RK ARCHIVE - Quote of the Day...Would Have Been Better Last Year, Though

Great idea! In fact, it's so awesome that many of us advocated doing exactly this back in early 2007. At the time, we were urging Gov. Kaine to veto the House GOP's "transportation monstrosity," as we called it at the time, and take the case to the voters in November. Instead, we got abusive driving fees (now defunct due to popular demand) and regional authorities (now defunct due to Supreme Court ruling), while largely losing the issue for the elections in November 2007.

As it is, Democrats took control of the state Senate and gained four seats in the House of Delegates. But imagine if, in the spring of 2007, Gov. Kaine had simply said, "We're either going to solve this problem or Virginians are going to know who stood in the way of a solution?" My guess is that Democrats would have gained several more seats in both chambers, possibly even come very close to taking back the House of Delegates, and that we'd be in a lot different (better) position than we are now.

Hate to say I told you so, but to use another cliche this Sunday morning, maybe it's "better late than never." I sure hope so.

Comments

I don't know (True Blue - 4/27/2008 1:39:30 PM)

My sense is that the issue wasn't quite ripe in 2006-2007. Kaine had to make a gesture towards working with the Republicans, to give their plan a chance. He did, and the Republican plan of abuser fees and regional authorities failed miserably. Now the Republicans have said that they have given up and will do nothing.

Now that the Republicans have fumbled, the issue is finally ripe for 2009. The question is, will we be united enough as a party to exploit it?

Obama-Clinton has been painful. A divisive Deeds-Moran fight could keep us from fighting the kind of unified campaign we need to fight next year.

Getting ready for 2009 (Teddy - 4/27/2008 3:10:44 PM)

This legislative session is clearly now intended to prepare us for the 2009 elections:

A divisive Deeds-Moran fight could keep us from fighting the kind of unified campaign we need to fight next year.

I agree and, after much soul searching, I have concluded that, no matter how much I like and respect Brian Moran (and I do), no matter how good a politician he is (and he is), and no matter how good-sounding a transportation plan he comes up with, the truth is, that in today's Virginia an effective answer to NoVa's transportation troubles can only be promoted and passed by some one from the Rest of Virginia, because only one of RoVa's own will have the credibility and contacts to accomplish such a task. Creigh Deeds is from old, rural Virginia, and he has said repeatedly that he can create an effective transportation program for Virginia and get it passed. It strikes me that Brian Moran would be better advised, if he wants to run for state office in this cycle, to go for Attorney General or Lt. Governor (where he could preside oveer the Senate and help Deeds get the transportation bill pass). He would gain more seasoning and additional state-wide recognition, maybe lose a bit more of his New England accent, and be ready to run for Governor in the next cycle; and, Democrats could avoid another bruising primary and develop a deeper bench.

I take it you don't agree with (Lowell - 4/27/2008 3:16:48 PM)

this?

Distaste for intra-party fireworks is rooted in an overly simple notion of politics. Competition can strengthen a party.
Depending on who's talking, Moran should defer to Deeds because the latter has been tested statewide; that his 360-vote loss for AG in 2005 to McDonnell, having been outspent 2-to-1, shows grit.
Or Deeds should defer to Moran because the latter, as an Alexandria legislator, can -- aided by Mark Warner's apparatchiks -- more fully harness the Northern Virginia vote trove.
Never mind that Deeds swept Fairfax and Arlington and was almost even in Loudoun and Prince William counties.
The oft-mentioned scenario: One guy runs for governor; the other for lieutenant governor and Steve Shannon raises enough jack to -- he hopes --pre-empt a Moran or Deeds fall-back for attorney general.
Why not revel in the benefits of a tussle than worry about its risks? It's worked for Democrats and Republicans.
Consider the heavy turnout in Virginia's Democratic presidential primary -- nearly 1 million to roughly 500,000 in a GOP contest that affirmed the inevitability of John McCain's nomination.
The primary, particularly for Democrats, will yield a huge harvest of voters who can be dunned for dollars, enlisted as workers, steered to the polls next year.

Well, now, (Teddy - 4/27/2008 8:12:30 PM)

your longer quote came from whom? I understand the theory of how a competitive primary can be good for the party, any party, but I tend to think such a call should be made on a case by case basis. As one of the prospective donors for such contests, I have to say I am almighty tired of all the elections Virginia puts us through year after year. I am also almighty tired of the national Democratic primary, and it has IMHO gone beyond strengthening the party and begun weakening it. After this experience, and with a sure-to-be-exhausting (and expensive) national election coming up, I am not convinced that immediately following that, that another primary in Virginia pitting NoVa candidates against RoVa candidates is going to be "good." If, as suggested, Steve Shannon goes for Atty. Gen, (and John Warner goes for US Senator) I am afraid we could have a slate top-heavy with NoVa. I can be convinced otherwise, and do not have a closed mind, but this is my thinking now.

"can" is not the same thing as "will" (True Blue - 4/27/2008 9:20:56 PM)

I'm normally ready to mix it up as anyone, but I don't feel like this is the year to do it. On the other hand, if the party unifies this Fall and wins big, maybe we'll have the energy for a Moran-Deeds brawl.

Primaries "can" help a party build excitement and register new voters. They can also season an inexperienced candidate (I'm looking at you, Jim Webb).

On the other hand, they can breed a lot of bad blood among activists. There are still hurt feelings from Webb-Miller, two years on. There will be hard feelings from Obama-Clinton for many, many years, I am sure.

Next year we will have maxed out voter registration because of this year's presidential election. Anyone who sleeps through this year, just doesn't care about politics, at all.

I'm not sure that we'll need a nasty primary fight in early 2009 in order to bring the new voters out. Moran and Deeds are both seasoned pols, so I don't think they need a "practice" election the way Webb did. I guess I just don't see a lot of potential benefit in a nasty brawl just before a tough general election.

I'm with Teddy: I think Moran should go for Attorney General. We haven't had a Democratic AG in how many years? The AG's office needs a shakeup, and maybe Moran is just the guy to do it.

I agree with you that there's very little (Lowell - 4/28/2008 6:21:38 AM)

apparent advantage to a primary in 2009 between Creigh Deeds and Brian Moran. The problem, however, is that neither appears to have any intention of "stepping down" to run for a different office. So, all this talk on the internet and elsewhere will probably amount to nothing in the end...