A Look Back At The 5th Congressional District

I have to admit- nothing annoys me more than down-ballot candidates who win on coattails and then their supporters scatter to claim otherwise.  It seems to happen often.  I think the reason it happens so frequently is the sycophant factor post-election when supporters and aides want to tell the winning candidate how great they are- how brilliant their campaign was- and how amazing their own supporters are.

Which brings us to Tom Perriello who has the most annoying sycophants that I can remember in recent Virginia political history.  For over a year they have scattered across the internet to dispute any claim of Perriello winning his election on Barack Obama's coattails.  To listen to them you would learn that Tom's brilliant campaign that focused on service to the community and his faith flipped an impossibly Republican electorate in the south- and that Tom is now the national model for Congressional candidates.  The compliments literally rain down for Tom at a pace that you would expect to hear in a bar full of guys trying to take the one girl there home with them for the night.

In fact, they make the argument so energetically and with so many misleading numbers that most people probably believe the argument as fact instead of seeing it for the mindless absurdity that it is.  Let's review the numbers and see what really happened in the 5th District in 2008.

Votes Received:

Barack Obama 157,362
Tom Perriello 158,810
(Difference of 0.91% in votes received)
 
No election ever sees a perfect vote correlation- especially precinct to precinct or county to county- but this difference is one of the closest ones I have ever seen.  It's fairly apparent when looking at the precinct results (even figuring in areas in the north where Tom won his largest "crossover") that 98%-99% of all Perriello voters were also Obama voters.

That my friends- is the definition of coattails.

Comments

[Kevin Poirier]

No way. Obama rode on Perriello's coattails. (Sarcasm) Love your blog by the way.

[Not Tucker Watkins]

I'm sure pointing this out makes me sycophantic, but wasn't Perriello the only Democrat in a contested election to outperform Obama's total? At the very least, you should be wondering how he avoided voter dropoff. By your logic, shouldn't Andrea Miller be the Congresswoman from the 4th. How do coattails explain the fact that a Democrat had never broken 40% against Goode? I understand you don't like Perriello but he clearly did a better job than any other Virginia House Dem in making himself viable.

[Not Larry Sabato]

He probably was, but that's what I mean by a misleading statistic that Perriello supporters throw out there.

Boucher and Scott were unopposed- they usually run better than top of the ticket.

Moran never runs even with the top of the ticket and he didn't in 2008 either. Connolly was well behind Obama for many reasons I have listed on this blog.

The only other in a close race was Glenn Nye who, like Tom, was within 1% of Obama's total- only he was slightly to the south of it- but also elected on coattails.

So if your point is that Tom is 1% better as a candidate (and Congressman) than Glenn Nye, I would strongly agree.

[Eric Cantor's Lisp]

could this have something to do with the fact that periello and obama have a lot of things in common (young progressive alpha male ivy-league educated lawyers who believe in the same thing)?

another thing they have in common is your distaste for both of them. curious.

[Not Larry Sabato]

I don't dislike Obama or Perriello. I voted for Obama, and if I lived in the 5th I would vote for Tom.

But I'm not an apologist for either one of them, either.

[Gretchen Laskas]

So just wondering- is anyone who supports Perriello a sycophant?

I would never deny that Obama had nice long coattails, but coattails alone rarely get a non-incumbent candidate elected. So I would stake out some middle ground. Obama's coattails mattered, but were not the only thing, and perhaps not even the most important thing to focus on (at least going into an election this year.)

[Not Larry Sabato]

Gretchen- coattails are never the "only thing"- every candidate has some voters for or against them that might otherwise go the other way but they have a personal reason (good or bad) to be for or against someone.

But my point is, if 98% of your votes are voting the same party upballot- it's fair to say your election was on coattails and not based on the candidate.

[Not Royston Jester]

I think that there is a flaw in this analysis. There was a total vote drop-off between the Presidential and Congressional elections, no? The normal assumption would be to attribute that drop off equally to supporters of both Presidential candidate. The fact that Perriello then exceeded Obama's total suggests that he not just got 1500 cross-over votes (his margin over Obama's vote), but a substantial amount more from people who voted for McCain, as the total vote in the Congressional race was lower than in the Presidential race.

[Phil Chroniger]

Look, 2008 was a perfect storm for Perriello. He was going against Virgil Goode (who had already alienated all but the social conservatives in the district), and the anti-GOP sentiment was strong during that election as well.

I'd say that "coattails" would be a good phrase to use here, though it didn't hurt that the incumbent that he defeated was fairly unpopular at that point. 2008 was tough enough for him, 2010 will be even more difficult.

[Gretchen Laskas]

Maybe it's because I lived three years in C'ville that I can't help but know that the candidate Perriello was very much a part of the win and why Republicans aren't taking a win fir granted. Even Republicans have been impressed by his work ethic and willingness to campaign and know his constituents.

This same appreciation kept Tom Davis in his seat regardless of Dem or Rep coattails in a district that trended more Dem than Rep. This same appreciation for someone willing to work hard was also at least part of the explanation for Scott Brown's win.

I don't know any dem who doesn't recognize that the Va 5th isn't going to be a fight to the finish. But I think I speak for a lot of dems when I say that I would rather go into that fight with a candidate like Perriello than many of the other Dem candidates.

[cvllelaw]

What I find intriguing is how fundamentally irrelevant this discussion is.

Yes, Tom got a bump from increased black turnout because Obama was in the race.

But in white precincts, Tom outdrew Obama. Just as an example, Tom got 35.6% in Campbell County; Obama drew 31.3% there. That works out to out to losing Campbell by 7,000 votes instead of losing by 9,300 votes -- a gain of 2,300 votes in a race that he won by 727.

Tom's 2008 victory was a product of many things coming together -- Virgil's over-confidence, Obama's coattails, the last-minute gay porn scandal, the endorsement by the Danville Register and Bee, to name a few. But most importantly, Tom's victory was a product of an extremely hard-working candidate who raised a lot of money, ran good ads that created a likeable persona for him, and who ran as authentically who he is -- an admittedly Christian Democrat who was disgusted by the ways of Washington, both Democratic and Republican, who genuinely cares about people and who has the ability to meet voters and have them understand that he is listening to them.

Any attempt to parse the election results more finely than that is a waste of time.

And what difference does the answer make, except to give pundits something to argue about rather than to actually do anything productive?

Supposed someone could conclusively prove (no one can, but anyway...) that Barack Obama's coattails accounted for exactly 3,245 votes, so that we would know that Tom would not have won had Hillary Clinton been the nominee.

So what?

What does that tell Tom that he has to do in 2010? It tells him that he has to work hard, but he was already doing that. What does it tell us that we as active Democrats have to do in 2010? It tells us that we have to work hard, but we were already preparing to do that. For that matter, what does it tell Republicans? That they get over-confident and sit on their fannies? I hope that is the message they take away, but I am not counting on it.

Any good Democrat who spends more than 5 minutes seconds pondering this question has wasted his time.

[Byrne Baby Byrne!!!]

Awww Did someone not pay Ben enough in "consulting" fees? Perriello, ran a great campaign and pulled off a stunner in beating Goode - we should all do whatever we can to send him back to Congress next year.

Or would Ben rather see Robert Hurt in that seat?

[DanielK]

Or Bradley Rees? I was trying to encourage Jane Hamsher to volunteer for him because she's also on her anti-Perriello trip :)

[Goodbye Tom]

Ben's exactly right. Obama's coattails accounted for 20000-30000 votes that Tommyboy would have never won on his own. Combine that with the change in the national mood and Tommyboy is headed for a 50,000+ vote loss.

[Gnarly]

Love lefty Yankees discussing the the 5th....therein lies the rub.

[Haywood Jablomi]

Here's a good question; given the recent SCOTUS decision, what's the over/under is on how much money Massey Energy and Arch Coal will spend this cycle to defeat Tommy?

[kelley in virginia]

Gretchen, your analysis is the one most on the money, I think.

2008 was indeed the "perfect storm" for Perriello. and yes, he has worked hard in his district to remain visible & viable.

however, it is his votes for the GIVE act, stimulus, cap 'n trade & obamacare that have fueled his field of opponents.

State Senator Robert Hurt can beat him. I look forward to it.

[Russ in Cville]

What you fail to point out is that the 5th District was won by John McCain. That means Tom Perriello got more votes than Obama. It's also very clear to us Perriello supporters that Tom has a tough fight ahead of him.

When I was a reporter I lived in three different states and covered 5 different Congressman from both parties, including Goode from every affiliation. No one works harder for his district than Tom Perriello.

I was also not impressed wit your recent "Tim Kaine Scandal" report. That so called "scandal" involved Kaine not giving a blanket pass to all felons because he saw it as unconstitutional. That was such a tabloid move on your part. I can see the difference between a blogger and a reporter. And your right, you are no Larry Sabato. Just a bitter wannabe.

[Mr. CCH]

Not Obama's coattails...but Mark Warner"s...Mr yes vote on Obamacare got almost 205,000 votes in the 5th district. His endorsement carried a lot of weight in '08 that it will not carry in 2010

[Phil Chroniger]

*rolls eyes*

Nobody seems to think that Virgil Goode's unpopularity had ANYTHING to do with Perriello's victory. It seems Tom works hard for people in Charlottesville (a place that is majority Dems/college liberals), but knowing people of many different political stripes in other areas of the 5th (I've got some family, friends, and acquaintences down that way), Perriello has gone from "he seems better to Virgil" to "I can't believe I voted for him"

Of course, I'll be disagreed with here, but this is my observation based upon people I know and simple demographics. Combine that with the fact that Perriello's voting history does not jive with the general opinions of 5th District voters (who are not in favor of things like cap-and-trade), and his battle is more likely to be an uphill one in 2010 than it was in 2008.

[Bob]

Perriello was a great candidate, but the 5th is a very conservative district. I'm sorry, but Perriello's toast.

That being said, if the teabaggers keep up their attacks on Hurt and run their own candidate (possibly even Goode) as an independent, then that's about the only way Perriello gets re-elected. Straight up Tom vs. Bob, Tom's done, but man are the teabaggers doing everything they can to blow this easy pick-up.

[Right turns only!]

Bob, how dare you disparage the teabaggers. The ballsonchin movement is going to save our democracy from all those "other" people. We are going to take our country back from all those unsavory third world types.

What we need is MORE teabagger candidates not fewer!

The GOP needs to nominate the most extremely conservative candidates possible. If they don't we need to run our own candidates against them. That is the ONLY way to win!

These leftists are trying to tell us we can't secede! Can you imagine that? They say we can't ignore laws we deem unconstitutional! Can you imagine that?

Less talk. More teabagging!

[Not Larry Sabato]

Right turns- no trolling under multiple screen names.

[Right turns only!]

Trolling? Moi?

[Name]

right turns = spock and its blatantly obvious

[Not Larry Sabato]

It's not Spock, but another regular liberal commenter here (who I usually agree with).

[Mr. Jefferson]

My pudding must be soft and yielding, "Right turns only!"

[change]

You have to excuse Spock, he is from another planet and does not understand the realities of earth, much less the attitudes of people of the greatest country therein.

Or if you do not believe in aliens; he is just a young person trying to express himself to the adult world. His parents ignore his immature rhetoric and chalk it up to youth, so he must get his frustrations out in the only manner he can…. Thoughtless (and usually racist) babble…..

Oh to be young and stupid……

[Not Virgil Goode]

Coattails cut both ways. John McCain probably brought out votes that Virgil wouldn't have gotten otherwise, especially as McCain carried the district. Just a random thought.

[Not Tom Perriello]

Ben is actually correct about this one. Tom didn't stand a chance against Virgil unless the black voters came out. This district is largely made up of black voters. they just don't vote. What happened this time is that they came out and voted for the first black president. Thousands of people who have never voted before voted for Obama. It was a beautiful thing to see Democracy working and people participating. Some for the first time, others for the thousandth time. But it was apparant that Tom could not have gotten that many votes on his own. Had Tom run any other election it would have been an epic fail.

[Phil Chroniger]

Considering Ben just said it's not Spock, I'd lay off of him.

[change]

Not Tom,

People showing up to vote because of the color of someone’s skin is not a “beautiful thing to see”.

I would suggest that people educating themselves on issues and voting for those who best represent their beliefs is a better definition of Democracy.

[Not Tom Perriello]

Perhaps I was not clear enough when I tried to convey my point that it is a beautiful thing to see people voting for the first time. Note "It was a beautiful thing to see Democracy working and people participating. Some for the first time, others for the thousandth time."
The beauty was their participation, regardless of the reason.
In an ideal world we would all become educated on candidates and their message. But Pres. Obama needed no message to get the voters out. It is sad that they came out because he is half black, but it was a great way for the Dems to take the Presidency.