I think he'd make a successful candidate for Attorney General. Creigh would be our best bet for someone at the top of the ticket who helps us down-ticket as well.  

the result of your idea would be Governor McDonnell working with Attorney General Moran.

Deeds can't win where McDonnell's strong and where the votes exist (Northern Virginia & Hampton Roads). He didn't last time. He won't this time.

I think both Creigh and Brian have potential statewide.  I think Creigh has more, and seeing as he was outspent drastically by McDonnell in 2005 yet only lost by 300 votes (how quickly the fickle blogosphere forgets these things), if we can give him even footing I think he'll win it.

it slightly favors a Deeds candidacy, IMHO.

Creigh carried 62% of the vote in Virginia's strongly democratic districts in 2005 -- 67% in the 3rd, 69% in the 8th and 53% in the 11th. By comparison, Byrne took 64%, and Kaine 65%.

Warner carried 62% of the vote in those districts in 2001. Kaine carried 62% there as well for Lt. Gov. in 2001.

Of course, it is important to remember that those Democratic districts constitute only about 25% of the vote.

Virginia elections in 2005 were close, and it is tough to draw firm conclusions from the data. To the extent that one can, however, you can conclude that carrying 62% of the three Democratic leaning districts is sufficient to win a statewide election (Warner, Kaine in 2001). Creigh has shown he can carry that amount (2005).

On the other hand, as Leslie Byrne showed in 2005, even 64% of those districts might not be enough if you lack sufficient strength elsewhere (and Byrne even had the advantage of strength in her home 11th district, which is a swing district). And given that Kaine drew 65% in those districts, I would guess it would be difficult to do much better.

In other words, at least when it comes to statewide elections on state issues, it is the ability to garner votes in places other than NoVa and Hampton Roads that seems to count.

On a pure electability argument, if the argument is whether Moran is more electable because of his strength in NoVa, or that Creigh is more electable because of his strength throughout the rest of the state, Creigh would seem to win that one.

That analysis, of course, does not consider the respective attractiveness of each candidate.

And, I would add, I'm an amateur at this, so I could be totally wrong.

We can't count that with us this year.  McDonnell will win his home.  Which means the Warner strategy may work better than the Kaine strategy.

As Virgina Beach gets more moderate, the chances for the Second being won by a Democratic candidate increase.  

Ralph Northam won both counties of the Eastern Shore.  The Northern area of Norfolk has turned blue with recent wins by Kaine, Kellam, Webb and of course Paula Miller (3 times) and Northam.  With Bobby Mathieson and Joe Bouchard winning last November, there is every possibility that enough of the Beach could vote democratic to turn the 2nd blue.  

Keep in mind, Virginia Beach voted for Kaine and it's a transient area.  There are plenty of people in the 84th that have no idea that Bob McDonnell was their Delegate before he was their Attorney General.  

I'm just pointing out that he did very well there in 05, and will likely do well again.  McDonnell crushed Creigh there, and I bet he'd do the same to Brian (if not more so).

based on the data.  I think the problem is that the date is old and unreliable.

Since 2005, the NOVA and Tidewater areas of Virginia have seen huge jumps in their popoulations as well as in the number of registered voters versus the rest of the state. So I suspect the electability arguement might be tipping to Moran at this point.

The bulk of the state's population growth has been in the traditionally Democratic, urban areas of NoVa and Hampton Roads.

As to whether that translates into an electoral advantage for Moran or for Deeds is a matter of legitimate debate.

My main point in this debate so far has been that we should proceed from an accurate accounting of what has transpired, based on the available data. Outdated as it may be, it's the best we got.

Am I missing something?  Why doesn't Moran run for Lt.. Gov. to set himself up for Gov. in 2013?  

While Creigh is a wonderful person and Senator, he cannot raise money and is a 'somewhat' lackluster speaker.  Further, I don't think he'll be able to deliver the big numbers needed in Northern Virginia and may not be able to deliver Hampton Roads.

He came close to McD last time in spite of himself due largely to Warner and Kaine's extensive coattails.

I think you all like Deeds on paper because he appears on paper to follow the Warner "rural outreach" model--but recall that that model works when someone who is completely comfortable raising money at the Tower Club and the Ritz is able to make populist inroads into more conservative areas.  It doesn't work the other way around.

Brian is by no means perfect--he will have a very difficult time in rural Virginia (much harder than Warner or Kaine).  But it seems more likely that he'll be able to successfully pitch a 'hardscrabble friend of the working man' down south than Creigh will be able to function effectively in the boardrooms of Northern Virginia, DC, Richmond and Hampton Roads.  This is particularly the case with Steve Jarding shaping Brian's image for the next few months.

Brian is the pragmatic choice in this case.  Creigh should run for AG.

Your statement that Creigh won't "be able to deliver the big numbers needed in Northern Virginia and may not be able to deliver Hampton Roads," is contradicted by the facts.

He won 62% in those districts in 2005, which is sufficient to carry the state (Warner and Kaine each won 62% in 2001). The Democrats' ceiling there is probably 65% -- based on how Byrne and Kaine did in those districts on 2005.

The 2009 election will not be won or lost by a Democrat in Northern Virginia. Of course, the electoral calculus for McDonnell is different.

I think it is fine to like Brian Moran better, and to think he will make a better governor and a better, more charismatic candidate. And while some of your speculations about how Moran will do outside of NoVa and HR are unprovable one way or another, Creigh's ability to get votes on a statewide basis is a matter of record that contradicts your speculation.

won't be able to win statewide.  Instead of this debate, how about we talk about the merits of the two candidates, their visions for Virginia, their political philosophies, their legislative accomplishments, their leadership skills?  How about, on this progressive blog, we talk about who would be the most PROGRESSIVE candidate on the environment, on health care, on education, on a whole host of issues?  Or is it simply easier and more fun to talk "horse race?"

Actually, I don't know who I support in the race. I have interviewed Creigh Deeds a few times, and the man just really impresses me. As for Brian Moran, I don't know much about him.

So your point is fairly taken.

I'm actually just trying to put to rest this idea that Deeds can't win in NoVa or HR before it gains traction. Not so much in support of Deeds candidacy, but because it it is demonstrably wrong.

And, I would add, as Mark Warner has shown the remainder of Virginia is certainly available to a Yankee candidate from Alexandria, so I'd dispose of that shibboleth as well.

we should be talking aout the merits of each candidate.

Perhaps we can apply this to the 11th congressional district primary race as well.

as far as I can tell, a few people have been talking about electability, but most have been talking about the perceived merits/demerits of the candidates.

"He came close to McD last time in spite of himself due largely to Warner and Kaine's extensive coattails."

Back it up or go home.

If Carrington's statement were true, then we would expect to see similar numbers for McEachin in 2001, when both Warner and Kaine were on the ticket.

However, in the Democratic districts, there was significant drop-off. McEachin only took 56% of the vote.

Didn't have the cache in 2001 that they had in 2005 since they hadn't done anything yet.  Much longer coattails in 2005--the two are not comparable.

The question is why did Kaine voters not vote for Byrne or Deeds.  In the 11th they did vote for Leslie, and she is running there now.  If Creigh wants to be the nominee, he needs to explain a) Why those voters rejected him last time, and b) What he plans to do different this time so they don't reject him again.

Obviously, every candidate needs to explain why they will win.

Although just to be clear, Deeds beat McDonnell in the 11th in 2005, and actually was not too far off of Byrne's total there (102K v. 98K).

Allowing for the fact that it was Byrne's district and the fact that it was a down ticket race, Deeds' showing in the 11th was not too shabby.

While it is certainly true that there were obviously people who voted for Kaine and Byrne who did not pll the lever for Deeds, I'm not sure it is fair to conclude these voters "rejected" Deeds. I would argue perhaps there was some name recognition at work in the 11th for Kaine and Byrne, and that in the absence of that in a down ticket race, people vote party, but I don't really know.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to go district by district finding statistics to prove what is, by its nature, a gut impression that Deeds rode significant coattails in his close call in 2005 and that, absent such, it would not have been such a close call against a better funded Bob McD.  That seems to me to be pretty simple common sense.  

Instead,

how about you prove that Deeds would have performed as well as he did in 2005 absent a substantial wave of good feeling for Warner and Kaine.  How about proving that Deeds at the top of the ticket this time around will do just as well as Deeds under Kaine (and after Warner) in Nova and HR.

Can you do it?  Probably not.  So we're left with common sense...

Does it make sense to you that a relatively poor public speaker who was at a substantial financial disadvantage benefited significantly from a charismatic leader and substantial fundraiser at the top of the ticket and a previous office holder who left with a 70% approval rating?  Does it also make sense that when this same candidate is expected to be the "principle draw" against the same better funded, charismatic opponent he may have a harder time?

I am not bashing Creigh--I think he's a great guy and a good D.  And there is certainly the possibility that he will improve as a speaker (inspirer) and fundraiser.  I just have a hard time picturing him beating McD and an even harder time seeing him making the substantial improvements he will need to make (when he no longer has coattails but is, instead, expected to provide them) in order to excite the donors and voters the state's most populous regions.

Clearly, Brian will have his own (substantial) problems--but fundraising and getting people excited in the state's most populous regions (kind of important for D candidates) will not be among them.

I have gone district by district, and the facts simply do not support your gut impression.

For example, you talk about cache in 2005 that was not there in 2001, and that explains the coat-tails in 2005, but not 2001.

That makes no sense.

In 2001, Democrats WON both upstream races. In 2005, Democrats LOST the Lt. Governor race.

In both 2001 and 2005, the top of the ticket took 52%. So, if there was this greater cache with Kaine and Warner, why would in manifest itself in the AG race, but NOT in the race where you claim the cache was greater?

Your gut impressions are all well and good. Your evaluations of the candidate's relative strengths and weaknesses as public speakers or as fund raisers or in the charisma department is fine.

But as the saying goes, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

Moran may indeed be  abetter candidate in 2009, but you factual assertions are just wrong.

"In 2001, Democrats WON both upstream races. In 2005, Democrats LOST the Lt. Governor race.

In both 2001 and 2005, the top of the ticket took 52%. So, if there was this greater cache with Kaine and Warner, why would in manifest itself in the AG race, but NOT in the race where you claim the cache was greater?"

I would argue that Kaine was a stronger candidate of his own accord in 2001 than was Leslie Byrne in 2005.  I also think it was a minor miracle that Creigh came as close as he did in 2005 and that, had he run the same race (against the same opponent) in 2001, he would have done much worse due to the shorter coattails of the upticket at that point.

Once again--gut impressions, so feel free to disregard. But I bet you'll find that many share these same instincts.  For example, if Creigh is the "rural candidate" of choice--do you think it odd that the architect of Warner's famed "rural strategy" didn't choose him as the horse to back in this contest?

Too much time spent on the blogs this am--any responses will necessarily go unanswered...so attack away!

I'm sorry that you feel attacked because I pointed out the facts are at odds with your gut impressions.

It is my hope that Creigh will reconsider his options and decide to seek the office of Attorney General.  He's a great guy and a committed and talented public servant; but organizationally, managerially, oratorically, and financially, his gubernatorial campaign is simply not proving to be competitive with Moran's nor is it demonstrating the assets necessary to beat McDonnell in '09.

A Moran - ? - Deeds ticket would be a strong one.