No, Lowell, you aren't being overly pessimistic. You're right. If things are getting this negative this early, we won't see the kind of productive primary we saw with the three candidates last time for lieutenant governor. Byrne, Petersen, and Puckett kept to the high road. These two guys want to get down in the mud really fast.

Plus, this fight will pit the more rural parts of the state against NOVA. Not a winning thing for the Dems.

But...how can we stop it? I don't see a way.

...I'm probably going to stay as far away from it as possible if it stays like this.

And it further bothers me that creating this kind of divisiveness right now, before the 2008 General Election, when Democrats need to be unified, is also not helpful, to say the least.

I think Democrats are coming to realize that nasty primaries hurt us and are turned off by negativity directed at fellow Democrats.  We are getting tired of bloodletting in our party, especially when it risks defeat in November.

You never like to see your own party's primary become extremely negative, especially when both candidates bring a lot of positive attributes to the party. But you are completely right, Karen, we really don't need to be divisiveness right now when Virginia is a swing state in the presidential election and we have the opportunity to pick up a number of Congressional seats.

Flip a coin.  Either of these candidates would be great, but they shouldn't waste resources and good will fighting each other.  Loser gets AG.

Deeds probably could win the AG hands down.  Gov, I am not persuaded. For now, so as not to make this situation worse, I will keep my own counsel on my reasons.  But from here it seems that the Deed campaign is really off-base, strident, AND a wee bit jealous.  Enron?  Creigh's guys have got to be kidding.  And, frankly this just shows how "small" their campaign really is.

Criticism is a legitimate part of any campaign.

The problem with this campaign so far, IMHO, is that rather than let this campaign develop, it seems Moran supporters have been intent on getting Deeds to drop out before it even starts.

I mean, consider the tenor of some of the posts here in the past several months.

* Brian Moran makes a good speech at the convention, and lots of people cheer, so Creigh should drop out.

* Someone floats the canard that because Creigh is from Bath, he can't win votes in NoVa, so he should drop out.

* Brian Moran has Mame Reilly, Steve Jarding and Jerome Armstrong on his side. Creigh should drop out.

* Brian Moran wins a straw poll at a Memorial Day gathering. Creigh should drop out.

The latest fundraising numbers suggested the same thing. Brian Moran has raised so much money that why should Creigh even bother?

Given my personal tastes, I wish the Deeds campaign had raised the issues of Del. Moran's fundraising without the personal shot about Enron accountants and the sarcasm, because the issues are relevant (however one feels about them). Unfortunately, the message gets lost in the style.

And, of course, I think we are all still weary from the Clinton-Obama match.

But consider, when this community found out that Mame Reilly, who is very well-respected,  had signed onto to Moran's campaign, it took notice. Well, I think the fact that she is being paid $15K/month, which would annualize to $180K, is a relevant piece of information.

There is nothing wrong with this arrangement. Fish gotta swim. Birds gotta fly. And consultants gotta earn. But it is nonetheless a relevant fact. Anyone may look at Ms. Reilly's expression of support in a different light, no?

And if the money race matters to you (and at this point I think it is not very meaningful one way or the other), if either candidate is manipulating expenses to  suggest their campaign is in a stronger financial position than it really is, we ought to know that. If it is a standard tactic to delay payments, fine -- this article tells us that, too, and so each of us can evaluate that information accordingly. But the information is still relevant.

So, if the Deeds campaign came on a little strong here, perhaps it is understandable and forgivable, given the circumstances and arguments to date, and given the fact that his people are just getting into campaign mode.

Now, that all said, I agree with everyone here that I don't want to see 11 months of this kind of thing between Democrats. I said it during the presidential primary, and I'll say it during this one: We have two good candidates, folks. Winning in 2009 is essential. I hope we all can support the candidate we like without denigrating the other.

I am a big fan of Creigh's for reasons I have expressed previously,but I like Del. Moran as well, and If I criticize him, I'll vow to do it respectfully and with a factual basis. And however it turns out, I'll support the winner.

These campaigns are just engaging now one another. I say lets give them time to find their footing before jumping to any conclusions.

or any other RK front pager, has called for Creigh to drop out. Am I missing something here?

I referenced "posts," meaning reader comments, as distinct from diaries. So, to the extent that anyone misunderstood my point, I apologize.

RK has said it is neutral in the race, and has, as far as I can tell, acted as such.

A comment is a comment.

Ah, blog lingo. :)

I've only been using the Internets for 14 years. I'll get the hang of it any day now.

The acrimonious tone needs to be abandoned...but on the other hand, I am sincerely curious about how the Moran team managed to spend that much money without buying a single piece of direct mail, a second of radio time or a frame of television advertising.  I'm not opening up my wallet to either candidate again until either the tone changes from Creigh or Moran starts exercising some fiscal discipline.

there has been acrimony on both sides. See here, for example:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com...

A nasty battle has developed between Del. Brian J. Moran's (D-Alexandria) staff and Fairfax County police officers and sheriff's deputies over their role in next year's governors race.

Last month, the Fairfax Coalition of Police and the Fairfax Deputy Sheriff's Coalition -- both affiliated with AFL-CIO and the International Union of Police Associations (I.U.P.A.) - endorsed Sen. R. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath) instead of Moran in the race for the Democratic nomination for governor.

Jesse F. Ferguson, Moran's communications director, responded by writing a terse letter to the two organizations on July 1 questioning the "legitimacy of" their endorsement.

It doesn't look like that was a fight between the campaigns, but a disagreement between the Moran folks and the people doing the endorsement. It wasn't an attack on deeds -- and it wasn't even public. someone gave the letter to the wapo to make it public and make it look like a fight. the only "nasty battle" here seems to be between moran's guy and the union guy. not between moran and deeds.

Where on Earth do you think Tim Craig got that letter? Think the union gave it to him, in the hopes he would write an article about how Brian Moran's campaign is dragging them through the mud? My guess it it came from the Moran camp, which wanted its complaint in the paper to blunt the impact of the endorsement. I'm just guessing, but it had to be one or the other.

It is equally absurd to say this wasn't an attack on Deeds. Of course it was. This letter questioned the integrity of the entire endorsement process.

You know, as I said above I wish the Deeds spokesman had approached this particular issue a bit more gently, but at least he was willing to stand up and take responsibility for what he said on the record.

BTW, you still have not addressed your erroneous assertion i another thread that Creigh cannot get enough votes in NoVa in a general election to win.

I don't think you can say that both are at fault here. If you read the post, it's clear that the Deeds folks threw the punch on this.

The headline is "Moran's Finance Report Scrutinized by Deeds." And the first line is "A campaign staffer for Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, a Democratic candidate for governor, is accusing Del. Brian J. Moran (D-Alexandria) of turning in misleading information about his own gubernatorial campaign's fundraising numbers."

In other words, the Deeds guy -- Peter Jackson of 05 Creigh-count fame -- called up Tim Craig and made an accusation. The next paragraphs detail the accusation and the counterpoint that Deeds' campaign did the same thing it accused Moran of. Which, besides being sloppy attacking, is an attack against standard campaign practices.

The piece closes with the Moran campaign's response to the accusation of high spending: "'Delegate Moran has been very clear that he was building a team and developing the infrastructure early to level the playing field against opponents who have run statewide,' said Ferguson, who noted a recent poll showed Moran and Deeds were essentially tied." Not an ounce of acrimony in that statement.

And then, when given the clear opportunity to respond to the nasty tone of the attack in kind, Ferguson refused to do so: "It's unfortunate that they would attack the service of Mark Warner's political director (Reiley) and Mark Warner and Jim Webb's campaign manager (Jarding). I have no interest in responding in kind."

I dont think there has been so public a negative statement by the Moran Team. You don't see them calling up the WaPo and making 'accusations' or attacking fundraising, or anything like that.

Creigh Deeds has one big advantage - he's done this before, so he can start quicker and earlier. They're ramping up the rapid response and opposition research operation faster.  

Jesse Ferguson has been throwing punches at Creigh on behalf of Brian for a year.  Jesse's the one who initiated the media scuffle about Creigh's new law firm job last year and he's been playing the primary (before it even started) as a zero sum game.  

Back and forth is natural in a campaign but don't perpetuate the myth that Brian's campaign is wearing halos.  Attacking the police union because they endorsed Creigh?  Yeah, that's taking the high road.

want to send a donation to Moran.  

Peter did a great job against Taliban Bob in 2005.  The quotes were pithy.  He showed wit.  

BUT this is a primary.  It's sad that the Deeds campaign has already dragged this into the mud.  Save the negativity for the republicans.  

So much for Creigh's 'nice-guy' persona.  You can't claim to be the nice guy, and then have your campaign act like this.  Creigh, which one is it?  

Kudos to Jesse for not responding in kind.