Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Sunday, September 25, 2016

Democrat Terry McAuliffe holds a narrow lead over Republican attorney general Ken Cuccinelli in Virginia’s gubernatorial race, according to a new poll from Public Policy Polling.

The poll finds McAuliffe leading Cuccinelli by a 41 to 37 percent margin — 7 percent support Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis, and 15 percent are undecided. McAuliffe’s 4 percent lead is essentially unchanged from his 5-point advantage in PPP’s previous poll of the race in late May. Additionally, a Rasmussen poll in early June showed McAuliffe with a similar 44 to 41 percent lead.

Both candidates remain unpopular among Virginia voters — 29 percent view McAuliffe favorably, while 33 percent view him unfavorably. That negative rating looks positively rosy compared to Cuccinelli, however; 32 percent hold positive views of the right-wing attorney general, while 44 percent view him negatively.

“The governor’s race is shaping up exactly as expected — voters don’t care for either Ken Cuccinelli or Terry McAuliffe,” Dean Debnam, president of Public Policy Polling, said in a statement. “But at this point they have a bigger problem with Cuccinelli than they do with McAuliffe.”

Cuccinelli’s problems may be deepening. A The New York Times report published on Monday suggests that Cuccinelli may have closer ties to the Star Scientific gifts scandal that has dogged Virginia governor Bob McDonnell. The report reveals that Cuccinelli received $18,000 worth of gifts from Star Scientific’s chief executive — some of which he failed to report, along with his stock in the company. Cuccinelli says that this was an oversight, but McAuliffe should have ample opportunity to tie the Republican to the controversy that has left McDonnell’s approval rating at an all-time low.

For now, McAuliffe is attacking Cuccinelli for his views on Social Security and Medicare. On Tuesday, the McAuliffe campaign released a new television ad questioning Cuccinelli’s Paul Ryan-esque views on the social safety net:

There’s certain to be more where that came from. According to a report in the Richmond Times-Dispatch, McAuliffe now has $6 million in cash on hand — more than double Cuccinelli’s total of $2.7 million.

Photo: mdfriendofhillary via Flickr.com

  • Lynda Groom

    The Cucc is a very dangerous and ignorant little man. I hope the voters of Virginia have finally had enough of this character.

  • Dominick Vila

    Our focus should not be on the likely victory of a Democrat in a blue state, but the potential defeat of several Democrats running for re-election in red states in 2014.

  • TheSkalawag929

    Virginia democrats should not take for granted that just because McAuliffe is ahead that he will win. You have to make sure that you get the people out to vote and not just for McAuliffe. You need to get him as much democratic support in both chambers of the state legislature as possible. He can’t govern the state alone.

  • Catskinner

    But McAuliffe is a flawed candidate, which will begin to show shortly.

    • metrognome3830

      Apparently they are all flawed, cat. Isn’t it just great that the voters are only given the choice of voting for the least flawed (in their opinion) instead of having any kind of clear choice? “Our candidate is less corrupt than yours.” What a great campaign slogan.

  • Allan Richardson

    So seniors are “dependent” on government? People too old to work, or too old to keep their jobs and too old to be hired by businesses who only want YOUNG workers, are “dependent?” People who did not have leftover cash to invest while they were struggling to stay afloat in an economy geared to the wealthy, or who DID invest and lost it due to a catastrophe (or a con artist that conservatives do not want to be restricted from running his con), are “dependent?” Darn right, and we deserve it!

    Social Security did not exist when the Great Depression hit, and many seniors of THAT generation became homeless (they were called “bums” then) when their jobs, which they were trying to keep even in their seventies, and their savings, went away.

    What do conservatives WANT old people to do? Just die younger with no medical treatment?