BOB MARSHALL VS. JIM GILMORE
Bob Marshall was on the politics program- and announced he has already started the paperwork to challenge Jim Gilmore for the GOP nomination for U.S. Senate.
Bob Marshall vs. Jim Gilmore to take on Mark Warner? Some things in politics are just not predictable.
(Hat Tip, RWL)
it's all going to come down to the downdrafts from the Presidential race
Posted by: PWConservative | December 17, 2007 at 12:27 AM
PW you are an idiot Warner will crush either one no matter who the nominee is.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 12:58 AM
Praise God!
t endorses Marshall - a genuine hero for the pro-life movement.
Posted by: t | December 17, 2007 at 02:28 AM
t,
You praise God for Marshall running.
What will you do if he loses to Gilmore or Warner?
Posted by: ZB | December 17, 2007 at 07:53 AM
2008 Predictions
Mark Warner: 75%
Bob Marshall: 25%
or
Mark Warner: 65%
Jim Gilmore: 35%
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 08:24 AM
The hilarious thing is the comment from anon8:24 was planted by Gilmore's people. "Vote for our candidate: he's not going to lose to Warner by nearly as much!" ;-)
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 08:36 AM
Ben, are the Republicans requiring Gilmore and Marshall to gather the 10,000 signatures to get on the ballot before their convention, or does the convention process supercede that process?
Posted by: The Richmond Democrat | December 17, 2007 at 09:40 AM
Richmond Democrat, you only need to collect signatures to get on the ballot if you're running in a Primary, or as an Independent in the general election. You do not need to collect petition signatures to run in a Convention. The petition requirements are set by state law, not by the political parties, although sometimes parties will require candidates who are running in a party canvass to collect a small number of petition signatures.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 10:39 AM
Anything can happen once a candidate reaches the general.
I am not a Bob Marshall fan by any stretch but I also think Gilmore is lousy. I do think Marshall could potentially cause Gilmore all kinds of problems in a convention setting, especially if Gilmore does not come to the convention with a majority. Marshall will have the prolife and homeschool communities backing him 100%. This is huge in a grassroots effort. People within the GOP are just not sold on Gilmore. Marshall will run into problems when folks start talking about party unity because he caused more than one Republican in the General Assembly plenty of heartburn and really campaigned against them. I really can't see many state delegates or senators backing Marshall because he is essentailly an "independent" in the state house.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 11:47 AM
I'm gonna have to go with PW on this. There's no doubting that Warner is popular, but an unpopular person at the top of the ticket can hurt him badly. (Although the same can be said for the republican candidate as well.)
Despite Allen's many campaign blunders he lost by less than 10k votes.
Bottom Line: Neither side can afford an unpopular presidential candidate this year.
Posted by: A Voter | December 17, 2007 at 11:49 AM
I'd tell you what body aperture these two guys resemble but I do not wish to inappropriately stigmatize a useful body part.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 12:15 PM
I guess the RPV doesn't mind that it's image for the foreseeable future could be one of merciless and unhinged right-wing-bat-ery, American-dream crushing, electoral oblivion?
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | December 17, 2007 at 12:50 PM
Anon 12:15, don't talk about your appendix like that! ;)
Posted by: Phil Chroniger | December 17, 2007 at 01:04 PM
Phil, can the appendix be described as a useful body part? :-)
Posted by: A Voter | December 17, 2007 at 01:13 PM
What does the Englin crying at the side of the sreen mean?? Did I miss something?
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 01:48 PM
a quote when leslie byrne ran against MARK Warner for senate
"Byrne said Thursday that the Virginia Democratic Party and Warner supporters strong-armed would-be Byrne voters during the party caucuses, and committed outright voter fraud in some cases."
hat tip MC and Virginia Pilot
SO BEN. isn't it leslie byrne's duty to support the GOP Candidate next year considering Mark Warner engaged in "OUTRIGHT VOTER FRAUD" ???
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 01:59 PM
Phil & Voter:
Gosh,the appendix is not an aperture nor what I had in mind...although it does begin with an "a". :-)
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 04:21 PM
Phil & Voter:
To help you understand what I meant...Anon 1:59 seems to fit the description quite aptly.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 04:25 PM
What is predictable is that, sadly, Mark Warner will win in a walk with either of these two jerks as opponents.
Posted by: | December 17, 2007 at 05:35 PM
This should be pretty amusing and holds prospect for making Gilmore look like the voice of reason. Imagine that.
Posted by: NoVA Scout | December 18, 2007 at 08:11 AM
Reading a mailing this morning from Marshall's campaign (learning about his candidacy for the first time) my wife and I are sufficiently moved to seek to become delegates to advance his effort over Gilmore, then Warner. Finally, a truly pro-life candidate...
Pax et bonum
Posted by: Brian Byrne | March 01, 2008 at 04:52 PM