Republicans are only two days away from selecting their nominee between Will Nance, Steve Hunt and Marianne Horrinko. It appears to be coming down to Hunt who has much of the conservative establishment supporting him and Horrinko who is looking for bigger turnout to win. Nance will get a decent vote total from his community activities, but it would definitely be an upset if he wins.
Showing their varying strategies, there was a major event in the district that Nance and Hunt skipped while Horrinko was very visible with a large group of volunteers. The Westfield 5K had about 4,000 runners registered- and including the runners about 10,000 people present- mostly living in western Fairfax within this Senate District.
But more interesting than the Republicans was the Democratic nominee, Delegate Dave Marsden, skipping the event and having no presence there. Does Dave need a map to Sully? Why would he skip such a large event in his "new" district?
To be fair, Marsden is attending some events. He was in Charlottesville yesterday for the UVA-Tech game to hobnob with the UVA President and take his legislator seats that are available.
One of the things I was glad to see launch in the last couple years was "The Farm Team", an organization that was supposed to help increase the number of Democratic women in public office. Northern Virginia, which was once home to most elected Democratic women in the state has seen a number of seats once held by women all flip to men in the legislature For some unexplainable reason Democrats have in particular been very hesitant to nominate women in many of the "swing" seats in Northern Virginia. By my count 38 of the last 43 Democratic nominations in NoVA swing seats have gone to men. Discounting incumbents, the number is 21 of the last 23 key nominations in swing seats in NoVA going to men.
Despite this obvious problem- The Farm Team apparently decided to go on a nap during the last month as Dave Marsden outmaneuvered three quality female candidates (Janet Oleszek, Luann McNabb, Kathy Smith) for the nomination in the 37th Senate District.As I have explained earlier- the issue here wasn't that other candidates were unwilling to run- but that the process was intentionally set up differently from the 2002 Special Election in order to intimidate other candidates from challenging Marsden. Even worse- Marsden claimed a fake move to the Seward's house in order to run- while the three women have lived in the 37th District for a combined 70+ years!!
Female candidates being shoved aside in a process set up to discriminate against female candidacies seem like exactly what The Farm Team was formed to stop. Yet it appears they were either unable or unwilling to step in and stand up to the party leadership.
Democratic "leaders" in Richmond have apparently succeeded in delivering their nomination to fill Ken Cuccinelli's seat to Dave Marsden. As the filing deadline closes (appropriately on Black Friday)- no other Democrats are prepared to file to challenge Dave for the nomination.
But don't mistake that for a united party.
As I mentioned before, one of the driving factors behind the failure of a candidate to emerge from Sully District was the location of the vote. The "process" was voting in one location (the largest precinct in Marsden's Delegate District), on a single weeknight in rush hour- where the commute to vote from Sully could reach an hour or more! Ouch for "democracy".
Now in an effort to make it look like he has real support, Dave is out with his list of endorsements. Only problem is the list is big on political elites- and very light within the 37th Senate District. In fact- only 14 of the 46 endorsements live in the 37th District. 3 of the 46 endorsements have their names spelled wrong (it's Petersen, Jaskot and Jaffee) which doesn't speak well for the quality of staff Dave has surrounding his campaign either.
Who's not on the list? Three of the other four candidates polled against Dave in the recent poll (Janet Oleszek, Kathy Smith and Luann McNabb) apparently decided not to be listed in support of Dave yet- even though he is unopposed. And Delegate-Elect Kaye Kory apparently has more respect for voters in the 37th than other Delegate-Elects Scott Surovell, Mark Keam and Patrick Hope who all think they know who should represent this district. In fact Kaye is the only re-elected or incoming member of the House in Northern Virginia who has chosen to not be listed in support of Marsden- an impressive display of early fortitude that the others could learn from.
Congratulations are in order for Delegate Marsden. Not so much so for all the elected officials willing to white-wash Dave's fake move and claiming an address away from his wife to try to win an election. All these elected officials have done is shown that they value partisanship more than honest governing, and given voters in their own district an ugly look into their political souls.
Just had one of the most entertaining experiences of my political life tonight...
I started by grabbing dinner with Janet Oleszek. Janet has handled this entire situation with total class- from the Senate Caucus telling her she was "the candidate" and then pulling back to poll the district (with Marsden's pollster) set up a voting location (with former Marsden staff) and then announce Dave Marsden was moving in the district to run.
We decided it was in the best interest of all involved for us to sit down with Dave and try to find a way to unite the party. Since Dave had been calling Janet and she hadn't called back yet, we decided to go pay him a visit at home. But which home?
We took a gamble to say Dave was probably at his home in Signal Hill precinct where he has lived for almost 20 years. Yes, this is the house in the 34th Senate District, but he is allowed to leave the 37th to see his wife and there's no reason he would be at his "rented room" just before 9 p.m. on a weeknight. So we drove over, and sure enough Dave's car (with the Delegate license plates) was in the driveway.
Now, one funny thing about the Marsden's house is the large glass windows around the family room with the TV. As we got out of the car, we could see Dave sitting there watching TV. He got up- and walked out of the room. I figured he just didn't see us coming up the driveway. So Janet knocks on the door- and about 30 seconds later, Julia Marsden answers the door. Janet says "Hi Julia, I got Dave's phone call and wanted to stop by and chat with him". To which Julia replies "He is not here. He doesn't live here anymore. He's at the Seward's" (The Sewards are the large Democratic donors that Dave has "moved in" with to meet residency requirements in the 37th Senate District).
Janet and I are both above arguing with Julia on her front porch so we both thanked her and immediately went back to the car (plus it was raining and cold out). We then decided to go over to the Seward's- even though we had seen Dave at his real house, we wanted to play whatever game Dave was trying to play. So we drove across Burke to the Seward's house- who answered the door and said Dave was "out campaigning" and wasn't expected until later that night.
Out of curiosity we went back over to Signal Hill one more time. Dave's car was still in the driveway- lights/tv were still on in the family room- but the shades were all shut tight. Ha. We decided to let Dave watch Monday Night Football in peace. But one thing is for sure (besides Marsden's huge missed opportunity tonight); his entire "move" into the 37th Senate District is a complete load of crap.
WaPo:
Marsden said Monday that he has rented a room in a house which sits in both the House and Senate districts, allowing him to run for Cuccinelli's seat. He said he has slept there for several nights.
Video seems to indicate the whole "roommate" thing isn't working out so well in the first week...
Branding Democrats as totally out of touch with a tax increase right now is a horrible idea. And it isn't going to pass. Is this some sort of murder-suicide pact as he is leaving office for the Democrats left in Richmond?
After the Deeds Debacle, every Democrat should be able to agree that we need to take a careful look at what consultants our donations are going to- and how that interacts with the process of a campaign. I want to kick that off with a look at the upcoming special election in Senate District 37.
Democrats have successfully cleared the field for Delegate Dave Marsden to run for the 37th seat- and he will be moving in shortly. How did they clear the field with other strong candidates like Chuck Caputo, Janet Oleszek, Luann McNabb and Kathy Smith all sniffing around at a possible campaign? The Senate Caucus commissioned a poll last week to explore which candidate was the strongest in the field. Seems fair.
But of the 10-15 quality national Democratic pollsters who have done races in Virginia- the Caucus bizarrely selected Andrew Myers to conduct the poll- Marsden's personal pollster and one of his constituents.
Why Myers? Interestingly enough he was not used as the pollster in any of the eight targeted State Senate races in 2007. He's been primarily polling for House of Delegates races only for the past few years in Virginia. Hmm...
But wait. There's more! Because you might be thinking, why does it matter who does the poll? In a special election it is very easy to skew a poll to say whatever you want it to. Let me explain...
Of the five candidates, two (Marsden/Caputo) have run in both Governor's cycles (i.e. 05/09) and mid-term turnout (i.e. 07) cycles. Two more (Oleszek/Smith) have run in only midterm turnout cycles (03/07). Finally, McNabb was a first time candidate.
So here's what I would do for an initial voter sort if I was working for each candidate:
McNabb: The fewest voters will know her because she has never run before. So you want to poll the largest possible universe of voters (anyone who voted in last three years). All polls start with a question of whether people are likely to vote in the upcoming election, but many people if asked will answer this question in the affirmative, even if they aren't planning to vote. The increased participation will skew towards voters who don't know any of the candidates well- which will both increase the percentage of undecided voters which lowers the percentage each candidate receives- closing the gap between them. Finally, I'd make sure the regional weights were set at whatever recent election had the highest turnout in Sully (again anyone who voted in one the last three) to make sure the voters who knew McNabb would get the biggest possible voice. She'd still likely be in last place among the initial five because she hadn't introduced herself yet, but everyone would probably be within about 10 points of each other.
Smith: Smith, the current Chairman of the School Board is the only Democratic elected official left that lives in Sully District. She has run and won twice downballot from Cuccinelli victories in Sully District (03, 07). Since education voters districtwide also represent their highest percentage of the electorate when School Board elections are on the ballot, I would only poll 2007 voters districtwide as a starting point. Then once people opted in saying they would vote this year, I would weigh them based on the highest possible turnout (anyone who voted in one of the last three elections) since that would show the highest percentage of the electorate to the west. That would likely be enough to put Smith past Oleszek (who would be in 4th) and into a virtual three way tie with Caputo and Marsden- with Caputo still narrowly leading because of the western skew and the fact Marsden was unopposed in 2007 and his strongest IDs will be voters who voted in 05/09 when he was contested- while Caputo faced a race in 07 and has ID among both groups in his district.
Oleszek: Skewing the poll to Janet would be a no-brainer. She came within 100 votes of beating Cuccinelli in 2007, which is also the lowest turnout election of the last four years- making it most similarly resemble a special election. So use that election as the starting base for the poll- with the results weighted to recent special elections in the district. Why recent specials? The Bulova-Herrity special election was the most recent districtwide, and featured two candidates well known on the eastern end of the district- and much less known in the western end. (Even though Herrity lives west, its in the 39th Senate, and his stronger base in the 37th is the West Springfield area where he grew up on the east end of the 37th rather than the Sully area he doesn't represent to the north of his house). This configuration in the poll would give Oleszek the lead, Marsden in second (because of the regional weight) with Smith and Caputo tied for third and McNabb barely registering.
Caputo: With Chuck the obvious polling method is using the 2009 Governor's Election as the initial model. That eliminates McNabb, Smith and Oleszek from being close because of the number of voters who know a State Delegate from these higher turnout elections that do not know off year candidates or school board members. Once you start with that model- the only challenge is Marsden who also benefits from the higher turnout model. All you need to do to put Caputo ahead of Marsden is weigh the regions based on highest possible turnout (1 of last 3 elections)- and the poll comes back Caputo in 1st, Marsden in 2nd, with Oleszek/Smith tied for 3rd and McNabb in last because she hasn't ever run before.
Marsden: Once again, the best starting point for Marsden is the Governor's election turnout, especially since his only two contested elections (05/09) followed that model. From there, I would weight to people who had voted in recent special elections for the same reasons discussed in the Oleszek model above- it skews to the eastern side of the district that Marsden currently represents as a Delegate. This poll would put Marsden in first, Caputo in 2nd , Oleszek in 3rd (the turnout model which benefits Caputo is more important than the weighting that helps Oleszek in this scenario), Smith in 4th and McNabb in 5th.
So with that in mind- guess what model Dave Marsden's pollster chose? And guess who came out on top? Ugh...
I would have chosen the 07 model because in a low turnout special election, the overall turnout will likely be smaller than any of the general election cycles, making the lowest 07 turnout as the closest match to poll. That's also why I think Oleszek was probably the strongest candidate Dems could have put forward in this special election- because she was already known districtwide by the voters most likely to vote in this election.
Next time someone should tell Dick Saslaw and Mary Margaret Whipple to save the money for a poll that tells them the answer they want to hear- and hire this guy instead:
