In looking at Chris Cillizza’s The Fix this morning in regards to the pending shape of the GOP Senate candidates for 2024 (for the Warner seat), I noticed the following, which I had missed (it is from a week or so ago), (via WaPo): Republicans Opt for Convention to Choose Nominee

Republican leaders decided Saturday to hold a convention to choose their nominee in next year’s U.S. Senate race, delivering a setback to moderate Rep. Thomas M. Davis III and bolstering the chances of conservative former governor James S. Gilmore III.

The vote by the Republican State Central Committee means about 10,000 party activists will gather in June to decide who will face former governor Mark R. Warner (D) in the general election. Conventions that are limited to party activists generally favor conservative candidates, whereas moderates stand a better chance in open primaries that draw independents.

This strikes me as rather odd. I am not sufficiently versed in the specific candidate selection histories of the fifty states to know the answer for certain, but isn’t this highly unusual? It is my general understanding that congressional candidates have been exclusively chosen via primaries for decades and decades. Beyond the decision to utilize a convention, it is further odd that the Virginia GOP decided to go that route for only one office, as the state will still be incurring the cost of a primary for the Democrats and the other Republican offices.

The article indicates that the convention route is being sought as a way of better ensuring that former governor James Gilmore is nominated. The part of that logic that I find confusing is that if it takes a smaller, more elite-level process (as opposed to going to the rank-and-file Republican voter) to nominate Gilmore, would that not indicate a lack of broad support for the candidate, suggesting that perhaps he isn’t the party’s best choice in terms of fielding a candidate who can win the general election?

If Gilmore, who has won state office before, is threatened by a primary election (which the article clearly suggests in the case), then why in the world would anyone think that he can win the general election?

Not only is this an odd move, strategically speaking, but it is an undemocratic one as well, as it limits the number of persons who have a direct say over who the candidate will be.

2 Comments

1. Steven,

   Since when have party leaders(Dems or Republicans) want voters to have a direct say in who their party’s candidate. Just look at the screwed up Presidential nominating process.

   Cheers,

   Bill

   PS- Warner finished 2nd at the 1978 VA GOP Convention. If not for the nominee dying in a plane crash two months later, Warner wouldn’t have become senator.

   Comment by The Florida Masochist — Tuesday, October 23, 2024 @ 10:02 am

2. Much of what I’ve read about the Virginia Senate seat has focused on the conflicts between the Republican Party’s moderates and its “old guard” — the much more conservative wing which, while its candidates tend to lose with the population growth of northern VA, still remains entrenched in the GOP. Either they’re in denial about the way that Virginia’s electorate has changed, or they don’t care about electability — just about nominating those who agree with them (Republicans are going to nominate a pureblood conservative, by God!). As a result, the Democrats are making huge gains in the state.

   Comment by Patrick — Tuesday, October 23, 2024 @ 10:29 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The trackback url for this post is: http://poliblogger.com/wp-trackback.html?p=12703

NOTE: I will delete any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.