Virginia Turns Back to Red

The rub is Deeds can’t live with Obama, and can’t live without him. His campaign is sputtering, he trails Republican Bob McDonnell by 7 points or more in every poll, and the Democratic base is demoralized. He needs Obama’s help in arousing voters and creating a Democratic surge in turnout on November 3.

The downside is Obama motivates Republicans as well and is likely to have little effect on independents. In 2006 and 2008–disastrous election years for Republicans in Virginia–“the independents were behaving like Democrats,” says former Republican congressman Tom Davis. They had turned sharply against President Bush and the war in Iraq. With Bush gone, independents are increasingly leery of Obama. For Deeds, the president is a “net negative,” Davis says.

The Obama problem isn’t unique to Deeds. It’s likely to afflict many Democratic candidates in 2010. A strong economic rebound and a rise in Obama’s approval rating would ease the problem. But for the foreseeable future in regions where Obama is relatively weak–Sunbelt, border, plains, Rockies–Democratic candidates will be skittish about being linked to the president.

Virginia 2009 is the test case. Since 2004, Democrats here have won a presidential race, a second straight contest for governor, three House seats, two U.S. Senate seats, and control of the state senate. That’s a powerful Democratic trend. Virginia seemed to have moved from Republican stronghold to blue state almost overnight–or at least to swing state that tilts Democratic.

But maybe not. The political landscape a year later looks quite different. John McCain lost to Obama by 53 percent to 46 percent in 2008. Davis says if the probable shape of the turnout next week–fewer students and blacks, more Republican-leaning independents and angry seniors–had been the case last year, McCain would have won the state. Polls of likely voters suggest the same.

When Deeds, a rural state senator, won the Democratic primary in June, Democrats were optimistic. With his moderate-to-liberal record, Deeds seemed well positioned to unite Democrats, attract independents, and win the governorship. Republicans, who’d expected former Democratic national chairman Terry McAuliffe, to be the nominee, were rattled. Deeds led McDonnell in two polls.

It’s been all downhill from there. Democrats would have you believe the blame rests with Deeds and his inept campaign. There’s some truth in that. In contrast, McDonnell, who defeated Deeds for attorney general by 323 votes in 2005, has run a crisp, disciplined, inclusive campaign from the start.

He’s overcome one big obstacle. In late August, the Washington Post, chronically hostile to Virginia Republicans, uncovered McDonnell’s 1989 master’s thesis. It was remarkable for its social conservatism, especially its criticism of working women. Deeds leaped on it, making the thesis the centerpiece of his campaign and airing TV ads on it for weeks. McDonnell repudiated parts of the thesis, insisted he supports women in the workplace, and moved on. The tactic worked. McDonnell took a hit in the polls but never fell behind.

Then, in mid-September, Deeds made a critical error. During a debate, Deeds said he would not raise taxes. Afterwards, he told reporters he was only referring to “general revenue” taxes. His evasiveness infuriated the Washington Post, which had backed Deeds in the primary on the sole issue of his willingness to increase taxes to finance road building. The paper’s endorsement was crucial in his come-from-behind victory.

Three days later, a Post editorial slammed Deeds for “trying to fudge the issue.” He responded by unveiling “my transportation plan,” which the Post published. (At the debate, McDonnell had held up a blank piece of paper, calling it the Deeds plan.) In the op-ed, Deeds said he would “sign a bipartisan bill with a dedicated funding mechanism for transportation–even if it includes new taxes.”

That thrilled the Post. In an editorial the next day headlined “Honesty on Transportation,” it praised Deeds for having “unequivocally committed himself to support higher taxes to rescue the state’s sclerotic road system.” Last week, the paper endorsed Deeds in an unusually lengthy editorial that trashed McDonnell. It conceded Deeds lacks good candidate skills, but said “there are plenty of reasons why [he] is the better choice,” particularly taxes.

Now it was McDonnell’s turn to leap. He has attacked Deeds relentlessly, in speeches and television spots, for proposing to raise taxes in a recession. His steadily improving poll numbers indicate the attacks have been effective. McDonnell’s transportation plan, by the way, involves selling state-run liquor stores and no new taxes.

Does an off-year governor’s race really matter in the national scheme of things? Absolutely. In New Jersey, the election is all about the incumbent Democratic governor, Jon Corzine. In Virginia, with its one-term rule, there’s no incumbent. So it’s one party against the other. And to the dismay of Deeds, McDonnell has injected Obama and his liberal agenda into the race. Further tying Deeds to Washington is Obama’s pick for Democratic national chairman, Virginia governor Tim Kaine.

The Virginia election isn’t a referendum on Obama. At a minimum, though, it will be clear evidence of what a state that voted for Obama in 2008 thinks of him now. Desperate to stir Democratic turnout, Deeds has embraced Obama in the waning days of the campaign. He’s broadcasting an ad in which Obama lauds him. The president is to make a final campaign appearance in Virginia this week–joined this time by Deeds. If Obama gives Deeds a significant boost, so much the better for Obama and Democrats. But if the drift to McDonnell continues, we’ll know what Virginia voters are saying about the president.

Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.