalize on the strength of Tim Kaine at the top of ticket.
Unfortunately, this argument is wrong in both respects.
While McDonnell was declared the winner in 2005, the election between McDonnell and Deeds was, in any analytical sense, a tie.
As for whether Deeds under-performed in 2005, a look at the last seven elections for statewide office in Virginia (1981 through 2005) shows that Deeds was the strongest Democratic candidate for Attorney General in almost a generation.
First, consider the Democratic particular frustration in capturing the AG office. Democrats have lost four consecutive elections for AG (1993, 1997, 2001 and 2005). In contrast, Democrats have won elections for Governor and Lt. Governor twice each in that span, so this can't be attributed solely to the fact that Virginia was a "Red" state during this period.
Democrats captured the AG spot three times - 1981, 1985 and 1989. Mary Sue Terry won the latter two elections by landslides with 61.4% and 63.4% of the vote, respectively -- clear outliers (in fact, in 1989 Terry became the first non-Federal candidate in Virginia history to get more than one million votes). Ironically, when Terry ran for Governor in 1993, she turned in the weakest performance of any Democrat seeking that office over the 25-year period (the reasons need not be explored here).
Still, Deeds' near win in 2005 radically reversed a distinct negative trend in Democratic efforts to capture the office. After prevailing in the contest for AG three consecutive times, the last two by landslide, in 1981, 1985 and 1989, Democratic performance went quickly downhill. In 1993, 1997 and 2001, the Democratic candidate earned 43.9%, 42.4% and 39.9%, respectively.
Deeds, in stark contrast, reached 49.5%, the most since Terry.
Second, it is arguable whether Kaine had any coattails to begin with. Kaine was not a particularly strong candidate. Indeed, of the 5 Democratic victories in gubernatorial elections since 1981, Kaine's winning percentage of 51.7% ranked fourth, beating only Doug Wilder's 50.2% in 1989.
Third, Leslie Byrne was a weak LG candidate, a further indication of the Kaine's weak coattails. In the Democratic Party's 5 victories noted above, only once did they fail to also carry the LG spot - in 2005.
It is also fair to assume that as one travels down the ticket, coattails would weaken even further. In fact, Deeds was the only Democratic AG candidate in all seven elections, except for Terry's two landslide runs in the 1980s, to out-poll the LG candidate both in terms of percentage and absolute number of votes.
Fourth, despite all of this, as a percentage of votes earned by the top of the ticket, Deeds earned 95% of the number of votes received by Kaine. Excluding Terry's 1985 and 1989 outlier runs in which she bested the top of the ticket by 10% and 22%, respectively, on average the AG earned 89% of the top of the ticket's vote.
In sum, in historical context Deeds' turned in a strong electoral performance in 2005 in his AG run. While in retrospect the beginning of the Blue resurgence in the Commonwealth can be dated to 2001, Virginia was still a Red state in 2005. Both Senators were Republican, and Republicans controlled both the Senate and the House of Delegates. Bush dominated in 2004, and only three of 11 congressional representatives were Democrats. And at that time, Allen was not only a presumptive favorite to win the Senate election in 2006, but that election was widely seen as a formality on Allen's inexorable march to the GOP presidential nomination.
What does this portend for the future? That is hard to say, but it would seem to bode well for a Deeds v. McDonnell rematch.
Generally, strong electoral performances for statewide offices (win or lose) have been a good predictor for Democratic success in Gubernatorial contests. Baliles, Wilder and Kaine rose to the top office from the AG and LG positions, respectively, and Warner's respectable battle for the Senate in 1996 clearly portended his subsequent victory.
Conversely, actual service in office has not meant success for the GOP. Gilmore, elected to AG in 1993, was able to win the top seat in 1997. On the other hand, the last two unsuccessful GOP nominees, Jerry Kilgore and Mark Early, were both attorneys general. And the only other successful GOP candidate in the last seven elections, George Allen, had not held statewide office when he ran in 1997. |
