Warner vs. Gilmore and a Pocketful of Blogs

|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Thursday, July 24, 2008; Page LZ04
This week's Notebook is a compilation of items from The Washington Post's "Virginia Politics" blog. To get your fix of Virginia politics throughout the week, check out http:/
No Winner in Senate Debate
The U.S. Senate debate on Saturday at the Homestead between Democrat Mark R. Warner and Republican James S. Gilmore III ended in a draw.
"Neither former governor scored a breakthrough," Bob Lewis of the Associated Press wrote in his initial story on the 75-minute debate.
Because Gilmore needed the debate more than Warner, the overall dynamics of the race did not change. But several things stood out.
First, Warner was far more aggressive in attacking Gilmore than he had been expected to be.
Second, Gilmore was on a clear mission: Make the debate about energy and offshore drilling. He had some success. Warner appears to have an evolving position on offshore drilling. Warner made clear during the debate that he supports lifting the federal ban on offshore drilling and leaving the issue up to individual states.
Third, Gilmore probably made some strides in shoring up his conservative base. Gilmore took a few swipes at moderate Republicans, such as former Senate president John H. Chichester Jr., singling him out as the reason Democrats have the majority in that chamber.
Gilmore also sought to draw distinctions with Warner on the issue of judicial appointments.
"It may be one of the most significant differences between myself and Mark Warner," said Gilmore, who held up Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Samuel A. Alito Jr. and John G. Roberts Jr. as examples of good Supreme Court justices.
When Warner was asked after the debate whether he agreed they were good justices, he said, "I might agree with one of them." He refused to elaborate, saying, "I am not going to weigh in on individual justices."
But many of Gilmore's statements seemed better suited for a 1990s-style Republican campaign in Virginia, where voters have elected two successive Democratic governors and Sen. James Webb (D) in recent years.
Warner went out of his way to try to drive a wedge between Gilmore's conservative views on some issues and those of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the presumptive GOP nominee for president. Warner mentioned McCain more than he mentioned Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), the presumptive Democratic nominee.


Discussion Policy![[The Presidential Field]](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/09/17/GR2007091700670.gif)
