Virginia Mega Thread: The Youngkin Administration

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Could be interesting if democrats nominate this dude.

https://twitter.com/Jaaavis/status/1327632164968681474?s=20

Stupid is as stupid does

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Could be interesting if democrats nominate this dude.

https://twitter.com/Jaaavis/status/1327632164968681474?s=20

Stupid is as stupid does

Why I’m stupid ? Politically extreme / very ideological candidates - Jealous / Kobach / Gillum - don’t have a particularly strong electoral record in gubernatorial races.

I think jdb was referring to Carter thinking he had a chance of winning, not your comment

Correct

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Woof Carter went down in flames. Embarrassing to say the least.

You love to see it

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://twitter.com/Michelle4VA50/status/1442927730895376384?s=19

Beyond parody. Maybe Carter was the right choice after all.

NARAL Virginia has gone off the deep end tbf.  They’re apparently refusing to describe pregnant women as “mothers” or “women” b/c “something something Evulz cisgender terminology.”

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://mobile.twitter.com/PrinBlandingVA/status/1451953951922868230

Shameful behavior

Imagine actually believing this

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

T-Mac and his team leaning into this - the whole thing is kind of backfiring on Youngkin. Now it looks like he put some crazy lady on TV who wanted to ban a book by an award winning black author because her AP studies son "was scared"

https://twitter.com/DNCWarRoom/status/1452785923490463744

That’s the right play for McAuliffe; Youngkin has run an amazingly weak campaign and his anti-book insanity is the sort of thing thing that will play horribly in suburbia regardless of the results.  That and Youngkin’s opposition to anti-COVID regulations are his two biggest weaknesses (well…there’s also the fact that his campaign doesn’t seem to have a clue what it’s doing, but I’m talking policy/messaging).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The most interesting thing here imo is that Youngkin is an overhyped candidate who has run an absolutely terrible campaign for a VA statewide candidate, but the environment is so toxic for Democrats that it may not even matter despite Virginia being a Safe D state.  I can understand in the LG race b/c it’s much lower profile (which has led to weak Republicans like Jackson beating - admittedly very low - expectations in the past), but this is a pretty alarming development.  I really hope the polls are wrong and underestimating us here or it is gonna be a really ugly cycle.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Guys the Republican shift was generic across demographics. CRT wasn't the only thing that happened in the election. Youngkin ran a sunny, moderate campaign and Biden is unpopular. That's it.

https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/1455693099062153217?s=20

ROTFL Youngkin did not run an even remotely moderate campaign

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1456025843281633283

Silence, Republican!

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Amazing: https://twitter.com/IAPolls2022/status/1516187403093950469

Obligatory lol Zogby

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

just to remind people that Chap Peterson tended to vote more with the Democratic line than Vogel  and Dunnavant are for the gop.

Its beyond laughable someone would want to primary Peterson

In fact, he should be the 2025 Gubernatorial nominee!!!!!!!!!!

Peterson was always right:

https://wtop.com/virginia/2020/06/lawsuit-northam-covid-19-unconstitutional/

A pair of lawsuits filed Tuesday are asking Virginia and federal courts to find unconstitutional Gov. Ralph Northam’s ongoing COVID-19 executive orders restricting businesses in the commonwealth.

The suits were filed by lawyer and Virginia state Sen. J. Chapman “Chap” Petersen, D-Fairfax, on behalf of his clients, whose wedding event and restaurant businesses have been suffering. He spoke first to WTOP.

Petersen said Northam’s executive orders have effectively closed his clients’ businesses under his emergency powers during the coronavirus pandemic.

“He is using powers that are supposed to be for an emergency but, instead, he’s basically passing long-lasting and semi-permanent laws that are preventing them from operating their businesses,” Petersen said, “and he is doing it without any legislative approval. And that is unconstitutional.”

Fortunately, by July 2020 things were very loose in VA.. and few bothered to enforce MASKS, night curfews, etc.

He’s horrible on gun control.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Another significant VA senate retirement: the Dem in the Youngkin +15/Trump +10 2016 Eastern Shore seat.  This was a narrow Obama/Clinton seat before it lost significant urban territory in redistricting.  He probably didn't have much of a chance anyway.

I wonder if he’ll run for Congress

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Did the primaries really change the trajectory that much?

Well, a lot of the number crunchers went into this with the assumption that the VA State Senate would close to Likely D while the HoD would be a toss up.  However, several things have happened to change this assessment leading to a place where both chambers could reasonably flip:

1. A 20/20 tie in the state senate goes to R's through the LG, while a 50/50 tie in the HoD cannot be broken and leads to power sharing unless someone switches parties (note there are no remaining rural Dems in the HoD who would obviously consider switching).

2. Individual candidates matter more in the smaller state senate.  Both of the strong Dem incumbents in Lean R rural-ish districts retired and R's nominated their strongest candidate in every one of the several Lean R Biden +5-10/Youngkin +5-10 seats.  They also a Susan Collins type candidate who is a moderately pro-choice OBGYN who already won a significantly Clinton 2016 district in the 2019 elections running in a Richmond area Dem-leaning seat (admittedly, it's a stretch at Biden +16, but D's will at the very least have to divert resources there).  If she gets through and R's win all of the Lean R districts, they have tied even without the median Biden +13/Youngkin +1 district.  However, this cuts the other way in the HoD because R's need to sweep several Biden +12ish districts with anonymous people.  

3. Outer NOVA is shaky.  The VA-10 area contains the most likely decisive seat for state senate control and it barely voted left of 2021 Youngkin/McAuliffe in the 2022 US House elections.  The Biden numbers probably don't work there anymore.

4. On the other hand, downstate college towns look great for Dems and turnout was surprisingly high in these areas in the primary.  Many of the decisive seats are anchored by college towns.  There's also a seat in the Richmond suburbs that is racing left.  Biden barely won it, but then it voted for McAuliffe in 2021 and the no-name congressional Dem in 2022.  They only need to win a couple of these seats to count to 50.  

Respectfully, I think your analysis here is fundamentally flawed in that you seem to be implicitly treating Youngkin numbers as more significant than the Biden 2020 numbers.  The Biden 2020 numbers are far more useful as a baseline than the Youngkin 2021 numbers.  The latter were basically the perfect storm, tsunami-level Republican wave absolute high-water mark for Virginia Republicans in NOVA.  While neither data set represents a perfect baseline, it would be a mistake to treat the Youngkin numbers in NOVA as anything more than a freak fluke.  It'd be like treating the 2021 New Jersey Governor results as the default baseline in New Jersey going forward.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

co/efficient (R) has D+1

https://twitter.com/IAPolls2022/status/1699087583613993354

Junk poll

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Have people factored in the high chance that we'll be in a government shutdown starting Oct 1 and a bunch of people in Fairfax and Loudoun will be furloughed?

Hmmm... the shutdown in 2013 likely explained the Dem wins in VA that year.  Only time the president's party has won the governorship since 1973, so it was pretty exceptional.

The Dem won because the Libertarian took nearly 7% of the vote.

There were a number of factors at play that year.  Republicans also ran a pretty weak candidate.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The Democratic cope in this thread is nuts.  She should drop out immediately and if she doesn’t then she’ll blow the race.  Simple as that.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

The Democratic cope in this thread is nuts.  She should drop out immediately and if she doesn’t then she’ll blow the race.  Simple as that.

A lot of people are saying many things.

That was not intentional

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/virginia-democrat-who-raised-money-by-selling-sex-acts-could-be-charged-with-prostitution-lawyers-say
Seems like the GOP operator was basically doing media bait on liberal publications. He could have given it to say the dailywire first but seems he gave it to the AP who not only refused to report it but actually tipped Gibson off.  Seems the WaPo did decide to report it.

Lawyers probably nixed it. Don't know why WaPo decided to run the story

Because the Washington Post has a shred of journalistic ethics.  If the AP sat on this, it really calls their credibility as a news source into question.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/virginia-democrat-who-raised-money-by-selling-sex-acts-could-be-charged-with-prostitution-lawyers-say
Seems like the GOP operator was basically doing media bait on liberal publications. He could have given it to say the dailywire first but seems he gave it to the AP who not only refused to report it but actually tipped Gibson off.  Seems the WaPo did decide to report it.

Lawyers probably nixed it. Don't know why WaPo decided to run the story

Because the Washington Post has a shred of journalistic ethics.  If the AP sat on this, it really calls their credibility as a news source into question.

Actually, the opposite. AP probably realized there was a ton of liability with this story, not to mention it was literally just Republican oppo research. Sounds like AP did the right thing here. Shame on WaPo for publishing it.

1) I’ll grant you that this isn’t my area of legal expertise/practice, but based on what I’ve read, I don’t see any legal liability for a news outlet publishing this objectively true story.  The Washington Post was doing its job.  It’s a shame the AP chose not to just because the politician who would be damaged was a Democrat.  Folks who are fine with how the AP handled this have no business criticizing Fox News.  Fox is much worse, but it’s the same underlying issue (okay Fox has a number of them, but the partisan bias is one of them).

2) It may well be Republican opposition research, but that doesn’t make it any less true.  All due respect, but shame on Democrats who don’t recognize how bad this due to their partisan blinders.

3) How have folks on Atlas not learned anything from Katie Hill and Cal Cunningham regarding the political ramifications?  Both their scandals were really bad, but not as bad as this one and yet proved more than enough to sink them.  And yet we have folks breathlessly insisting that this will have no impact on the race or even backfire on Republicans.  And if Gibson somehow wins, then shame on the voters because anyone who does something like this is clearly unfit for office.  And what the hell was that “it was for a good cause” garbage?  Seriously?  That’s really what we’re going with?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/virginia-democrat-who-raised-money-by-selling-sex-acts-could-be-charged-with-prostitution-lawyers-say
Seems like the GOP operator was basically doing media bait on liberal publications. He could have given it to say the dailywire first but seems he gave it to the AP who not only refused to report it but actually tipped Gibson off.  Seems the WaPo did decide to report it.

Lawyers probably nixed it. Don't know why WaPo decided to run the story

Because the Washington Post has a shred of journalistic ethics.  If the AP sat on this, it really calls their credibility as a news source into question.

I don't think you understand what journalistic ethics are. It's not to report on every single story that is given to you or report stories about candidates to try and influence voters. It's not the job of newspapers to do opposition research and media campaigns for Republicans. No laws were broken.

This was a major story that raises extremely serious questions about a candidate’s judgement, integrity, values, and basic fitness for office.  It is absolutely news and respectfully, it’s pretty clear that you only care about journalistic ethics when it’s a story that would make a Republican look bad. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/virginia-democrat-who-raised-money-by-selling-sex-acts-could-be-charged-with-prostitution-lawyers-say
Seems like the GOP operator was basically doing media bait on liberal publications. He could have given it to say the dailywire first but seems he gave it to the AP who not only refused to report it but actually tipped Gibson off.  Seems the WaPo did decide to report it.

Lawyers probably nixed it. Don't know why WaPo decided to run the story

Because the Washington Post has a shred of journalistic ethics.  If the AP sat on this, it really calls their credibility as a news source into question.

I don't think you understand what journalistic ethics are. It's not to report on every single story that is given to you or report stories about candidates to try and influence voters. It's not the job of newspapers to do opposition research and media campaigns for Republicans. No laws were broken.

This was a major story that raises extremely serious questions about a candidate’s judgement, integrity, values, and basic fitness for office. It is absolutely news and respectfully, it’s pretty clear that you only care about journalistic ethics when it’s a story that would make a Republican look bad.  

LOL absolutely not. This was two consenting adults who are married to each other. If you disagree with their "integrity and values" then this is a whole different issue that you are clearly projecting onto. This is like saying a porn star or sex worker can't run for office because they theres questions about their "basic fitness" for office and their "values"? No. This isn't 1925.

Yes, and?  Rightly or wrongly, the vast majority of Americans share my position on this sort of stuff.  Most people would have serious concerns about the values and basic fitness for office of a sex worker or porn star who tried to enter politics and you’re only fooling yourself if you try to pretend otherwise.  And you can’t even dismiss it as “something something two consenting adults” when she engaged in sexual harassment against a non-consenting third party as well.  

No offense, but the idea that we shouldn’t seriously question the judgement of anyone who is running for office despite broadcasting sex tapes of themself online is laughable.  This woman clearly lacks the basic common sense and decision-making abilities to be entrusted with public office.  

You can talk about it not being 1925 all you want and a lot has changed, but you’re either letting partisanship cloud your objectivity here or you’re simply wildly out of touch with most Americans on this sort of stuff.  

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Yes, and?  Rightly or wrongly, the vast majority of Americans share my position on this sort of stuff.  Most people would have serious concerns about the values and basic fitness for office of a sex worker or porn star who tried to enter politics and you’re only fooling yourself if you try to pretend otherwise.  And you can’t even dismiss it as “something something two consenting adults” when she engaged in sexual harassment against a non-consenting third party as well.  

No offense, but the idea that we shouldn’t seriously question the judgement of anyone who is running for office despite broadcasting sex tapes of themself online is laughable.  This woman clearly lacks the basic common sense and decision-making abilities to be entrusted with public office.  

You can talk about it not being 1925 all you want and a lot has changed, but you’re either letting partisanship cloud your objectivity here or you’re simply wildly out of touch with most Americans on this sort of stuff.  

If she actually exposed herself to a hotel employee, that’s an entirely different issue, and would be disqualifying. However, this detail hasn’t been substantiated by a credible source.

You can’t just say “most people agree with me” and call it a day. This forum is supposed to be more sophisticated than the lizard brain of the median voter.

Why do you view her posting the videos as disqualifying? Why do you view it as a demonstration of lack of judgement on her part? There’s nothing morally wrong with doing consensual sex work.

In terms of the political ramifications, it’s absolutely fine to point out that most folks agree with me and call it a day.  And given where most folks are on such issues, anyone who runs for office despite having made and distributed a sex tape clearly has disqualifying levels of bad judgement.  Frankly, it suggests that she’s a delusional idiot who makes stupid decisions and has a profound lack of even the most basic level of common sense.  There are already too many delusional morons in office.  The last thing we need in elected office is someone too stupid to know that you shouldn’t run for office if there’s porn of you floating around somewhere.  I mean, Jesus f***ing Christ, how is this even a conversation?  

As for consensual sex work, someone who engages in that sort of behavior not out of genuine necessity or to survive, but simply because they see it as an acceptable way to make some extra cash clearly doesn’t share my values.  I don’t want sex work to be normalized.  Pornography is protected by the First Amendment, but it is still a deeply immoral and reprehensible thing.  Banning porn is unconstitutional and generally a silly idea in the internet age, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good thing.  I realize this is probably an unpopular position on Atlas given that more than a few posters here likely rely on porn as a pale substitute for actually having sex, but folks who make or distribute pornography are pariahs for good reason.  

Moreover, porn and sex work are not legitimate careers or acceptable ways to make money.  While I think the laws on this need to be reformed to stop excessively victimizing sex workers, the goal is still to keep sex work illegal.  And whether you like it or not, the vast majority of voters in the district will see this as a serious issue, including those who vote for her out of pure partisanship.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1704918721976844675?s=20

I’ll wait for a credible source

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

FWIW Susanna Gibson overperformed the fundamentals.  That was the best Dem result in the state in a Biden +5 seat.

Goochland really almost came through for her😂😂😂😂😂

Thankfully she lost

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

FWIW Susanna Gibson overperformed the fundamentals.  That was the best Dem result in the state in a Biden +5 seat.

Goochland really almost came through for her😂😂😂😂😂

Thankfully she lost

I hope she rightfully earns Queen of Goochland next time!!

You do realize she pretty unambiguously committed sexual harassment, right?  Like, the porn thing aside; that should be disqualifying right there.