Virginia Governor's Race, 1989

ThtLJ VOL. 65, NO. 11 JULY19 9 University ofVirginztV NEWS LETTER Virginia Governor's Race, 1989

PART 1: THE NOMINATION STAGE by Larry J. Sabato

The author is professor ofgovernment and foreign affairs at the The Republican Party Primary University of Virginia. This News Letter is the first ofa two-part series; the second article, on the November general election, will Only once in Virginia's history before 1989 did the appear as the December issue. Republican party choose to hold a statewide primary election, and it was an unqualified disaster. In 1949 Virginia and New Jersey have the distinction of hold the GOP experimented with a primary, with the fol ing the only gubernatorial contests in the nation the lowing results: (1) only one person filed a candidacy year after a presidential election. Every election cycle for governor; (2) no one at all filed for attorney gen- these two states (as well as eral; and (3) the one contest assorted large cities that hold The Virginia nominating on the ballot, for lieutenant their mayoral races at the governor, drew the magnifi same time) compete to see contests of 1989 were far more cent total of 8,565 votes. This which one will feature the significant than most. compared rather unfavorably mostinteresting match-up Wilder's ascension as the with the 316,622 votes cast in the one that becomes the Democratic party's standard-bearer the simultaneous Democratic entree of the nation's off-year primary for governor. political meal. is in itself hugely important and Twenty-two cities and coun In 1989 Virginia has historic. Coleman's primary ties reported fewer than ten won hands down. One party victory emphasizes the moderate, Republican primary voters.1 has nominated as its candi pragmatic dimension of the date for governor thegrand Of course, those were son of slaves who is seeking Republican party's profile. the days ofDemocratic party to become the first black ever hegemony inVirginia, when elected governor of any American state. The other 1. Larry Sabato, The Democratic Party Primary in Virginia: Tanta party produced a highly charged three-way mount to Election No Longer (Charlottesville: University Press of gubernatorial primary canlpaign that has launched Virginia, 1977), pp. 64-66. Some Republican party leaders helped a remarkable comeback bid by one of state's most to create their own embarrassment by urging party members to vote in the simultaneous Democratic gubernatorial primary, tenacious politicians. to assist Byrd Organization candidate John Battle in his close contest. Battle won narrowly in the end. • *. : ~: The University of Virginia News Letter is published by the Center for Public Service, 2015 Ivy Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-1795. (804) 924-3396 *.* THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA NEWS LETTER

winning the Democratic primary North during the Iran-Contra hear experiencein local, state, and federal was regarded as 'tantamount to ings. U. S. Representative Stan Parris governments, but hehad the handi Republicans felt election.' That era is long gone, but of Northern Virginia's Eighth Dis cap of only a regional identity. Coleman ran the most ag mired in failure and sois the pericxi ofRepublican guber trict also preferred a primary, be lieving that his strong regional base gressive and hard-hittingcampaign, sought to break the natorial dominance that extended from 1969 to 1981.TheGOP has seen and substantial financial backing airing a series of highly negative mold in 1989 with a two successive statewide tickets go would enable him to score an up television ads directed at Trible. In dramatic, surprising down to decisive defeats, and it was set election victory. Less enthusiastic one, for instance, Trible was chas departure from past determined to do things differently was former state Attorney General tised for his 1982 U.S. Senate com practice. in 1989. So the Republicans resur J. MarshallColeman. Herecognized mercial in which he had appeared rected the primary, which had been Trible's difficulties in the party, and in a military-style flight suit next to abandoned bythe Democrats after reasoned that his loyal base of a fighter jet; in fact, Trible had not twofratricidal gubernatorial nomin supporters within the GOP would served in the military, having ob ation battles (in 1969 and 1977).2 have more influence in a party tained a medical deferment during Democrats had decided that the conclave. The- fourth candidate, the Vietnam War. The spot, pro primary's expense and damage to HouseofDelegates Minority Leader duced by nationally known GOP party unity left the nominee Andy Guest, was also pro-conven mediaconsultant Robert Goodman, wounded and vulnerableto a GOP tion. Guest was knownonlyto party speared Trible for donning "a uni candidate chosen by convention. activists (and not even most of form he never wore, in a plane he The Republicans turned this them), and his longshot bid might never flew."s logic around in 1989, based on their be crippled if he were forced to ownrecent experiences. Convention compete outside the limited uni EJection Results battles in 1981 and 1985 had proven verse of party regulars. divisive; the insular nature of the Coleman's vigorous parry and convention setting seemed to make The Campaign thrust was rewarded at the polls on each skirmishmoreintense; and the June 13. In one ofthe most impres relative handful of party activists As it happened, Guest dropped his sive comebacks in modern state participating in the mass meetings bid in March after making little or history, Coleman shed his loser's and conventions gavean 'elitist' cast no progress to improve his stand imageby winning a narrow victory to the GOP's selection process.3 ing. The three remaining contend over Trible, 147,941 votes (36.8 Most of all, Republicans felt mired ers traded increasingly vituperative percent) to 141,120 votes (35.1 per in failure and sought to break the charges and personal barbs aired cent). Parris was in third place with mold with a dramatic, surprising both in eleven joint appearances 112,826 votes (28.1 percent). departure from past practice. around the state and in television As Table 1 indicates, Cole Of the four candidates who and radio advertisements that man'striumph was a broad one; he sought the gubernatorial blessings reached a crescendo in June. won twenty of fo.rty-one cities and of state Republicans, two of them Trible, supported by most forty-four of ninety-five counties. were prime movers behind the shift GOP state legislators as well as by (Trible captured fifteen cities and to a primary. Former U.S. Senator the Old Guard Byrd conservatives, forty-three counties, Parris five cit PaulS. Trible was especially eager stressed his 'electability and win ies and eight counties.) Coleman to broadenthe electorate beyond its ning political record; but he was carried the Tidewater Second and activist core; many GOP faithful attacked for being a 'quitter,' in Fourth congressional districts were angry at his decision to quit sufficiently pro-Reagan, and wrong where Trible had been presumed the Senate (and thus in effect cede on specific votes (such as his 1978 to be leading, but where the 'mili his seat to DemocratCharles Robb), support of the constitutional tary ad' discussed above perhaps as well as his criticism ofconserva amendment to grant statehood to had its greatest effect (given the tive hero Lieutenant Colonel Oliver the District ofColumbia).4 Coleman area's concentration of military touted his long involvement in state personnel and retirees). Coleman 2. See the author's Virginia Votes se government and familiarity with also captured the Richmond Third ries (the volumes for 1969-1973 and state issues, but suffered from his as well as the Roanoke Sixth and 1975-1978) for discussion of these pri mary elections. losses in the 1981 gubernatorial race 3. 'Strong party' advocates would and the 1985 nomination fight for sharply disagree with this view of lieutenant governor. Parris claimed 5. The pose had also been an issue, party conventions. See Larry Sabato, though a much lesser one, in Trible's The Party's Just Begun: Shaping Politi successful campaign for the u.s. Sen cal Parties for America's Future (Glen 4. Trible called the vote a "mistake" ate against then-Lieutenant Governor view, Ill.: Scott, Foresman, 1988), pp. and renounced it. Richard J. Davis (D). 76 205-212. JULY 1989

higherthan many Republicans had feared it would be. Thebenchmark TABLE 1 was the1988 'SuperTuesday' presi Results by Congressional District, dential primary, when about 1989 Virginia Republican Primary for Governor 234,000 people had voted on the GOP side (8.9 percent of registered Total Percent of Percent of Votes Cast for voters) and 365,000 on the Demo Votes Registered District Cast Voting Coleman Parris Trible cratic side (13.8 percentofthose reg istered). Thus, the 1989 Republican 1 55,318 20.9 23.6 15.1 61.2 primary drew 73 percent more 2 36,120 16.2 41.8 23.6 34.6 voters to the polls than the previ 3 52,995 17.7 37.2 34.6 28.1 4 35,387 14.2 41.9 20.5 37.6 ous year's GOP battle, and 11 per 5 36,463 15.1 40.9 13.1 46.0 cent more than the Democratic 6 37,300 15.8 48.2 17.3 34.5 contest. On the otherhand, the last 7 40/632 15.1 40.2 33.3 26.6 Democratic gubernatorial primary, 8 47,214 14.7 25.9 57.8 16.3 9 17,251 7.4 41.8 11.6 46.6 held in 1977 when Virginia's regis 10 45,115 13.2 38.4 37.3 24.3 tered population was smaller by nearly 700,000 than in 1989, drew SOURCE: Compiled from official election results from the State Board of Elections. nearly a half-million citizens to the polls. The Richmond Third District, in addition to the First District (as Piedmont Seventhdistricts, the lat the First District in the U. S. House noted earlier), had turnouts well ter twoconsidered his own regional of Representatives from 1977 to abovethe average, while theSouth home base. In the day's biggest 1983, and it proved to be his spring west Ninth brought up the rear, surprise, the Northern Virginia board to the Senate in 1982. Just as with just 7.4 percent of those regis Tenth also fell to Coleman, despite it provided most ofTrible's winning tered voting. (The Ninth also trailed Parris's 'favorite son' status in plurality then, the district nearly all districts in turnout for Super Northern Virginia. (Parris did win propelled Trible to another win in Tuesday.) It is also worth stressing his own district, the Eighth, by a 1989 by awarding him the largest that even a relatively 'good' level landslide.) vote proportion any area gave to of voter participation in a primary Trible, held to modest vic anycandidate (61.2 percent). More is still paltry compared to almost tories in the Southside Fifth and over, the turnout in the First was any general election. Southwest Ninth districts, had a the heaviest in the state (20.9 per much more substantial margin in cent of the registered voters). The Suburban Vote his native First District (Newport Overall turnout (almost News, Hampton, and the Northern 404,000, or 15.1 percent of all regis Coleman's statewide plurality was Neck area). Trible had represented tered voters) was considerably built on his narrow edge in sub urban Virginia, which cast almost 56 percent of the primary's total votes (see Table 2). ParrisandTrible TABLE 2 finished a close second and third, Urban Vote, 1989 Virginia Republican Primary for Governor respectively, in the battle for sub urban support. However, Trible Percent Percent of Votes Cast for of Total captured thecentral cities bya small Urban Measu re Vote Coleman Parris Trible margin over Coleman; yet these cities comprised only 15 percent of Urban Corridor 64.6 34.6 33.9 31.5 the total statewide vote, so they Standard Metropolitan Areas 70.6 35.7 32.2 32.1 could not compensate for Trible's Cen tral Ci ties 15.0 34.6 29.6 35.8 suburban loss. The former senator Suburbs 55.6 35.9 32.8 31.3 made his best showingamongrural Rural Areas 25.0 40.6 16.4 43.0 voters, who comprised a quarterof the statewide vote. While Trible SOURCE: Compiled from official election results from the State Board of Elections. received 43.0 percent of the rural NOTE: For definitions of the 'urban measures' used in this tab'le, see Larry Sabato, vote, Coleman was close behind, at Virginia Votes 1983-1986 (Charlottesville: Institute of Government, University of Virginia, 1987). 40.6 percent. Parris's lack ofa state wide organization was most 77 THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA NEWS LETTER

apparent in this sector of Virginia; with just 16.4 percentinrural areas, Among the ironies he was simplynot competitive with TABLE 3 of this primary his rivals. Voting in Selected Predominantly Black Precincts, election was the Overall, Coleman emerged 1989 Virginia Republican Primary for Governor with wafer-thin pluralities in both ability of Marshall Number Total Percent of the Urban Corridor and the Stan Coleman to beat his of Votes Registered Coleman Parris Trible dard Metropolitan Areas of Vir City Precincts Cast Voting % % % opponents at their ginia, while Trible placed third in own game. both. Even though a tiny vote was Black Precincts recorded in the sample black pre Charlottesville 1 45 4.2 53.5 20.9 25.6 Virginia Beach 1 121 6.7 52.5 19.2 28.3 cincts ofTable 3, Coleman was the Hampton 2 335 8.0 27.2 29.6 43.2 favorite by a wide margin (42.8 Newport News 8 270 3.2 38.6 15.9 45.5 percent, to 33.5 percent for Trible Norfolk 10 373 2.1 45.2 18.8 36.0 and 23.7 percent for Parris). While Portsmouth 2 48 1.2 35.4 43.8 20.8 theprimary'sturnoutstatewide was Richmond 15 382 2.8 50.4 27.0 22.6 15.1 percent, intheseblack precincts Emporia 1 8 2.2 87.5 12.5 0.0 it was a miserly2.8 percent ofthose Petersburg 4 112 2.9 54.5 23.2 22.3 registered. Still, this percentagewas 1,694 2.8 a considerableimprovement for the Totals 44 42.8 23.7 33.5 Republicans over when less 1988, SOURCE: Official election results from the State Board of Elections. than 1 percent of the registered NOTE: For the listing of the black precincts used in this table j see Sabato j Virginia voters in sampleblackprecincts cast Votes 1983-1986. a GOP ballot. Coleman was once a favor ite of black voters; in November Another indeterminate as The Primary in Perspective 1977, in his successfulbid for attor pect was the degree to which ney general, he received nearly a Democrats participated in the GOP Among the ironies of this primary third of the vote in sampIe black primary (in a phenomenon called election was the ability of Marshall precincts. For Republicans in mod 'cross over' voting). Since Virginia Coleman to beat his opponents at ern times, that proportion was sec has an 'open primary' with no party their own game. They had wanted ond only to Linwood Holton's 37 registration, Democrats were free a primary, not a convention as did percent in his 1969 election as gov to cast a ballot. Indeed, PaulTrible's Coleman; he won anyway. They ernor. Colemanfell outoffavor with late advertising encouraged conser had hoped for a moderate turnout, blacks in 1981, however, when he vative Democrats to show up at the not a light one that could be domi garnered under4 percentofthevote polls, becauseofhis supportamong natedbyColeman'smore dedicated in black precincts in his losing ex-Byrd Democrats. Other Demo corps of party activists; Coleman gubernatorial contest with Charles cratic activists privately discussed triumphed d sp't 1 rger-than Robb. the option of voting for the weak expected vote. The absence of any exit poll est of the three - most appeared Certainly, Coleman's come ing on June 13 makes other demo to pick Trible - to enhance Doug back was engineered mainly on the graphic observations difficult and Wilder's chances in the falL Un strength of his own considerable tentative. For example, white fun doubtedly, some Democrats, for political talents and personal tenac damentalist Christians are one of various motivations, did vote on ity, as well as the tough anti-Trible many Republican constituency June 13. But from an inconclusive campaign he waged. He was as groups, but their turnout rate and examination ofheavilyDemocratic sisted as well by Parris's attacks on candidate preferences cannot be precinct returns; not many seem to Trible, which helped to humble the determined from aggregate voting have done so; in any event, it is frontrunner. (Parris had predicted statistics. The best guess is that the unlikely many ofthem would have that Trible would dine at a 'banquet fundamentalist constituency was supported Coleman or accounted of consequences' on election day; not monolithic in this contest, and for his margin of victory. Both Parris was one ofthe cooks, though it appeared split especiallybetween Democratic motives discussed here, to his sorrow, not the head chef.) Trible and Coleman. for instance, would have favored Coleman's own third-place show Trible instead. ing in the early polls kept the focus 78 JULY 1989

off of him while lulling Trible into so than a convention? All these Senate term, Dalton acceded to the an overconfident 'above-the-fray' things considered, the Republican requests of party leaders who be stance - the classic campaign primary of 1989 appears to have lieved she would add 'star quality' Democrats ... were stance for an incumbent until the delivered more than the GOP had to the ticket. For attorney general, brimming with 1980s made it obsolete with nega reason to expect: a competitive the GOP nominated (unopposed) confidence about 6 tive, attack politics. candidate, relative unity, and a Richmond state Senator Joseph B. the black and female Coleman had other advan partynot intatters. These propitious Benedetti, a legislative veteran who members on their tages. Only a few major newspa results were partly a function of fully recognizes thedifficultyofhis pers endorsed a candidate, but luck, partly a product of RepubIi race against the incumbent Demo ticket, and worried Coleman got every nod (from the cans' hunger for state office after crat, Mary Sue Terry. mainly about the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, the Wash eight years out ofpower. Given the white male on the ington Times, the NorthernVirginia underlying condition of the GOP, team. Journal newspapers, and the a convention might havebestowed Democratic Contests Fredericksburg Free-Lance Star). the same blessings in 1989, though Oddly, Coleman also received a the primarycertainlygranted some The fireworks on the Democratic boost from his 1981 gubernatorial unique favors. For example, it at side came well before the state party rivat Senator Charles S. Robb. Elec tracted the participation of many held its nominating convention in tion-eve news stories reported that times more citizens than a conven Richmond on June 9 and 10. Lieu Robb saw Coleman as Douglas tion would have - though the ex tenant Governor L. Douglas Wilder Wilder's toughest potential oppo tent and quality of participation in had madeclear his intention to seek nent, Trible the easiest to defeat. a primary is far less demanding. the governorship virtually ever Some Republicans, desperately Also, the GOPorganization gained since his election as lieutenant searching for a winner, may have an invaluable tool with the list of governor in 1985. But moderate taken the advice of the man who 400,000 primary voters. conservative Democrats were un put an end to their party's decade Yet, if primaries become the easyabout the prospect, just as they long reign ofpower and made state GOP's permanent method ofchoice were in 1985 about Wilder's earlier Democrats competitive again. for nominations, one can only bid for statewide office. Wilder's Most independent political wonder how many years will pass continuing family feud with former observers were in agreement with before a Republican primary pro Governor Charles Robb and his Robb's assessment of the GOP duces the destructive divisiveness frequent disagreements with Gov contenders. Trible's 'quitter' image that gubernatorial primariesin 1969 ernorGerald Baliles only increased and his lack of Vietnam military and 1977 created for the Democrats. the anxiety. service (video pretensions to the The GOP will not always be as for The anti-Wilder bloc in the contrary) could have been master tunate as in 1989, nor as desperate party initially placed its guberna fully exploited by Douglas Wilder for victory. If a party persists in a torial hopes in Attorney General in the fall. In contrast to Trible, game of Russian roulette, eventu Mary Sue Terry, who had bested Wilder's trademark is perseverance, ally it will find thechamberloaded. Wilder by almost ten percentage a d h' Kor War record 's a Re ublican can at least be points in her 1985 general election distinguished one. If this conven grateful that the acrimony did not victory. But in March 1988 Terry tional wisdom was correct, then, extend to their nominations for unexpectedly decided to run for Republicans may have barely other statewide offices. State Sena reelection as attorney general rather dodged the bullet ofdefeat in their tor Edwina P. 'Eddy' Dalton was than run for governor, thus remov 1989 primary. Therancor and nega the consensus choice for lieutenant ing the greatest single obstacle to tive attacks alone gave many pro governor. The former first lady and Wilder's nomination to the top spot. primary Republicans pause. And widow of Governor John N. Dal Governor Baliles bowed to the the expenditure of more than $11 ton (who served from 1978 to 1982) seeming inevitable shortlythereaf million total by the three contend had been elected to the Senatefrom ter, awarding Wilder an accolade ers made the whole affair enor Henrico County in 1987. Despite a widely interpreted as an endorse mouslycostly - probably far more pledge to serve out her four-year ment. All other potential candidates (including stateSenator Daniel Bird of Wytheville, who was the only 6. The new rule of politics is: An attack 7. Coleman spent $3.79 million; Par unanswered is an attack agreed to. ris, $3.67 million; and Trible, $3.65 Wilder rival with a formally an The rule applies equally to in million. nounced candidacy) stepped aside, cumbents (or frontrunners) and and Wilder had the prize in hand. challengers. 79 THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA NEWS LETTER

While his Republican com stronger candidates had decided the state's politics; the Old Guard petitors attacked one another prior against running. in both parties was without a can to theGOP primary, Wilderquietly In a remarkable transposition didate for governor. Thateach party travelled the state and nation, se from 1985, the Democrats who met nominated a woman for statewide curingcommitmentsofsupportand in Richmond for their June nomi office added to the appearance of raising money. Attorney General nating convention were brimming change and progress. Mary Sue Terry, unopposed for withconfidenceabouttheblackand The optimistic see in all this renomination, was able to do the female members ontheir ticket, and the dawnofa 'NewDominion.' But same. But there was one statewide worried mainly about the white much will depend on the actual Democratic contest: the lieutenant male onthe team. It was a measure conduct of the spirited campaign governor's berth was the goal for of how far Virginia politics, or at sure to follow. How will Wilder's two Northern Virginians, state Sena least the Democratic party, had race modify the tone and substance tor Richard L. SaslawofFairfax and corne in four years. The unified of the election? Will either candi businessman Donald S. Beyer, Jr. convention gave an enthusiastic dateattempt to use it to advantage? of Falls Church. send-off to the standard-bearers, In what ways will the concentra Saslaw, with thirteen years of and both Senator Robb and Gov tion ofnational media attention on legislative experience, was con ernor Baliles bestowed their bless the contest influence its outcome? sidered the early frontrunner, but ings on Wilder, despite their past To what extent will the nominees Beyer's aggressive grassroots differences with him. engage in negative campaigning organizational effort enabled him and will the targets be restricted to to take a narrow lead when local issues and prior legislative votes, Democratic caucuses were held on Conclusion: ANew Beginning or will they extend to personal at April 8 and 10. Gradually in the tacks and private matters? The weeks after the caucuses, Beyer Nominatingbattles end butoffer no answers to these questions will af added enough previously uncom final conclusion: theyare merely the fect not just the fate of the candi mitted delegates to clinch a victory, beginning of intense general elec dates but the image of the state and Saslaw conceded in late May. tion campaigns. Yet the Virginia beyond its borders. Neither Saslaw nor Beyer was able nominating contests of 1989 were to arouse much enthusiasm in far more significant than most. Democratic ranks. Saslaw was con Wilder's ascension as the Demo To get on the mailing list to sidered abrasiveand had previously cratic party's standard-bearer is in receive the NEWS LETTER e3ch lost a U.S. House contest in itself hugelyimportantand historic. month, just write to News Letter, Northern Virginia, while Beyer had Coleman's primaryvictoryempha Center for Public Service, neverheld anypublic office and was sizes the moderate, pragmatic University of Virginia, 2015 Ivy a virtual unknown statewide. dimension oftheRepublican party's Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903 Prominent Democrats privately profile. Indeed, the combination of 1795. Please print or type the conceded that, given EddyDalton's Wilder and Coleman suggest the completemailingaddress.in- presumed electoral advantages, new, forward-looking centrism in

~ Entered as * * second-class mail 1111 Charlottesville, Virginia * * ISSN 0042-0211 Executive Editor: A. E. Dick Howard Managing Editor: Sandra H. Wiley

Published monthly by the Center for Public Service, University of Virginia. The views expressed are those of the authors and not the official position of the Center or the University. Entered as second class matter January 2, 1925, at the post office at Charlottesville, Vir ginia, under the act ofAugust 24, 1912. © 1989 by The Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia. Printed by the University Printing Office. POSTMASTER: Please send address changes to Center {or Public Service, UVa, 2015 Ivy Road, Charlottesville, VA 22903-1195.