Why Virginia Is Tilting Toward Kerry
By Benjamin Wallace-Wells, Washington Monthly. Posted September 27, 2004.
The changing demographic of Virginia points to a Democratic revival in the state.
... people who move to Virginia from neighboring North Carolina or West Virginia believe that they have traded up in the world, to a state that's more prosperous and classy, the heart of the Southern establishment.
It is this cultural difference that explains one of the mysteries of the current presidential
race: John Kerry, the Massachusetts Yankee, is doing rather well here. He launched his
campaign at Norfolk Naval base with an aircraft carrier in the background, and went on to
crush Sen. John Edwards, a native from North Carolina, in the state's March primary. Most
observers had thought that if Kerry stood any chance in the South, it would be in
Tennessee, Arkansas, and Louisiana – the states which Clinton won and Gore came closest
to taking. But soon after he became his party's presumptive nominee, a strange pattern
kept popping up in the polls: In Virginia, not considered a swing-state, Kerry stayed close
behind President Bush. State Republicans called it a mere blip, complained that the race was
still young, and grumbled when local papers called them up to ask whether Bush might lose
the state come November. Political scientists and pollsters mostly agreed that a Virginia win
would be a long-shot for the man from Massachusetts. But by the eve of the Democratic
convention in late July, Kerry and Bush were in a statistical dead-heat, and while Kerry's
campaign chose to pull its Television advertising from Louisiana and Arkansas, it kept buying
ads in Virginia. Six months ago, Larry Sabato, the esteemed University of Virginia political
scientist, told reporters that Kerry was a dead duck in the state. Now, he tells me, Virginia is
still Bush's to lose – but Bush may very well lose it.
A win for Kerry in Virginia, or even a competitive finish here, would qualify as fairly stunning
political news. Virginia is commonly thought of as the seat of the South, a place of countless
shrines to Confederate warriors, the home of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and the
Bush-Cheney '04 campaign headquarters. Virginia did not go for either Clinton or Carter,
both Southern Dems. In fact, it hasn't voted for any Democratic presidential candidate since
1964 and has long been the most reliably Republican state in the South.
But drive around Virginia, like I did early last month, and you realize pretty quickly that
those same qualities that distinguish the Old Dominion from the rest of the South also help
explain the surprising buoyancy of Kerry's candidacy. Put simply, Virginia is the
Massachusetts of the South. Both states pride themselves on the lead roles they played in
the nation's founding. Colonial Williamsburg, Mount Vernon, and Monticello are as revered
locally as are Plymouth Rock, Old North Church, and Bunker Hill. Both states have long
maritime traditions and booming high-tech suburbs. Both have cultures that admire good
government, revere brave public service, trust leading families to run things, and generally
eschew ideological zealotry and radicalism.
All these attributes can be seen in the kind of individuals who win statewide office in both
places. Virginia's senior U.S. senator, John Warner, is a GOP version of Kerry: well-born,
courtly, hardworking, a party man but with an independent streak, and a decorated Navy
veteran. Warner refused to endorse Oliver North, the Republican candidate for the state's
other Senate seat in 1994 because North was too radically conservative. And Virginia's
current governor Mark Warner, is a Democratic version of Massachusetts' GOP governor Mitt
Romney: competent, ideologically moderate, and a successful business entrepreneur. This
centrist Chamber of Commerce sensibility, which helped make Virginia reliably Republican
long before the less genteel parts of the South, is what's now helping shift the state
towards Kerry's column this fall.
lots more at link:
http://www.alternet.org/election04/19993/