Realistic, factual, sober analysis from a very partisan person

Except that Trump didn’t carry Virginia. So taken to it’s logical conclusion — both parties push as hard as they can to get as many Trump or Hillary voters to the polls as possible — Gillespie or any other statewide GOP candidate still loses, all other things being equal. And if the Dems are turning out because they hate Trump (which is pretty clearly the case), will Trump voters turn out for somebody other than Trump out of love for Trump, even though he’s not on the ballot? Not likely — that’s just not how people’s minds work. People will vote against a party to send a message out of anger, but they are far less likely to come out and vote for somebody for positive reasons. There’s an emotional imbalance in the electorate that favors the Dems. This is the same dynamic that makes negative advertising effective: fear of the unknown. I can tell you that the largest category of responses to emails that we sent from my official Fairfax GOP account during this cycle did not come from GOP voters who liked what I said about Gillespie, or from Trump voters upset that Ed didn’t align himself with the President. They came from very nasty, angry Dems, and from Republicans saying they would not support the party as long as Trump is the face of the GOP. None of this is meant as a knock on the President — I’m just stating facts. There is no simple “embrace Trump” solution. Last year, we traded one group of voters for another. That trade worked out well in other states. It did not work out well here. One reason for that is the long-standing differences between registration and turnout rates in Northern Virginia vs. other parts of the state. Even if a candidate fully embraces Trump, you have to change voting habits and political culture in SW Virginia and other areas to overcome the historically higher rates in Fairfax. Again, not knocking anybody — just making an observation.

There is no longer term. Triage or morgue.

Steve – Exactly how many campaigns have you won? I have known of you (and you) for many years and yet I am hard pressed to find a single campaign where you have been successful. Listening to you dole out your pearls of political wisdom is a bit nauseating.

The reality is the following. The Republican Party, for which I am a member, has spent a decade singularly focused on President Obama and Obamacare. While this focus provided short-term political gains, it will lead to long-term political loss. We have no intellectual conservatism anymore. The days of Reagan, Kemp and others are long gone. Instead, we have nativist factions that think the road back to power (or keeping it) is to antagonize minority groups and spend time singularly obsessed with repealing Obamacare.

Another issue we need to address is President Donald Trump. People can sugarcoat it, rationalize it, and throw out fancy facts and figures all day long – the reason Republicans lost on Tuesday was because of President Trump. This election was 2009 in reverse except it was worse. President Trump is toxic and while I will admit he has been treated unfairly by the press, he has brought a lot of this upon himself. His style of delivery is abrasive and his inability to effectively communicate has made him a weak President. You note in here it is important for Republicans to embrace the President’s agenda. What agenda? Every day his Administration sends conflicting messages and when those messages are not coming from his people, he decides to conflate the messaging with his Twitter account.

As for Shak Hill – where to begin? You always seem to wash up on the campaign of some guy making a long shot bid for an office for which he is entirely unqualified. Having known him for years, I used to think Shak was a nice guy but the reality is he is neither qualified to serve in the U.S. Congress nor would he win a General Election contest. I am sure voters are excited to see his interest in penis enhancement methods and prostrate milking ideas.

Seriously, where do you find these people?