Ed Gillespie - 2014 Va. Campaign

Virginia's Great Loss

Underdog Ed Gillespie would have flourished in the Senate.

 

He made all the right moves.

 

By Mercedes Schlapp Nov. 7, 2014 | 4:10 p.m. EST + More

The GOP win this week was historic, and the near shocking upset in Virginia’s Senate race was clearly indicative of Republicans who were determined to make a comeback in 2014. Since the beginning of this race, Republican candidate Ed Gillespie trailed significantly behind incumbent Democratic Sen. Mark Warner. The day before the election, Real Clear Politics' poll average had
Warner up by 9 points, which led most of us to believe that the election was an easy win for him.

Outside groups, big Republican donors and political analysts never imagined that Gillespie would even come close.

Yet Gillespie proved them all wrong. He was exactly the type of Republican candidate whose disciplined approach in the right political environment is what can make a difference in a swing state.

[SEE: Political Cartoons]

Despite limited resources, Gillespie organized and led a flawless campaign by staying on message and focusing on the voters’ top issue for this election cycle: the economy. While Democrats were touting improved economic conditions, the voters felt anxious and unsettled about the future state of our nation. ABC News exit polls showed that 45 percent of Americans believed that the economy was the most important issue. The exit polls also showed that, in Virginia, 34 percent of the voters cast a vote against President Barack Obama. Obama’s unpopularity and Warner’s voting record helped to fuel the Gillespie campaign.

On Tuesday night, both Democrat and Republican political operatives watched in awe as Gillespie managed to pull off an early lead, strongly competed in swing districts such as Loudoun and Prince

William counties and outperformed in other counties such as Stafford. With the Scott Brown loss in

New Hampshire early in the evening, Republicans were pleasantly surprised to find that Virginia was suddenly in play. It seemed that Gillespie was becoming “the little engine that could.”

[SEE: Editorial Cartoons on 2014 Congressional Elections]

From the beginning, Gillespie was the underdog. Warner, a popular politician who ran an invisible campaign, was barely noticeable in Virginia and continually tried to brand himself as a moderate despite voting 97 percent of the time with Obama. Yet Gillespie fought for every vote, building coalitions, working to make inroads with women, Hispanic and minority voters. He would go to the bus stops and talk to voters in the early morning, traveled extensively and spent every minute campaigning, while Warner just took his campaign and his cushy Senate seat for granted.

Reflecting days after the election, the word in Washington is that if only outside groups and big
Republican donors would have invested more money into the Gillespie race, he could have possibly beaten Warner. Gillespie aggressively fundraised, but he was up against Warner’s deep pockets and a substantial campaign war chest.

[SEE: Political Cartoons on the Economy]

Although Gillespie lost the race by a few thousand votes, the greatest loss will be for the state of Virginia. Gillespie would have worked with both parties to find common-sense solutions to improve the lives of Americans and ensure our nation remains secure. This purple state lost a great opportunity to replace an Obama puppet with a roll-up-your-sleeves type of senator. We can only hope that Gillespie throws his hat in the ring and runs for governor in Virginia in 2017.

Why Did No One Listen to Ed Gillespie?

  

Super PACs and donors didn’t think the Republican had a chance in Virginia’s Senate race. They were wrong. 

By Carrie Levine

 

Ed Gillespie—and Virginia’s Senate race—turned out to be the surprise of election night.

Photo by Mike Segar/Reuters

This story was published by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C.

When Ed Gillespie decided to run against Democratic incumbent Mark Warner for a Virginia U.S.

Senate seat, his bid was universally hailed as a long shot.

No one, though, thought the American Crossroads co-founder, former Republican National

Committee chairman, and ex-lobbyist would have trouble attracting big money.

Conventional wisdom was wrong on both counts.

Gillespie—and Virginia’s U.S. Senate race—turned out to be the surprise of election night. Warner, a popular former governor who routinely led in polls, claimed victory by fewer than 17,000 votes, and Republican Gillespie has yet to concede. The election could be headed for a recount.

That Gillespie managed to mount such a serious challenge is particularly notable given his token support from outside groups like super PACs, nonprofits, and party committees. Gillespie’s surge leaves everyone wondering if he would have upset Warner had such groups invested in Virginia’s race like they did in other U.S. Senate contests from Alaska to North Carolina.

“Shame on them,” said Howard Leach, one of only six donors to the We Can Do Better PAC, a super PAC started to support Gillespie’s U.S. Senate bid. “They should have put some money in Ed’s race.”

“When Ed Gillespie tells me something going forward, you’d better believe I’m going to listen to him.” 

Warren Stephens, Republican donor

Reported outside spending on North Carolina’s U.S. Senate race, the most expensive in history, was $81.2 million. The total spent on Virginia’s U.S. Senate race, which appears to be the closest in the country? A measly $2.6 million.

The Gillespie campaign and the National Republican Senatorial Committee did not respond to a request for comment. The Washington Post reported the NRSC spent $675,000 in Virginia, including $100,000 the weekend before the election.

Leach gave $25,000 to the We Can Do Better PAC, which raised $140,000, most of which it spent on radio ads in late October.

Leach, a businessman and investor, is a former campaign cash bundler for President George W. Bush, who later appointed him as U.S. ambassador to France. His relationship with Gillespie dates back to

Gillespie’s time at the helm of the RNC. “I think very highly of Ed Gillespie as an individual,” Leach said, adding, “I wish that Ed had had more help.”

American Crossroads and its related nonprofit, Crossroads GPS, stayed out of the race entirely. At least two of Gillespie’s former lobbying clients ran ads in Senate races, but they didn’t show Gillespie any love.

The American Hospital Association’s political action committee ran U.S. Senate-focused ads in Kansas, Alaska, Mississippi, and Arkansas during the 2014 cycle, according to Kantar

Media/CMAG, an advertising tracking service, but stayed out of Virginia. The National Association of Realtors Congressional Fund, a super PAC funded entirely by the National Association of Realtors, ran U.S. Senate-focused ads in Mississippi, Alaska, Kentucky, Michigan, and Kansas but also avoided the Senate race in Virginia. Neither organization responded to requests for comment on the election results.

The biggest outside spender in the Virginia race was the Virginia Progress PAC, a pro-Warner super

PAC that spent $1.8 million and aired about 3,400 ads, or one out of every eight in the race, according media data. The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action spent the most money pushing for Gillespie: $410,000, still less than a quarter as much as the Virginia Progress PAC, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Virginia “is a rich state for us in terms of members and supporters and donors and we felt that we could make an impact,” said Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the NRA. “And we could make an impact in a race where there was a clear distinction between Gillespie and Warner. Gillespie would be someone who would support us through thick and thin and Warner … hadn’t.”

The NRA paid for an August mailing, and it also made phone calls on Gillespie’s behalf in October.

Polls consistently showed Gillespie trailing well behind Warner. That and the possibility of the expense of playing in Virginia’s media market may have played a part in discouraging other outside groups and donors.

Warren Stephens, chairman and president of Little Rock, Arkansas-based Stephens Inc., also gave $25,000 to the We Can Do Better PAC. Stephens, a major political donor, gave more to other groups, including $2 million to American Crossroads, because Arkansas was one of Crossroads’ prime target states, he said. “I donated to [We Can Do Better PAC] because I’ve known Ed Gillespie a long time and he’s a nice man,” Stephens said. “I think I’m probably like everyone else. I didn’t think he had a chance.”

Stephens said he doesn’t remember who approached him to contribute to the We Can Do Better PAC, but no other group brought up Virginia’s U.S. Senate race when soliciting him.

Stephens said he won’t second-guess why outside groups, including American Crossroads, didn’t put money into the Virginia Senate race. Still, “when you have a good candidate maybe the lesson there is just go ahead and support him no matter what,” he said.

Steven Law, president of American Crossroads, was not available to be interviewed, a group
spokesman said. Law personally contributed $1,000 to Gillespie’s campaign on Oct. 17, according to 
Federal Election Commission records. In an emailed statement, the group said, “Republicans benefited from an unprecedented late-breaking wave and an abundance of top-flight candidates like

Ed Gillespie. The Senate battleground was so broad this year that we would have had to shift resources from other close races to try to take advantage of any new opportunities in the campaign’s closing days.”

Gillespie’s campaign reported raising about $6.8 million and spending slightly less than $6 million through Oct. 15. Warner’s campaign reported raising nearly $16.4 million and spending $13.7 million, more than twice as much as Gillespie.

The Gillespie campaign was also out-advertised. Warner ran more than one-half the TV ads in the race, according to the Center’s media analysis. Gillespie ran slightly more than one-third. The data shows no outside group aired a TV ad in the race after Oct. 11.

It’s impossible to know whether more outside spending would have tipped the race Gillespie’s way, but it seems likely people will write bigger checks for him next time.

“What he told me … was, I’ve studied the race and it’s winnable and I’ve never studied a race harder.

I’m sitting there going, ‘OK, sure, Ed, there’s no way you can win the race, but I know you, I’m behind you, we’ll do something,’ ” Stephens said. “Lo and behold, when Ed Gillespie tells me something going forward, you’d better believe I’m going to listen to him.”

Carrie Levine is a federal politics reporter at the Center for Public Integrity.E