Virginia Mega Thread: The Youngkin Administration

[THG]

Youngkin responds to the flag controversy:

https://www.twitter.com/BruceLeshan/status/1448717837535694859

[wbrocks67]

Perfect.

https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/1448735446838697989

[wbrocks67]

I guess Biden will be in VA before 10/29 then

https://twitter.com/karentravers/status/1448654616283861009

[Matty]

Meanwhile, in things that matter far more to Virginia that Donald Trump:

The loudon story is getting worse, and there are rumblings NYT has an expose article in the works

https://mobile.twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1448760311750791169

[wbrocks67]

Meanwhile, in things that matter far more to Virginia that Donald Trump:

The loudon story is getting worse, and there are rumblings NYT has an expose article in the works

https://mobile.twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1448760311750791169

Yeah what we're not going to do is perpetuate DailyWire.com postings here

[Matty]

You sound EXACTLY like trumpkins

Nuh-uhh story fake because I don’t like the source!

It’s not just daily wire at this point reporting this

[Gass3268]

Meanwhile, in things that matter far more to Virginia that Donald Trump:

The loudon story is getting worse, and there are rumblings NYT has an expose article in the works

https://mobile.twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1448760311750791169

If true, it's horrific and there needs to be consequences, but what does this have to do with Terry McAuliffe or Glenn Youngkin?

[Progressive Pessimist]

Meanwhile, in things that matter far more to Virginia that Donald Trump:

The loudon story is getting worse, and there are rumblings NYT has an expose article in the works

https://mobile.twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1448760311750791169

If true, it's horrific and there needs to be consequences, but what does this have to do with Terry McAuliffe or Glenn Youngkin?

Somehow Republicans think this will somehow deliver the election to them. And they say we're the ones being desperate when it comes to this election.

[LimoLiberal]

If anyone wants a good breakdown of the Loudoun County assault story, I recommend this from DC Urban Moms (a sneakily powerful message board):

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1007838.page

[ElectionsGuy]

Since McAuliffe's entire strategy is Youngkin = Trump, I wonder how that sits with Democrats if they lose this. I'm still expecting a narrow McAuliffe win but I can't imagine going into 2022 thinking a Trump clone just won a state Biden won by 10 (but of course, he's not a Trump clone, not even close).

And if Youngkin loses, it'll really cement the idea that Virginia is done with the Republican Party medium/long term. If they can't win when the national winds are favoring them and Biden is unpopular and McAuliffe has run this lousy of a campaign they probably can't win any time in the near future.

[Non Swing Voter]

Meanwhile, in things that matter far more to Virginia that Donald Trump:

The loudon story is getting worse, and there are rumblings NYT has an expose article in the works

https://mobile.twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1448760311750791169

If true, it's horrific and there needs to be consequences, but what does this have to do with Terry McAuliffe or Glenn Youngkin?

Somehow Republicans think this will somehow deliver the election to them. And they say we're the ones being desperate when it comes to this election.

I literally live 10 mins from Loudoun County and literally heard about this here.  Nobody in VA is voting on this issue.  It really is quite desperate of the blue avatars to think this will amount to anything. 

[roxas11]

You sound EXACTLY like trumpkins

Nuh-uhh story fake because I don’t like the source!

It’s not just daily wire at this point reporting this

I think this attack was unfair

If I posted a big news story, but I used MSNBC as a credible source than you would have every right to criticize me for doing something like that because Rather you like it or not where we get our information really does matter and it will determine how people are going to perceive the news stories that you or even I post on here

you say that others are also reporting about this, then why not use them instead of The Daily Wire or better yet next time just use multiple sources because that would actually make it harder for others to completely dismiss what you have to say

[MT Treasurer]

Since McAuliffe's entire strategy is Youngkin = Trump, I wonder how that sits with Democrats if they lose this. I'm still expecting a narrow McAuliffe win but I can't imagine going into 2022 thinking a Trump clone just won a state Biden won by 10 (but of course, he's not a Trump clone, not even close).

And if Youngkin loses, it'll really cement the idea that Virginia is done with the Republican Party medium/long term. If they can't win when the national winds are favoring them and Biden is unpopular and McAuliffe has run this lousy of a campaign they probably can't win any time in the near future.

Agree completely (I also think Youngkin would beat McAuliffe in any remotely competitive state except maybe GA), but I wonder if 'minimalist' single-issue themes/campaigns might be more effective than we think. Hickenlooper's entire campaign could be reduced to "Gardner = Trump", Tuberville's to "I support Donald Trump", Rick Scott's to "Bill Nelson had four decades to fix this", Todd Young's to "I’m a marine, not a lobbyist," Maggie Hassan's to "We need a Senator who will put Granite Staters ahead of special interests", etc. All of these candidates sounded incredibly repetitive and clearly gave scripted answers all the time, but apparently it was all that was needed from the candidate him- or herself (while outside groups took care of the negative ads, obviously) to ride the state's partisan lean to victory. Even Mark Udall, who was widely mocked for his seemingly obsessive focus on abortion, only lost by two points back when CO was only D-leaning and not deep blue like VA/CO today. He’d win easily even with a literal single-issue abortion campaign today, and VA isn’t that much more R than CO.

McAuliffe is many things but he’s no dummy, so I don’t think he’d be pushing this "Youngkin = Trump and no abortions" message so hard if he didn’t consider it an effective strategy. He also drove home the abortion message in 2013 when he painted Cuccinelli as an extremist, and it worked for him then (again, when VA was already a strongly D-leaning state but less D than it is today). There’s a case to be made that a largely negative campaign that drives home no more than one or two themes and doesn’t allow itself to be distracted no matter what is a winning formula in today's world of political campaigning. Now obviously you’re right that Republicans were never going to win this race if they can’t even win it under current conditions, but it’s an interesting pattern nonetheless. (And like I said, I don’t think McAuliffe's strategy would have worked in any remotely competitive state this year.)

[StateBoiler]

Since McAuliffe's entire strategy is Youngkin = Trump, I wonder how that sits with Democrats if they lose this.

Wow does that say little about McAuliffe's political ability. And this guy has been a top figure in Democratic Party politics for 30 years.

[Skill and Chance]

Since McAuliffe's entire strategy is Youngkin = Trump, I wonder how that sits with Democrats if they lose this. I'm still expecting a narrow McAuliffe win but I can't imagine going into 2022 thinking a Trump clone just won a state Biden won by 10 (but of course, he's not a Trump clone, not even close).

And if Youngkin loses, it'll really cement the idea that Virginia is done with the Republican Party medium/long term. If they can't win when the national winds are favoring them and Biden is unpopular and McAuliffe has run this lousy of a campaign they probably can't win any time in the near future.

Agree completely (I also think Youngkin would beat McAuliffe in any remotely competitive state except maybe GA), but I wonder if 'minimalist' single-issue themes/campaigns might be more effective than we think. Hickenlooper's entire campaign could be reduced to "Gardner = Trump", Tuberville's to "I support Donald Trump", Rick Scott's to "Bill Nelson had four decades to fix this", Todd Young's to "I’m a marine, not a lobbyist," Maggie Hassan's to "We need a Senator who will put Granite Staters ahead of special interests", etc. All of these candidates sounded incredibly repetitive and clearly gave scripted answers all the time, but apparently it was all that was needed from the candidate him- or herself (while outside groups took care of the negative ads, obviously) to ride the state's partisan lean to victory. Even Mark Udall, who was widely mocked for his seemingly obsessive focus on abortion, only lost by two points back when CO was only D-leaning and not deep blue like VA/CO today. He’d win easily even with a literal single-issue abortion campaign today, and VA isn’t that much more R than CO.

McAuliffe is many things but he’s no dummy, so I don’t think he’d be pushing this "Youngkin = Trump and no abortions" message so hard if he didn’t consider it an effective strategy. He also drove home the abortion message in 2013 when he painted Cuccinelli as an extremist, and it worked for him then (again, when VA was already a strongly D-leaning state but less D than it is today). There’s a case to be made that a largely negative campaign that drives home no more than one or two themes and doesn’t allow itself to be distracted no matter what is a winning formula in today's world of political campaigning. Now obviously you’re right that Republicans were never going to win this race if they can’t even win it under current conditions, but it’s an interesting pattern nonetheless. (And like I said, I don’t think McAuliffe's strategy would have worked in any remotely competitive state this year.)

Because of McAuliffe's background and personal life, a clean, upbeat, unifying campaign isn't really an option for him.  He knows he has to go with fear to win, and it worked last time (albeit narrowly). 

Holding that Trump rally on Wednesday night may have been a huge strategic error.  It effectively ends the all education, all the time news cycle that started with the debate gaffe with enough time left on the clock for McAuliffe to make it about Trump again.

[StateBoiler]

Since McAuliffe's entire strategy is Youngkin = Trump, I wonder how that sits with Democrats if they lose this. I'm still expecting a narrow McAuliffe win but I can't imagine going into 2022 thinking a Trump clone just won a state Biden won by 10 (but of course, he's not a Trump clone, not even close).

And if Youngkin loses, it'll really cement the idea that Virginia is done with the Republican Party medium/long term. If they can't win when the national winds are favoring them and Biden is unpopular and McAuliffe has run this lousy of a campaign they probably can't win any time in the near future.

Agree completely (I also think Youngkin would beat McAuliffe in any remotely competitive state except maybe GA), but I wonder if 'minimalist' single-issue themes/campaigns might be more effective than we think. Hickenlooper's entire campaign could be reduced to "Gardner = Trump", Tuberville's to "I support Donald Trump", Rick Scott's to "Bill Nelson had four decades to fix this", Todd Young's to "I’m a marine, not a lobbyist," Maggie Hassan's to "We need a Senator who will put Granite Staters ahead of special interests", etc. All of these candidates sounded incredibly repetitive and clearly gave scripted answers all the time, but apparently it was all that was needed from the candidate him- or herself (while outside groups took care of the negative ads, obviously) to ride the state's partisan lean to victory. Even Mark Udall, who was widely mocked for his seemingly obsessive focus on abortion, only lost by two points back when CO was only D-leaning and not deep blue like VA/CO today. He’d win easily even with a literal single-issue abortion campaign today, and VA isn’t that much more R than CO.

McAuliffe is many things but he’s no dummy, so I don’t think he’d be pushing this "Youngkin = Trump and no abortions" message so hard if he didn’t consider it an effective strategy. He also drove home the abortion message in 2013 when he painted Cuccinelli as an extremist, and it worked for him then (again, when VA was already a strongly D-leaning state but less D than it is today). There’s a case to be made that a largely negative campaign that drives home no more than one or two themes and doesn’t allow itself to be distracted no matter what is a winning formula in today's world of political campaigning. Now obviously you’re right that Republicans were never going to win this race if they can’t even win it under current conditions, but it’s an interesting pattern nonetheless. (And like I said, I don’t think McAuliffe's strategy would have worked in any remotely competitive state this year.)

Because of McAuliffe's background and personal life, a clean, upbeat, unifying campaign isn't really an option for him.  He knows he has to go with fear to win, and it worked last time (albeit narrowly).  

Holding that Trump rally on Wednesday night may have been a huge strategic error.  It effectively ends the all education, all the time news cycle that started with the debate gaffe with enough time left on the clock for McAuliffe to make it about Trump again.

Is this the "I don't believe parents have a right to tell schools what to teach?" Libertarian Party local and national figures repeatedly posted this statement on Facebook posts only putting up the caption "there it is".

[Non Swing Voter]

Parents have a right to vote for politicians and board members who fit their values.  Parent's don't have a right to storm into board meetings and demand certain things be taught.  This has become a pattern among the GOP over the last 20 years, starting with GWB. 

Didn't like the Florida recount?  No problem storm the recount facility.

Didn't like the 2020 election results?  Storm the Capitol. 

Don't like what politicians say?  Just follow Lindsey Graham around the airport until he's intimidated enough?  (granted some extremist Dems are doing this to Sinema now too...)

Don't like School Boards?  Storm school board meetings. 

The problem with the modern GOP is that the base thinks they know best for society despite being the least educated/qualified members of society.  So they use intimidation and threats of violence to try to get accomplished what they can't at the ballot box.

[Person Man]

Parents have a right to vote for politicians and board members who fit their values.  Parent's don't have a right to storm into board meetings and demand certain things be taught.  This has become a pattern among the GOP over the last 20 years, starting with GWB. 

Didn't like the Florida recount?  No problem storm the recount facility.

Didn't like the 2020 election results?  Storm the Capitol. 

Don't like what politicians say?  Just follow Lindsey Graham around the airport until he's intimidated enough?  (granted some extremist Dems are doing this to Sinema now too...)

Don't like School Boards?  Storm school board meetings. 

The problem with the modern GOP is that the base thinks they know best for society despite being the least educated/qualified members of society.  So they use intimidation and threats of violence to try to get accomplished what they can't at the ballot box.

Wasn’t this iteration of the GOP (post-Iraq, post-W, post-Lehman) basically started when the TEA Party demonstrators started storming congressional outreach meetings?

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Meanwhile, in things that matter far more to Virginia that Donald Trump:

The loudon story is getting worse, and there are rumblings NYT has an expose article in the works

https://mobile.twitter.com/guypbenson/status/1448760311750791169

If true, it's horrific and there needs to be consequences, but what does this have to do with Terry McAuliffe or Glenn Youngkin?

Because something something trans, therefore vaccines are globalist plot.

[roxas11]

Since McAuliffe's entire strategy is Youngkin = Trump, I wonder how that sits with Democrats if they lose this. I'm still expecting a narrow McAuliffe win but I can't imagine going into 2022 thinking a Trump clone just won a state Biden won by 10 (but of course, he's not a Trump clone, not even close).

And if Youngkin loses, it'll really cement the idea that Virginia is done with the Republican Party medium/long term. If they can't win when the national winds are favoring them and Biden is unpopular and McAuliffe has run this lousy of a campaign they probably can't win any time in the near future.

Agree completely (I also think Youngkin would beat McAuliffe in any remotely competitive state except maybe GA), but I wonder if 'minimalist' single-issue themes/campaigns might be more effective than we think. Hickenlooper's entire campaign could be reduced to "Gardner = Trump", Tuberville's to "I support Donald Trump", Rick Scott's to "Bill Nelson had four decades to fix this", Todd Young's to "I’m a marine, not a lobbyist," Maggie Hassan's to "We need a Senator who will put Granite Staters ahead of special interests", etc. All of these candidates sounded incredibly repetitive and clearly gave scripted answers all the time, but apparently it was all that was needed from the candidate him- or herself (while outside groups took care of the negative ads, obviously) to ride the state's partisan lean to victory. Even Mark Udall, who was widely mocked for his seemingly obsessive focus on abortion, only lost by two points back when CO was only D-leaning and not deep blue like VA/CO today. He’d win easily even with a literal single-issue abortion campaign today, and VA isn’t that much more R than CO.

McAuliffe is many things but he’s no dummy, so I don’t think he’d be pushing this "Youngkin = Trump and no abortions" message so hard if he didn’t consider it an effective strategy. He also drove home the abortion message in 2013 when he painted Cuccinelli as an extremist, and it worked for him then (again, when VA was already a strongly D-leaning state but less D than it is today). There’s a case to be made that a largely negative campaign that drives home no more than one or two themes and doesn’t allow itself to be distracted no matter what is a winning formula in today's world of political campaigning. Now obviously you’re right that Republicans were never going to win this race if they can’t even win it under current conditions, but it’s an interesting pattern nonetheless. (And like I said, I don’t think McAuliffe's strategy would have worked in any remotely competitive state this year.)

To be honest I think the texas abortion law was the worst thing they could have ever happend to Youngkin's campaign

before that moment I was also not convinced that McAuliffe's strategy was going to work, but after the Texas abortion law Youngkin comments about going on “offense” on abortion if he became governor did scare the heck of a lot of Virgina voters. McAuliffe's support among female voters is a big reason why he still leads in most polls despite Youngkin getting decent support from independent voters

had the Republican not been pushing those crazy laws it may have been a tougher for McAuliffe to convince voters that Youngkin is a major threat when comes to abortion, but as things stand people are clearly very worried about that and that is a major reason why the Supreme Court approval rating dropped to record lows after approving the tax abortion law

votes may not think the Youngkin is the next trump, but you better believe that he is in big trouble if female voters think that that he is going to start pushing TX style abortion laws the second he becomes governor

[Matty]

I’m just not convinced abortion in general is some huge net loser for either party

The polling on abortion in America is incoherent

People want it legal, but they also have large margins want it restricted after a while

How can someone be “pro life”, but only after x weeks?

How can someone be “pro choice”, but oops, no choice allowed for you, young lady who is too far along in term

Doesn’t make sense

[Skill and Chance]

I’m just not convinced abortion in general is some huge net loser for either party

The polling on abortion in America is incoherent

People want it legal, but they also have large margins want it restricted after a while

How can someone be “pro life”, but only after x weeks?

How can someone be “pro choice”, but oops, no choice allowed for you, young lady who is too far along in term

Doesn’t make sense

An intermediate view on abortion (1st trimester clearly legal, 3rd trimester clearly illegal) has actually been the majority opinion in the English-speaking world for centuries.  I encourage you to read up on the legal concept of "quickening," which was historically the point during the pregnancy after which termination was regarded as murder.  Roe overshot this historical consensus in the pro-choice direction and fired up conservatives.  The Texas law now overshoots it in the other direction for the first time in 50 years. 

[roxas11]

I’m just not convinced abortion in general is some huge net loser for either party

The polling on abortion in America is incoherent

People want it legal, but they also have large margins want it restricted after a while

How can someone be “pro life”, but only after x weeks?

How can someone be “pro choice”, but oops, no choice allowed for you, young lady who is too far along in term

Doesn’t make sense

In the past, I would have agreed you, but Roe v. Wade is under threat in a way that I have never seen before.

for example, in my lifetime at no point was I ever convinced that Roe v. Wade could ever be overturned, but in 2021 I don't feel that way anymore and I suspect that a lot of voters feel the same way

Also the TX abortion law is far more extreme than anything that Republicans have ever done in the past and not even Reagan himself would have publicly supported an anti abortion bill that had no exceptions for rape or incest

[Dan the Roman]

I’m just not convinced abortion in general is some huge net loser for either party

The polling on abortion in America is incoherent

People want it legal, but they also have large margins want it restricted after a while

How can someone be “pro life”, but only after x weeks?

How can someone be “pro choice”, but oops, no choice allowed for you, young lady who is too far along in term

Doesn’t make sense

Dirty secret. Voters want nothing to happen on abortion. Ie. the vast majority of non hardcore partisans can "live" with the status quo.

They may prefer slight tweaks in one direction or another, and the restrictionists probably have a slight intuitive advantage here, but the impressions of the hardcore activists on both sides is so negative among those who don't care that any major moves are likely to annoy voters who resent the issue intruding.

I really think revulsion at Texas is less "abortion is a right" and more "what on earth are these people doing in government" and the harmful thing for Youngkin is the impression that all, or all GOP governors but Hogan, Dewine, and a handful in NE march in lockstep on everything these days - voting, abortion etc - which means it is hard for Youngkin to run against things that might genuinely be unpopular - CRT, declining standards, Trans students in sports, vaccine mandates - without instantly being associated with what those mean for every GOP governor and legislature in the country unless explicitly stated otherwise. Namely bizarre ham-fisted efforts to impose nonsense curriculum(Texas), empowering local viglantes(here is the overlap between Texas abortion/"parental rights" sloganeering), bans on local covid policies by counties and even private businesses, forcing your kid to go to school with the son of the local crazy anti-vaxxer despite being symptomatic and testing positive(Florida).

Youngkin tried to avoid either attaching himself to the Republican party nationally or breaking from it. But what happened in Texas and elsewhere has made it so anything short of openly breaking with it qualifies as attachment.

[Matty]

True, but it goes the the other way too

The house just a couple months ago passed a abortion bill that that

A) invalidate nearly all state laws limiting and regulating abortion, including many health and safety regulations designed to protect the lives of women.

B) It would create an absolute right to abort a child before “fetal viability” — that is, according to the Act, when a baby born would likely survive outside the womb — and it would prohibit states from protecting life after viability until birth if a lone “health care provider” determines the “continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk” to the mother’s life or “health.”

C) The bill’s chief sponsor in the Senate has acknowledged the legislation “doesn’t distinguish” between physical and mental health, and the text of the bill explicitly instructs the courts to “liberally” interpret the legislation.