Jim Gilmore's running his mouth again, but this time it's not "No Car Tax" idiocy or how he's going to be President. This time, Gilmore's claiming that "it's a 'big myth' that presumed opponent Mark R. Warner can't be defeated."
"He has never really been challenged by anyone on his approach," Gilmore told the Tuesday Morning Group, a group of conservative Republican activists from across the state who meet monthly in Richmond.[...]
"There's a big myth being put out there that Mark Warner can't be beaten," said Gilmore, whose legacy includes the phaseout -- later stalled by Warner and a GOP-controlled General Assembly -- of the unpopular local tax on personal cars, trucks and motorcycles.
Sorry to break this to you, Guvnah, but the only "myth" here is that you have a chance in hell of beating Mark Warner next year. Heck, you'll be lucky to keep your fractured (and fracturing) party from completely disintegrating. Oh wait, I forgot, you may have Hillary Clinton -- the "bitch," as one of John McCain's supporters called her Monday (McCain said it was an "excellent question") -- to use as your bogey(woman).
There are only three problems with that: 1) Clinton might not be the Democratic nominee, then what are you going to do?; 2) even if Clinton IS the nominee, what makes you think she'll in any way hurt Mark Warner (in fact, the latest polls show Hillary Clinton WINNING Virginia)?; and 3) no matter how much you try to change the subject from your miserable record as governor to Hillary Clinton or whatever, we all know how you drove Virginia into the ditch and how Mark Warner had to come in and pull it out again -- why would we want to go back in the ditch again?
Anyway, good luck busting that supposed "big myth" next year, it should certainly make for entertaining blog copy. By the way, before you take on a far greater man than you are, perhaps you might want to begin by keeping your fellow Republicans from defecting to Mark Warner. Or perhaps you could try to attract Democrats -- or independents, for that matter -- to your camp (but something tells me you're not going to have much success there). Anyway, have fun "myth" busting. In the meantime, Mark Warner will be busy talking about his non-mythical plans for moving Virginia "Forward Together," as opposed to "Backwards Divided" as you and your party would prefer. Not exactly a difficult choice, regardless of how much false bravado you throw around.
P.S. On this one, Tom Davis was right. In getting the convention he wanted, Jim Gilmore won the classic "Pyrrhic victory." And that's no myth!
They abandoned their principles when they passed HB3202 and the voters knocked them down over it. Now here they are, just days later, huffing and puffing about a "myth".
They are CLUELESS!
When I saw Hager blaming the big losses on what was going on in Washington D.C, I knew they were beyond help. Guess they need to lose the US Senate, Virginia House and the White House before they get the message!
The Earley/Colson group lost a big court case in Iowa in 2006; I believe the latest on that case is that the 8th Circuit heard their appeal and we're awaiting the court's decision. Here's the plaintiff's summary:
[District Court judge]Pratt hasn't kicked privately funded Prison Fellowship programs out of any facility. He simply said the Iowa program was unconstitutional since it was so intertwined with the state and funded in part by taxpayers.Lastly, the Colson/Earley claim of miraculous recidivism rates does not hold up under scrutiny. The one and only study they cite that did show a lower recidivism rate for IFI graduates was quickly debunked. University of California-Los Angeles professor Mark Kleiman found that the study simply ignored 58 percent of the participants. When those inmates were added back in, Kleiman found that IFI participants actually returned to prison at a higher rate than non-participants. During the trial, Colson's attorneys never even argued that their program works, probably because they knew they did not have the proof required by a court of law. In his decision, Pratt noted this, pointing to Prison Fellowship's "lack of evidence?about the effect of InnerChange on recidivism." Added Pratt, "Aside from anecdotes, defendants offered no definitive study about the actual effects the InnerChange program has on recidivism rates."
Many school board candidates said a Democratic sweep of the body's three at-large seats is particularly a testament to voters satisfaction with the party. One of the successful at-large candidates, Jim Raney, won even though he did not put any yard signs in public space and was not allowed to campaign actively as a Democratically endorsed candidate because he is restricted as a federal employee."Jim Raney had no signs but he was listed on the Democrat's sample ballot," said Tina Hone, a Democrat and the at-large school board candidate to win the most votes.
"When you have straight party voting like this, that momentum is really hard to overcome," said At-large school board member Steve Hunt, who lost his seat to Raney despite several high-profile endorsements.
I spoke with one Dem campaign manager and asked for his assessment overall. He said the GOP is in real trouble in the county because this year's off year election traditionally has the lowest turnout of all -- there is lessened interest because of the lack of a top race. Still, the Dems won in the "ebb" turnout year -- and we all know Dems typically do better when turnout is higher.
Think of it this way. Cuccinelli's 92 vote edge came with only 32% turnout. Barker's narrow edge came with 34% turnout. Chap's 11% edge came with 39% turnout.
Compare two races in 2005 and 2007. Caputo beat Craddock in the interesting 2005 election year by 15%, and beat Cadin this time by 6%. Now, Craddock was a really awful candidate--but when one looks at the percent voting one gets a different look at the result. Caputo's reduced margin this time came with only a 32% turnout. He won last time handily when turnout was 42%.
Statewide in 2005 turnout was 45%. But go back to the presidential election year and turnout statewide was 71%.
With Fairfax being a really blue county, and with a big turnout in a presidential election year, I think Mr. Gilmore's odds are very slim.