While the 2017 field for Lieutenant Governor is probably still not even settled, the early entrants continue to gain support.
The latest tranche of endorsements comes for Sen. Bryce Reeves. While serving in Richmond, Reeves has cultivated a reputation for being strong on “law and order” issues and on the Second Amendment. While most people recognize him as a successful small businessman and legislator, what many don’t know is his previous career in law enforcement, in which he served as a narcotics detective in Prince William County, and in the military before that, when he qualified and served as a U.S. Army Ranger.
This background has now paid off with the endorsement of 30 county sheriffs from around the Commonwealth:
Accomack County Sheriff Todd Godwin
Albemarle County Sheriff Chip Harding
Augusta County Sheriff Donald Smith
Bath County Sheriff Robert Plecker
Bedford County Sheriff Michael Brown
Bland County Sheriff Thomas Roseberry III
Brunswick County Sheriff Brian Roberts
Caroline County Sheriff Tony Lippa
Charles City County Sheriff Alan Jones
Chesterfield County Sheriff Karl Leonard
Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins
Cumberland County Sheriff Darrell Hodges
Danville City Sheriff Michael Mondul
Fredericksburg City Sheriff Paul Higgs
Grayson County Sheriff Richard Vaughan
Greene County Sheriff Steven Smith
King George County Sheriff Steve Dempsey
Lancaster County Sheriff Patrick McCranie
Louisa County Sheriff Ashland Fortune
Montgomery County Sheriff Hank Partin
Northumberland County Sheriff James “Doc†Lyons
Orange County Sheriff Mark Amos
Page County Sheriff Chadwick Cubbage
Patrick County Sheriff Daniel Smith
Prince William County Sheriff Glendell Hill
Richmond County Sheriff Steve Smith
Spotsylvania County Sheriff Roger Harris
Stafford County Sheriff David Decatur
Wythe County Sheriff Keith Dunagan
York County and Poquoson Sheriff Danny Diggs
Virginia Sheriffs are all elected by the people, and tend to be the most liked and most respected elected officials in their respective counties. So, these endorsements mean more than most, and reflect impressive strength for Reeves this early in the contest.
Reeves and Sen. Jill Vogel (R-Fauquier) and Del. Glenn Davis (R-Virginia Beach), the other currently-announced candidates for Lieutenant Governor, as well as all the other announced (and, perhaps, unannounced) candidates for statewide office will gather this Saturday at the Liberty Farm Festival in Fauquier County.
13 comments
[…] We previously reported on an impressive list of sheriff’s who have endorsed Bryce Reeves. […]
Please! I think you left out a couple of endorsements, Wagner, Hanger, Norment, Cosgrove, and less we forget Taylor. Not a line up I’m interested in. Why would you be??
Now let’s look at his 2nd Anendment shall we…. The woman is the race has the best scores form VCDL and the NRA. Who else in this race has 100%?? That’s right no one!
It’s high time you boys stop shunning conservative women and start supporting them. I’m done with the boys club. Did I play the woman card? In the infamous words of Sarah Palin, “You betcha”!
I don’t vote based on gender, nor should anyone else who claims to be a conservative….it’s kinda the whole reason we’re conservatives in the first place: because we view people as individuals rather than members of some demographic collective.
The idea that anyone in the GOP is trying to “shun conservative women” and keep them out of leadership positions is quite frankly a load of BS. I expect these sort of “war on women” tactics to come from Democrats, not Vogel’s surrogates.
I think you missed my point entirely. It’s not about voting on a persons gender. It’s about not having the right gender and manipulating so the “boys club” gets to pick. I’m over that crap.
The back room deals have been struck and the women have to twice as hard to get fair play. It’s not BS when you see and hear what is happening behind the scence. So if that’s the world we live in then I expect to play just as rough. Welcome to politics.
This is true, the party has token leadership slots for women, collegians, and yout’ — they should know their place.
Any woman ‘uppity’ enough to run for statewide office that doesn’t end in “-woman” should recognize it as an uphill battle.
It is troubling when members of the Law Endorsement Sector try to affect the laws they are to enforce. There are conflicts of interest that produces obstacles to needed justice system reforms. Mass incarceration, prohibition, laws designed to circumvent the 4th Amendment, and Civil Asset Forfeiture are examples of areas of needed reform that Law Enforcement, in general, opposes, because they hinder expansion of the Law Enforcement Sector.
Never heard of him.
Which is we we need a $4 million primary to help the better-funded more easily persuade any registered voter that shows up to select our GOP nominee.
If we do nothing as a party except for giving the politicians primaries and the selection of primaries, just what exactly do we need a party for anyway?
(For bonus points; for the 10th CD GOP giving primary to Babs, who voted to make the tie and who voted to break a tie?)
The state’s Conservative Fellowship Republican Party wing candidate for Virginia Lieutenant Governor of which the author of this article is a central associate and key figure. That is perfectly fine but what would have been more appropriate in my opinion as a party elected official (which he is) would be to identify your extra party Republican affiliations to the voters right upfront. But I suppose to each his own as they say.
I think it’s a rule if you mention either the CF or VCN you have to add in the adjective ‘shadowy.’ It’s more fun and better explains why SCC members are more aligned to these groups than to their constituents or the party.
‘Cabal’ would probably also work.
But really, what can we expect from 90 some people who meet for a couple hours every few months?
It’s a single-issue caucus. You know, like the Congressional Flat Tax Caucus. Not a “wing,” as in Lawrence’s formulation, nor a “cabal” as in yours. Just people on the state committee who favor conventions over primaries.
Well then, Let That Be Your Last Battlefield!
The cumulative effect of your ‘caucus’ has been to saddle the taxpayers of Virginia with $4 million dollar tab for the selection of our party nominees.
Please tell me how this is fiscally responsible and in compliance with our creed?
Instead of the 41 primary votes being responsible for $100,000, I now hold each of you responsible for $50,000.
And “I voted against it” doesn’t matter jack. That kind of ‘fiscal responsibility’ is why we waste our time and lives in this Party.
Not a wing, or cabal or a caucus — Your gang just held up the Commonwealth of Virginia for $4 Million and left us Republicans holding the bag.
I’m knocking on doors today for our next President and re-electing ‘Primary’ Comstock and because of YOUR actions/inactions I will be ashamed of my own party with each person I meet.
So now please fix it. Do whatever you need to do to and either come up with the money from party donors (not like that money couldn’t be better used elsewhere) or ‘caucus’ with ALL your SCC fellows come up with a better selection method, failure is not an option..
Or maybe I’m wrong, the SCC is not the best and the brightest of the GOP. In that case, I will expect all of your resignations on Whitbeck’s desk Monday morning.
O’ come on Steve sell that baloney to the uninformed and naive along with the NeverTrump myths you pushed after the recent Republican presidential convention. The PAC associations and other positions regarding the Virginia education system, convention of states and social issues are all part of the package that voters have a right to know what they are buying into regarding the CF.
I have no objection to these types of extra platform political position activities per se, as it’s fairly common place in all party associations. My issue is not being upfront about what and with whom you subscribe when placing yourself or others before the voters, that is a no, no from my viewpoint. Why hide and fudge your positions? Is their something you are uncomfortable with or perhaps something you fear the voters would be uncomfortable with given full disclosure? These type of extra political party “societies” don’t generally bring out positive responses from voters when viewed from the outside in a purported open electoral process.