Virginia Turns Back to Red

Creigh Deeds, the Democratic candidate for governor of Virginia, has a Barack Obama problem. Obama won Virginia in last year's presidential race--the first Democrat to do so in 44 years--but his popularity in the state has plunged since then. Deeds is conflicted. Asked if he's an "Obama Democrat," Deeds said he's a "Creigh Deeds Democrat," whatever that is. And he's skipped two of three Obama appearances in Virginia during the campaign season.

The rub is Deeds can't live with Obama, and can't live without him. His campaign is sputtering, he trails Republican Bob McDonnell by 7 points or more in every poll, and the Democratic base is demoralized. He needs Obama's help in arousing voters and creating a Democratic surge in turnout on November 3.

The downside is Obama motivates Republicans as well and is likely to have little effect on independents. In 2006 and 2008--disastrous election years for Republicans in Virginia--"the independents were behaving like Democrats," says former Republican congressman Tom Davis. They had turned sharply against President Bush and the war in Iraq. With Bush gone, independents are increasingly leery of Obama. For Deeds, the president is a "net negative," Davis says.

The Obama problem isn't unique to Deeds. It's likely to afflict many Democratic candidates in 2010. A strong economic rebound and a rise in Obama's approval rating would ease the problem. But for the foreseeable future in regions where Obama is relatively weak--Sunbelt, border, plains, Rockies--Democratic candidates will be skittish about being linked to the president.

Virginia 2009 is the test case. Since 2004, Democrats here have won a presidential race, a second straight contest for governor, three House seats, two U.S. Senate seats, and control of the state senate. That's a powerful Democratic trend. Virginia seemed to have moved from Republican stronghold to blue state almost overnight--or at least to swing state that tilts Democratic.

But maybe not. The political landscape a year later looks quite different. John McCain lost to Obama by 53 percent to 46 percent in 2008. Davis says if the probable shape of the turnout next week--fewer students and blacks, more Republican-leaning independents and angry seniors--had been the case last year, McCain would have won the state. Polls of likely voters suggest the same.

When Deeds, a rural state senator, won the Democratic primary in June, Democrats were optimistic. With his moderate-to-liberal record, Deeds seemed well positioned to unite Democrats, attract independents, and win the governorship. Republicans, who'd expected former Democratic national chairman Terry McAuliffe, to be the nominee, were rattled. Deeds led McDonnell in two polls.

It's been all downhill from there. Democrats would have you believe the blame rests with Deeds and his inept campaign. There's some truth in that. In contrast, McDonnell, who defeated Deeds for attorney general by 323 votes in 2005, has run a crisp, disciplined, inclusive campaign from the start.

He's overcome one big obstacle. In late August, the Washington Post, chronically hostile to Virginia Republicans, uncovered McDonnell's 1989 master's thesis. It was remarkable for its social conservatism, especially its criticism of working women. Deeds leaped on it, making the thesis the centerpiece of his campaign and airing TV ads on it for weeks. McDonnell repudiated parts of the thesis, insisted he supports women in the workplace, and moved on. The tactic worked. McDonnell took a hit in the polls but never fell behind.

Then, in mid-September, Deeds made a critical error. During a debate, Deeds said he would not raise taxes. Afterwards, he told reporters he was only referring to "general revenue" taxes. His evasiveness infuriated the Washington Post, which had backed Deeds in the primary on the sole issue of his willingness to increase taxes to finance road building. The paper's endorsement was crucial in his come-from-behind victory.

Three days later, a Post editorial slammed Deeds for "trying to fudge the issue." He responded by unveiling "my transportation plan," which the Post published. (At the debate, McDonnell had held up a blank piece of paper, calling it the Deeds plan.) In the op-ed, Deeds said he would "sign a bipartisan bill with a dedicated funding mechanism for transportation--even if it includes new taxes."

That thrilled the Post. In an editorial the next day headlined "Honesty on Transportation," it praised Deeds for having "unequivocally committed himself to support higher taxes to rescue the state's sclerotic road system." Last week, the paper endorsed Deeds in an unusually lengthy editorial that trashed McDonnell. It conceded Deeds lacks good candidate skills, but said "there are plenty of reasons why [he] is the better choice," particularly taxes.