Find out how Cooch took $55,000 from the disgraced "U.S. Navy Veterans Association," in apparent exchange for his promise to get the Virginia Office of Consumer Affairs (which had "notified Thompson's group that it no longer qualified for an exemption from state registration requirements") off the group's back. Can we say "pay-to-play?" Find out more.
Many of us in Northern Virginia have been closely watching the results of the race between Gerry Connolly and Keith Fimian in the 11th District. Over the past four days, election officials and volunteers from both parties have conducted a canvass - a process which takes place after every election - in which vote tallies from each precinct are examined.
According to the State Board of Elections, the current unofficial count is at 111,695 votes for Gerry Connolly and 110,727 for Keith Fimian -- a difference of just 968 votes, or 0.43%. Fimian would be well within his right to request a recount at state expense, but does anyone think this would net him enough votes to change the outcome? As we have seen over the past few days, canvassing has only increased the margin for Gerry Connolly.
I think that Fimian is not planning to run for anything again, so he is throwing everything he's got into this effort. What's he got to lose at this point? If he chooses not to challenge the results, he remains the loser. If he chooses to make a challenge, the worst thing that could happen is that he is, well, still the loser.
Could the Fimian campaign have something up its sleeve? Anthony Bedell, Chairman of the Fairfax County GOP, says, "There are several developments in the Fimian - Connolly race that may call into question the accuracy of the current vote totals."
[This post is written by NRDC Action Fund's Rob Perks, who is the Director of NRDC's Center for Advocacy Campaigns]
The role of federal climate legislation in the mid-term Congressional elections, to paraphrase Mark Twain, is being greatly exaggerated. For instance, Politico was quick to blame last year's vote on the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) for the defeat of House Democrats.
In reality, 160 Democratic representatives who voted for the House climate bill won their elections yesterday. (This does not include four races that are still too close to call as of this writing.) On the other hand, 19 of 34 representatives who voted against the bill went down in defeat. (This excludes two races that were not decided as of this writing.)
[UPDATE, 11/04: E&E Daily has a story today that echoes my analysis, with a headline that is on point: "Being a Democrat, rather than voting for cap and trade, was the true political killer." (Sorry, no link provided because subscription is required.) As the article explains: "According to conventional wisdom, House Democrats who voted for a sweeping climate change bill last year paid a steep price for it on Election Day. But the theory of greenhouse gas emissions limits as ballot-box poison only goes so far, according to an E&E Daily analysis of competitive races. Among the Democratic-held House seats rated most endangered on election eve by the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, 61 percent of incumbents who voted for the 2009 cap-and-trade bill lost their races. But the most threatened incumbents who opposed the legislation fared even worse, with 79 percent falling despite their resistance to a measure the GOP savaged as "cap and tax." The better overall performance by vulnerable House Democrats who survived after backing the climate plan - a camp that ranges from the Mountain West to the South and includes three Iowans - is hardly a vindication of a legislative process that left even some environmentalists soured on the final cap-and-trade bill. It does suggest, however, that many Democrats in swing districts were brought low by voter discontent with a bad economy and an ambitious federal agenda, not the 1,200-page climate plan specifically."]
It seems that disgruntled independent voters tipped the election away from the party in power toward Republicans. So, whether this election is viewed as a sign of antipathy toward or flat-out repudiation of the Democrats over the lackluster economy or any other policy frustrations, one thing is clear: concern about the ill-fated cap-and-trade climate legislation barely registered with voters.
Indeed, according to a survey released today by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, when voters who chose the Republican candidate were asked in an open ended question to name their biggest concern about the Democrat, only 1 percent cited something related to energy or cap and trade. And when offered a list of six arguments Republicans made against Democrats, only 7 percent of voters selected the so-called "cap and trade energy tax."
There you have it: the mid-term election was about the economy, stupid - not clean energy and climate legislation.
But make no mistake, voters of all political stripes still care about those issues. Indeed, polling from across the country shows that Americans overwhelmingly support clean energy policies and comprehensive efforts to protect our air and water.
And in California, voters resoundingly rejected Proposition 23, a move by Texas oil companies to roll back the state's landmark clean energy and climate law.
So the takeaway from the contentious mid-term elections is this: voters may disagree on a number of political issues but there is common ground to be found on the issue of clean energy - and elected leaders should take notice.
I just finished working the polls in Big Stone Gap for Rick Boucher. When I voted at 10:00 this morning, more than 400 people had already voted in my precinct. Turn out is much higher than in 2008 when I worked as Wise County Field Organizer for Obama. I am a quadriplegic, paralyzed from the chest down. I worked by myself from 10 to 3 handing out around 300 flyers and sample ballots.I probably missed talking to 100 or so other voters as I was rolling around trying to get to everyone. Roughly two thirds of the people I talked too expressed positive opinions of Boucher. I even managed to change the minds of a couple of people voting against Obama. All in all, it was a very productive and uplifting day at the polls. From what I've been told, turn out is running high all over Wise County.
Yes, I proudly voted for a Democrat today. I drove past all the absurd "Stop Obama" signs and the signs falsely claiming the GOP candidate will balanced the budget. (The GOP has never delivered a balanced budget yet, so there is a zero chance this claim is true.). I remember who brought us a surplus --and it was Democrat Bill Clinton.
I also remember who brought the US economy to its knees. And it was not the Democrats. Paraphraising that recent video (about such remembering), which appeared on the BV front page , we remember who has brought us jobs and who has not, who tried to provide tax incentives for keeping jobs in the US and what party obstructed that effort. I voted because only one party cares about or will produce jobs, the Democratic party.
UPDATE 2:35pm: Over $600 in contributions from 14 individuals - thanks for your support!
I was in Rep. Tom Perriello's Danville campaign office last night when his regional field director said that while he was thrilled with the unexpectedly huge flood of volunteers the campaign is seeing, he'd love to have more cars & vans to get them from the office to voters in far-flung areas. Well, I said ... I know some blue Virginians who might be able to chip in to help out.
While not all of us can get to the 5th Congressional district, this is a great chance to support Tom's volunteers. Can you spare $25 or more to help Tom's volunteers be supplied with the resources they need to get out the vote?
I'm working out of Rep. Tom Perriello's Danville office through the election on behalf of the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund, which has endorsed Tom. I can't overstate how much energy there is for Tom here in Danville. Tom's office has been flooded with so many volunteers, they've expanded into additional office space across Main Street -- phone banks on the south side of the street, canvasses launching on the north side. In just the short drive to my canvass location tonight, I passed two other Perriello volunteers. Yard signs density in some neighborhoods is greater than I've ever seen for any candidate.
Most importantly, voters who came out to cast ballots for Obama/Warner/Perriello in '08 are closely engaged in this race.
As expected, the Hurt campaign is attempting to monopolize on President Obama's recent visit to Charlottesville. Two things stood out to me in his email (forwarded to me by GOPUSA). First is that he chooses to call Perriello a "lap dog." The other thing is Hurt's claim that "liberal special interest groups" are outspending him 6 to 1. Does that sound right to anyone down there in the 5th District? How much are the right-wing interest groups spending by comparison?
SUBJECT: Cut Obama's Lap Dog's Leash
Dear Fellow Conservative,
Obama and Pelosi control Perriello to such an extent, you would think they have him on a leash.
The most hotly contested congressional race in the nation is right here. Two different polls show the race as either a dead heat or our being ahead of my ultra-liberal Pro-Choice opponent. Obama is so worried about my being elected to Congress and bringing my Pro-Life views to Washington, that he is coming right here, to our backyard, this weekend.
Only one poll, which typically uses automated calls --the least appropriate method--to poll its sample here, shows the 9th District race a statistical tie, with others showing Rick Boucher leading. It is difficult to believe voters of the 9th would reward the opportunistic race waged by Morgan Griffith, who has done absolutely nothing for the 9th and has even sent school funding (and therefore jobs) out of our area. He's blocked protection of electricity rate-payers in our region. And yet, caution suggests we must take seriously even the possibility that such a tie is in play. So, today, I bring you some recent endorsements from the SW Virginia region's newspapers. And then I invite you to join in and help Rick go back to Washington, where he has ably, constructively and responsibly represented us. Morgan Griffith knows nothing about constructive leadership. But I invite you to read what others are saying.
"Boucher puts his constituents first, not his party. He deserves re-election.," said the Roanoke Times. Meant to contrast the extremely vicious partisanship of Morgan Griffith, this statement's subtext is clear. Morgan Griffith cares only about destructiveness, giveaways to the rich, and corporatism. The 9th cannot afford to go "there."
As I talk to voters here in Virginia's 5th Congressional district, creating jobs is obviously one of their top concerns. It's hard to explain Robert Hurt's jobs "plan" to them, because it's completely nonsensical:
Cut taxes for the rich, adding $700 billion to the national debt
Keep encouraging companies to send jobs overseas by protecting their tax loopholes
Roll back regulations on the industries that caused the economic collapse
Apparently someone forgot to tell Rob Wittman that it isn't ok to use taxpayer dollars to prepare, publish and mail his political campaign materials. The "franking privilege" allow members of Congress to send "official mail," under their signature, without postage - although this sort of mail is not free as it is paid for by annual tax-funded appropriations. As Rob is no doubt aware, political campaign mailers do not fall under what is allowable as "official mail."
Additionally, congressmen are prohibited (Section 3210 (a)(6)(A), Title 39 U.S.C.) from sending out any mass mailings during the 90-days preceding the date of an election - be it primary or general. A mass mailing is defined as "an unsolicited mailing of 500 or more pieces of substantially identical content - whether mailed singly or in bulk - over the course of a legislative year."
Since the 90-day blackout period begun, Rob has not shied away from using taxpayer funds to send out what are clearly campaign mailers. Kandy Hilliard, Chair of the Stafford Democratic Committee, issued a press release this morning that accused him of misusing taxpayer funds for campaign expenses and called for a formal investigation to be launched.
SEAGRAVES:If you're a legal owner of a firearm, should you be able to carry that firearm anywhere you want -- schools, public transportation, bars, restaurants?
FIMIAN: ...You know, I think that at Virginia Tech, if one of those kids in one of those classrooms was packin' heat, I think that, that would not have happened.
SEAGRAVES: It is illegal for students to carry guns into the campus...
FIMIAN: The perpetrator of that crime would've thought twice before walking into a classroom if he thought there was any chance of someone being armed and preventing him from doing that.
Here's 2nd CD Republican nominee, Scott Rigell, who the other day condemned (now former) Virginia Beach Republican Committee chair David Bartholomew for forwarding a racist email. Now, in response to a woman's question about why he let this happen to a "wonderful leader" like Bartholomew, and why this came up now, here's the bizarre, conspiratorial part of Rigell's response (after once again, correctly, stating that with leadership comes responsibility and accountability):
Now, why it came out the way it came out and when it came out? You understand that. And you know what, the full fabric of our community understands that as well, because I've been in touch with our friends in all parts of our community...they're not fooled by this.
You know, Mr. Rigell, one rule I've always heard in politics is that when you're in a hole, the first thing you want to do is stop digging. In the final 10 days of your campaign against Glenn Nye and Kenny Golden, you just might want to heed that advice. Or not. I don't really care, as I'm not a fan of Glenn Nye's and I really, really am not fan of yours!
In the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Virginia, it wasn't as if George Allen's lead collapsed the day the video of Allen tauntingly calling a Democratic staffer "macaca" came out. It was the first in a chain of events -- Allen's multiple, convoluted explanations, news of his Jewish heritage & his virulent rejection of it -- that prompted voters to ask themselves, "Do I really know who George Allen is?" When they took a second look at Allen's phony cowboy boots next to Jim Webb's combat boots ... well, you know how that went.
At TPM this morning, Josh Marshall says Rand Paul's inability to offer any coherent explanation to the Aqua Buddha controversy may have similarly shaken Kentucky voters' faith that they really know who Rand Paul is:
It's his response that seems weird. Why won't he just deny it? Or say it was a college prank and move on? And what's with the grandiose backing out of the final debate? Why won't he show up and face the guy who smacked him? (Paul's actually kept this one in suspense. He's going to announce [Friday] whether he'll show up for the second debate.)
In other words, it's sounding like a pretty good example of what I've called "bitch slap politics", a form of political gambit in which the substance of the attack is less important than showing the recipient can't or won't defend himself.
It took Webb weeks to close the gap with Allen, while Jack Conway has only days to catch Paul. But the gap is much smaller. Could we be looking at an upset in Kentucky?
Local Editorial: In Virginia, The Examiner endorses Fimian, Murray and Wolf
That would be the lunatic Washington Examiner, a "newspaper" (using the term extremely loosely) that makes the Moonie Times look moderate. Heck, even Ken Cuccinelli supporter Scott McCaffrey at the Sun-Gazette calls the Examiner "off the deep end," citing "its relentless effort to prove President Obama is the anti-Christ." Seriously, the paper makes Human Events, Michelle Malkin and Townhall look semi-sane. And this is the newspaper which thinks that Keith Fimian, Patrick Murray and Frank Wolf are the cat's meow. Case closed - unless you're a nutjob, vote Connolly, Moran and Barnett! :)
I am proud to represent Charlottesville, home of the UVA Cancer Center and one of two National Cancer Institute designated cancer centers in the entire commonwealth of Virginia. Virginia received over $86 million in grants and contracts from the National Cancer Institute in 2009, making a significant contribution not only to cancer research but also to local economic development and job growth. Each year, over 36,000 Virginians are diagnosed with cancer. I strongly support increased funding for cancer research so we can make a dramatic improvement in the health and quality of life of cancer patients. - Tom Perriello
But Tom's opponent, Robert Hurt, has declined to respond to the ACS survey so far. It's not like the ACS is a political action committee, or even that controversial. I understand avoiding the media when you have a horrible, horrible set of policies in mind, but avoiding the American Cancer Society, in a district with a major cancer research center?
Just got done watching Rep. Tom Perriello debate Robert Hurt on WCAV CBS 19 Charlottesville. Now that was a thing of beauty. I'm hoping there will be video shortly. For now, here are some tweets (including my own) from the butt-kicking Tom just delivered. Enjoy!
Another day brings yet another one of Scott Rigell's top endorsers - this time, former (2001) Virginia Beach Republican Committee chair, Karen Beauchamp - caught sending a racist email, this time with hate video to boot. Warning: the content in the video is some of the most vile, offensive language I've listened to in a really long time, it's very difficult to even sit through it. Ugh. Anyway, to say that racism is not a wide-spread problem among Virginia Beach Republicans is clearly untrue.
Yesterday, Scott Rigell did the right thing and denounced (now former) Virginia Beach Republican Committee chair David Bartholomew. Today, it looks like Rigell needs to denounce yet another VBRC chair, also a top endorser of his campaign. Right now, Rigell's got her name prominently displayed on his website (see image after the "fold"). After you watch the video or read the quotes from the video, I think you'll all agree that needs to change immediately.
In her email, Ms. Beauchamp enthusiastically references a video, by this guy, which is both too repulsive to watch, and apparently too repulsive for YouTube to allow on their site. If you really want to see it, it's available at the "Conservative Sportsmen" site. If you can't stomach watching it, which I wouldn't blame you if you didn't, I'll include a selection of a few of the most offensive quotes from the video after the "fold." Blech.
UPDATE: Scott Rigell's campaign has condemned this email as well. Good for him. Ms. Beauchamp's name also appears to have been removed from Rigell's list of endorsers.
Let me be clear, racism has no place in our society and runs completely counter to Scott Rigell's values. The Rigell campaign does not condone this type of behavior from anyone associated with our campaign. It should be noted that Karen Beauchamp is not in a position of leadership or an advisor to the Rigell campaign, and she has not been in a position of leadership within the Republican Party for close to 10 years.
By the way, that Washington Post story is almost completely wrong; the video they mention is a completely different video from a completely different story. Whatever, details details! (snark)
According to SurveyUSA (for what it's worth, as I'm honestly not sure what to make of this outfit's - or any outfit's - polling this cycle):
In VA-09, Democrat Boucher Remains Well Positioned for 15th Term in US House: In an election for US House of Representatives in Virginia's 9th Congressional District today, 10/14/10, incumbent Democrat Rick Boucher defeats Republican State House Majority Leader Morgan Griffith, 51% to 41%, according to a WDBJ-TV news poll conducted by SurveyUSA. 1 in 5 Republicans cross-over to vote Democrat. Independents break for the Democrat, one of the few places in 2010 where this is the case.
Apparently, Rick Boucher is so personally popular in the 9th CD, that even a national tsunami can't wash him away. This one looks like a Democratic "hold" in a couple weeks from now.
I'm planning to watch Tom Perriello debate Robert Hurt on WSLS starting at 6 pm. I'm also going to try and live blog it. We'll see how it goes, technically speaking, but my prediction is that Tom Perriello will kick Robert Hurt's butt all over the stage. Stay tuned! :)
6:01 pm: Welcoming the candidates, hopefully they'll get going right away since this only 1/2 hour (why so short?).
6:02 pm: No opening or closing statements, no timekeeper, no rules. Wild!
6:03 pm: First question, the budget, should we balance it. Both say "yes." WSLS points out, only 13% of budget goes to discretionary spending. So, how do you balance the budget? Hurt - surprised to hear Perriello in favor of balanced budget, supposedly said that was unrealistic, that's a "slap in the face." Hurt says we have to "make tough decisions," "get into entitlement spending," "make health care cost less, not more." Attacks Obama and Pelosi for "jamming down our throats" health care bill. Not in favor of raising taxes or cutting defense.
Perriello - Everything has to be on the table, "I've fought for that." Bipartisan budget commission. Hurt refused to support McDonnell on his balanced budget. We don't need politicians who think solutions fit on a bumper sticker, we need leaders. Balanced budget amendment will take 10 years to pass, we don't have 10 years. Find efficiency gains, "I've done it." Ran most efficient office in Virginia. We have to look at entitlements, defense, make tough choices.
Hurt - Don't raise retirement age. Find savings in healthcare costs. Problem is what he and Nancy Pelosi have given us is not health care reform. Market-based solutions into health care system. Allow insurance companies to sell policies across state lines, create competition, premiums now are going up.
Perriello - Hurt clearly hasn't been listening, premiums have been going through the roof for a long time. He'd raise taxes on small businesses. His plan would add $1 trillion to the national debt. Republican plan that just came out adds $4 trillion to the debt. We don't need to go back to tired policies that got us into this mess in the first place. His plan would cut payments to seniors, increase cost of prescription drugs.
The purpose of Blue Virginia is to cover Virginia politics from a progressive and Democratic perspective. This is a group blog and a community blog. We invite everyone to comment here, but please be aware that profanity, personal attacks, bigotry, insults, rudeness, frequent unsupported or off-point statements, and "trolling" (NOTE: that includes outright lies, whether about climate science, or what other people said, or whatever) are not permitted and, if continued, will lead to banning. For more on trolling, see the Daily Kos FAQs. Also note that diaries may be deleted if they do not contain at least 2 solid paragraphs of original text; if not, please use the comments section of a relevant diary. For more on writing diaries, click here. Thanks, and enjoy!
Many of us in Northern Virginia have been closely watching the results of the race between Gerry Connolly and Keith Fimian in the 11th District. Over the past four days, election officials and volunteers from both parties have conducted a canvass - a process which takes place after every election - in which vote tallies from each precinct are examined.
As I talk to voters here in Virginia's 5th Congressional district, creating jobs is obviously one of their top concerns. It's hard to explain Robert Hurt's jobs "plan" to them, because it's completely nonsensical:
In the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Virginia, it wasn't as if George Allen's lead collapsed the day the video of Allen tauntingly calling a Democratic staffer "
I have yet to see a stronger reason to vote for 
According to 
