Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Feb 10th, 2006, 12:53 PM        "How I Won," by Gov. Tim Kaine
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Com..._10_06_TK.html

February 10, 2006
How I Won
By Tim Kaine

I am honored to be serving as the 70th governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia. How I got to the governor's mansion is a story that may be of interest to other Democrats, especially given the daunting challenges my campaign faced.

For starters, I ran in a state that President Bush had won by 8 percentage points in 2004. In addition, I began with a 21-point name identification deficit and lagged behind in every poll -- sometimes by double digits -- until September 2005, only two months before the election. Finally, I was targeted by an unprecedented series of negative attack ads and was financially out-raised and outspent through most of the contest.

Yet I won the popular vote by a margin of 6 points and more than 113,000 voters. I attribute my victory to three factors: the exceptional popularity of Gov. Mark Warner, my predecessor and partner over the past four years; my campaign's understanding of Virginia's changing demographics; and my ability to speak directly to voters and offer them a positive vision for our future.

As a candidate in 2001, Warner had offered voters a compelling story. He was a successful businessman who wanted to use his boardroom expertise to fix a government so badly mismanaged that the Republican governor and the Republican state legislature couldn't even reach agreement on a state budget. After four years at the helm, Warner was given great credit for enacting record spending cuts, thus preserving Virginia's sterling credit rating. He also enacted historic bipartisan budget reform and earned the ranking of Best-Managed State from Governing magazine. Warner's approval rating grew to a record 80 percent.

Voters in 2005 understood that Virginia was much better off than it had been four years earlier. At the same time, voters were anxious about the direction the country was going under Republican management. The voters also knew that I, as lieutenant governor, had worked closely with Governor Warner, while my opponent, Jerry Kilgore, the state attorney general, had fought against him on practically everything.

Just as Warner had done in 2001, I had to accomplish three things to win in a red state. First, I had to find and energize Democratic voters. Second, I had to share my story with the voters. Third, I had to reach out to independent and Republican voters in a strategic way. And that's exactly what we did.

The generally positive feelings Democrats had heading into the election made them easier to energize. This was a significant contrast to Republican voters, whose enthusiasm was dampened by dissatisfaction with the Bush administration, various Washington scandals, and criticism over the response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. In Virginia, Kilgore was failing to excite his Republican base. That lack of enthusiasm was highlighted last summer, when, in the GOP primary, nearly 20 percent of Republican voters supported Kilgore's little-known and underfinanced challenger.

To find and turn out Democrats, we identified and targeted a group we labeled as "federal Democrats" -- people who vote in presidential election years but typically stay home during statewide elections. A quick examination of the last few election cycles illustrates just how significant that block of voters is.

In 2001, Mark Warner won the governor's race by a margin of 4.5 percentage points. Three years later, John Kerry lost Virginia by 8 points. But Kerry received almost half a million more votes than Warner. We spared little, in terms of time and attention, to reach these voters, knowing they would vote for us if we got them to show up at the polls.

I also thought it was important to tell my personal story and share my values and motivation with voters. After all, a candidate who fails to clearly define himself will be defined by his opponent's attacks.

I wanted to explain to people how my faith and my heart for public service, formed while serving as a missionary in Central America, inspire me to seek public office. As a law student at Harvard 25 years ago, I found myself with a lot of options but little direction. I decided to take off a year and work with Catholic missionaries in Honduras. I was the principal of a small vocational school, teaching carpentry, religion, and academics to children who had no other educational options. Second only to becoming a father, that experience was the most formative of my life. It has influenced everything I have done since -- from my career as a civil rights attorney to my service in local and state offices.

Just as it is in my life, my religious faith was a vital part of that story. I spoke about it often. But it wasn't clear until late in the race how much of an impact my faith would play in the contest, when Kilgore ran aggressive death penalty attack ads. Using the family members of crime victims, Kilgore insisted that my personal faith-based opposition to capital punishment would prevent me from carrying out executions. The ads were shocking and emotional. They led some pundits to immediately claim they would sink my campaign.

We quickly pointed out several untruths in the ads. A backlash began to form in both the press and the public to the nasty tone of Kilgore's campaign. I was also able to respond through my own ads, telling voters that I took the oath of office as seriously as my wedding vows.

We understood from the beginning of the campaign that our path to victory would be different from that of Governor Warner's 2001 campaign. Our strategy had to reflect that reality.

Warner had run against a suburban Republican from the Hampton Roads/Norfolk area, thus making the rural parts of the state the battleground. Warner focused a lot of his campaign on rural areas, especially in southwestern Virginia. He promised that a combination of new technology, better educational opportunities, and more attention from the state government would create a brighter economic future. That focus paid off when he performed remarkably well in the rural areas.

My opponent, by contrast, was a southwest Virginia native, with strong family and professional ties throughout the region. We knew that he would run well there. So we focused our strategy on winning extra support from the suburbs, where two-thirds of Virginia's population lives.

I had already decided on a policy platform that held a natural appeal for suburban voters. It included tax relief for homeowners, a statewide pre-K initiative, a balanced approach to growth, and new transportation solutions.

Our campaign strategy focused on eight "battleground" localities. These were suburban counties in Northern Virginia, Richmond, Hampton Roads, and Central Virginia that routinely go Republican. Our goal was not to win these suburbs, but to cut in half the GOP's usual margin of victory.

But we dramatically exceeded our expectations in the "battleground" localities. Rather than just cutting our margin of defeat, we actually won six of the eight counties we targeted. We also out-performed our goals in the other two. And therein lies the secret of our statewide victory.

Even as we methodically laid out our strategy, told my personal story, and offered an optimistic message of building on our success on key issues, Kilgore only relied more heavily on negative television and radio attack ads.

When Kilgore's death penalty attack ads failed to generate any movement in the polls, he tried to label me as a tax-raiser, a liberal, and a flip-flopper. When those failed to gain any traction, he tried to focus the race on the issue of illegal immigration, which was a growing concern in Northern Virginia. His attacks attracted national media attention, because illegal immigration is a hot topic in other parts of the country.

I responded by saying that I was opposed to illegal immigration, but that it was wrong to ask our local police officers to do the job of the federal government. I also reminded people that if Kilgore really wanted to do something about immigration, all he had to do was pick up a phone and call Bush and his Republican friends in Washington. He could tell them to do their jobs by enforcing the immigration laws.

When you consider the margins by which I won the regions he targeted with that attack ad, an argument can be made that it ultimately backfired.

While motivating our Democratic base, we strategically and successfully reached out to independent and Republican voters. We fought hard and avoided being the other side's punching bag. At the same time, we held the high ground by offering a positive message for the future. And most important, our agenda focused on the real-life issues -- homeowner's tax relief, pre-K, transportation -- that mattered to the suburban voters we targeted.

Winning support in fast-growing suburbs was the key to winning this election. In 2004, Bush won 97 of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties. To counter that trend, I aimed to connect with those voters by running a campaign focused on "quality of life" issues. Overcrowded schools, highway congestion, sprawl, housing prices, and property taxes are problems that didn't go away when the 1990s ended. They are big concerns in the places where I campaigned and won.

When I told suburban voters that I wanted to help them "grow right and get there faster," it resonated with suburban voters, regardless of what political affiliation they held. This addressed their top two concerns: How to preserve the lifestyle they sought by moving to the suburbs, and how to contend with the biggest drags on their quality of life there -- transportation and traffic.

That's why, as governor-elect, my first act was to hold town hall meetings in key locations, around the state, to discuss transportation solutions.

I now have the opportunity to put my platform into place. It won't be easy. Republicans control both chambers of the Virginia Legislature. But I welcome the challenge.

Tim Kaine is governor of Virginia.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Feb 10th, 2006, 12:53 PM       
It has been said over and over again all over the internet, but Tim Kaine's (and more importantly, as even he concedes, the popularity of Mark Warner) victory in Virginia is a race to be closely examined. Put simply, a Democrat took a typically very Red state. Kaine isn't the only example of this, there's also folks like Gov. Scwartz (sp?) in Montana, Governors Granholm and Vilsack in Michigan and Iowa respectively, as well as Sen. Salazar in Colorado.

I am torn on this approach by the Democrats. This isn't a "Kevin's politics" thread, but I have taken a more bread & butter, less ideological position on politics and governing lately. That's why this "Administrative Democrat" model has appeal for me. Warner in particular has shown REAL results in Virginia, however many of those results (like loosening gun restrictions) wouldn't be very digestable to many Democrats.

I think the Democratic primary in 2008 will come down to Warner and Clinton. Clinton will probably win that battle, because she has more money right now than the entire Democratic Party, and can win Democratic primaries, which tend to draw out more activist types. I think this is unfortunate, because all it tells me is that Democrats still don't get what Republicans have understood for over two decades now-- elections matter.

So when it's January, 2009, and we're swearing in a President McCain, or a President Giuliani (AAAHHH!!!), or even a President Romney, Democrats can start the bitching all over again. Ted Kennedy and Howard Dean will throw fits over judicial nominations, there will be countless investigations into voting machine errors, as well as new stories about how corrupt Republicans are. Maybe Senator Kerry can stage more last minute filibuster threats, which will ultimately be futile and meaningless.

Elections matter. Bill Clinton and James Carville understood this. Implement the Socialist State all you like, but do it AFTER you've taken power.

That is all.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
sadie sadie is offline
ineffable
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: ineffability
Old Feb 10th, 2006, 08:27 PM       
i voted for kaine.

on a side issue: i wonder about the one-term-in-a-row policy for governors in virginia. do other states have that policy? why do we?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Miss Modular Miss Modular is offline
Little Monster
Miss Modular's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Haus of Gaga
Old Feb 10th, 2006, 10:28 PM       
Our country is fucked, no matter who our next president is. Hilary might slow things down a little, but I think the idea of a representative democracy in the United States has come and gone.

If it's down to Hilary and Jeb, I'll be voting for Hilary. Hell, if it's down to Hilary v. McCain, I'll vote for Hilary. But It's all done, maaaaaaan!
__________________
Live From New York, It's Saturday Night!!!: http://notready4primetime.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
  #5  
El Blanco El Blanco is offline
Mocker
El Blanco's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Old Feb 11th, 2006, 10:51 AM       
I think another big reason your examples won, Kevin, is because they also focused on regionalism over political parties.

Kaine wasn't the Democrat running for governor of Virginia. He was the Virginian running for governor on the Democrat ticket. I know it seems like semantics, but it makes him seem more personable. He didn't focus on the national party. He focused on Virginia and what he would do.

Rudy won't get the GOP nod. He's a New York Republican. Same with Pataki. Pro-gay rights. Pro-abortion. Pro-gun control. Thats the big disadvantage to regionalism. As you pointed out, you have to please the far end of your party.

Admit it. You would love to see McCain as president. The press conferences alone would more than make up for any ideological differences you have with him.
__________________
according to my mongoose, anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Feb 11th, 2006, 03:26 PM       
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Blanco
I think another big reason your examples won, Kevin, is because they also focused on regionalism over political parties.
You're right on that count, and in reality, isn't that the way it should be???

Quote:
He didn't focus on the national party. He focused on Virginia and what he would do.
Which is sort of ironic, because all of his attempts to regionalize the race ended up getting him tossed nito the national spotlight (SOTU response).

Quote:
Rudy won't get the GOP nod. He's a New York Republican. Same with Pataki. Pro-gay rights. Pro-abortion. Pro-gun control. Thats the big disadvantage to regionalism. As you pointed out, you have to please the far end of your party.
Pataki is a non-starter, but good runningmate material. Rudy isn't just a NY Republican though. He's "America's Mayor." National security will be just as key in 2008 as it is now. He will run on that, on 9/11, and will also run in a similar fashion as Warner/Kaine. Nevermind the fact that the city budget was a mess right b/f 9/11, but why digress?

Quote:
Admit it. You would love to see McCain as president. The press conferences alone would more than make up for any ideological differences you have with him.
I've said it here before, but if the race is Hillary vs. McCain, I will either vote third party (not that voting in DC matters anyway) or vote for McCain.

Warner/Feingold is my dream ticket.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
Mocker
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Feb 19th, 2006, 04:50 PM       
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Com..._19_06_TV.html

I hope Democrats around the country pay special attention to the lessons of governors in states where the national party and our last two presidential candidates have struggled. The common thread among them is that they have shown the toughness to govern, the courage to take on big reforms, and the vision and creativity to focus limited state resources on the services and investments most crucial to their states and their people. As a result, they are overcoming partisan and ideological polarization and opening the minds of independents and even many Republicans to the ideas and values of the Democratic Party. That's what we have to do nationally if we want to build a governing majority that can take on the challenges of the 21st century.


Gov. Tom Vilsack, D-IA
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:01 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.