sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bill Bolling, Chuck Robb, Dick Davis (politician), Henry Howell, John Edwards, John Mercer Langston

Sabato Highlights✰✰✰ 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations✰✰ ✰Gubernatorial Twist: Democratic Unity, Republican Division

Overall ☑ The political parties traded places in 2001. The GOP, generally united for the past eight years, hosted a divisive convention contest for its gubernatorial nom- ination between Attorney General , the eventual nominee, and Lieutenant Governor John Hager. Meanwhile, the Democrats, who had suf- fered from many crippling internecine battles during the 1990’s, joined hands to nominate their wealthy former party chair, , in an unopposed primary.

The Republican Convention ☑ Mark Earley won about 49 percent of the elected convention delegates to 39 percent for John Hager, with 12 percent undecided or unpledged. At the actual convention, though, proportionately more Earley delegates attended, and he won at least 62 percent of the never- announced vote tally. Hager conceded and worked for Earley, but many of his fi nancial supporters did not. ☑ Delegate Jay Katzen won the nomination for lieutenant governor unopposed. Also unopposed for the attorney general slot on the ticket was former Secretary of Public Safety Jerry Kilgore.

The Democratic Primary ☑ A dismal turnout of 4.1 percent of the registered voters chose the running- mates for Mark Warner in a statewide primary election on June 12, 2001. ☑ Richmond Mayor won the lieutenant governor nomination with a bit less than 40 percent of the vote, defeating two delegates from , Alan Diamonstein and Jerrauld Jones. ☑ Delegate Donald McEachin of the Richmond area squeaked to victory with just 33.7 percent of the votes—the smallest winning percentage for any statewide candidate in either party since the primary was founded in 1905. ( law currently permits no run- off .) McEachin defeated three opponents, two

85 Western candidates who split that region’s votes, Senator John Edwards of Roanoke and Delegate Whitt Clement of Danville, and attorney Sylvia Clute, the only woman on the ballot in either party. Edwards was second with 29.5 percent, Clements third with 26.9 percent, and Clute last with 10 percent. ☑ As usual, African American voters played a large role in the Democratic pri- mary, providing between a quarter and a third of the total turnout. McEachin’s 77 percent of the black vote was the cornerstone of his nomination. The other African American candidate, Jerrauld Jones, secured only 61 percent of the black vote in the lieutenant governor’s contest. Tim Kaine’s 23 percent of the black vote enabled him to fashion a broad- based plurality. ☑ The seven candidates in the Democratic primary spent over $4 million—but both of the top spenders, Alan Diamonstein and Whitt Clement, lost.

House of Delegates Nominations ☑ As has become typical, just a handful of legislative primaries (nine) were held. But for the fi rst time since the founding of the primary in 1905, all legisla- tive primaries were sponsored by the Republicans. Because of the redistricting schedule, the primaries were held late, on August 21, 2001. ☑ Just one incumbent, Delegate Phil Larrabee of Poquoson, was defeated for renomination. Fellow Republican Thomas Gear captured the GOP nod by a mere 40 votes out of 4,670 cast.

Special Election for U.S. House—4th District ☑ The death of popular Congressman (D) in March 2001 caused a special election in the Tidewater 4th district to be held on June 19, 2001. The GOP nominated state Senator of Chesapeake over Delegate Kirk Cox of Colonial Heights. The Democrats backed state Senator of Portsmouth, an African American in a congressional district that was 39 percent black. ☑ In a hotly contested election with a sizeable 37.8 percent turnout of the regis- tered voters, Forbes defeated Lucas narrowly, with 52 percent. ☑ Together, the parties and candidates spent $7.1 million on this special election—a Virginia record for a U.S. House race. ☑ Forbes’ triumph gave Republicans seven of Virginia’s eleven U.S. House seats (eight counting Republican- Independent of the Southside 5th district).

86 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 ✰✰✰ 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations✰✰ ✰Gubernatorial Twist: Democratic Unity, Republican Division

Nominations for Statewide Offi ce

Under Virginia state law, each party is permitted to select its preferred method of nom- ination every election year for both state and federal offi ces.1 For 2001, Republicans picked the convention method, which has been used consistently by the GOP for state offi ces with the exception of election years 1949, 1989, and 1997.2 Many party purists prefer conventions since the party activists who build and maintain the or- ganization are rewarded3 by having the right to select candidates. In this particular case, though, it is clear that the GOP chose a convention because the method was correctly thought to favor Attorney General Mark Earley for governor. Earley was the more conservative candidate and was preferred by Governor and a majority of the Republican State Central Committee (the body that determines the nominating method). The other candidate, Lieutenant Governor John Hager, was a more moderate conservative and a close ally of business; it was thought that he would have an easier time raising money and appealing to the broader electorate that a primary might attract. Meanwhile, the Democrats moved in the opposite direction, choosing a pri- mary election to select their statewide slate for the fi rst time since 1977. A divisive contest in that earlier year which helped to produce a landslide defeat by Republican John Dalton in November4 led Democrats to switch to conventions, beginning in 1981. But two convention- nominated slates in 1993 and 1997 went down in mas- sive losses in the fall,5 so it was “time for a change” on the Democratic Party side. As it happened, the Democrats had no opponent fi le against Mark Warner, a very wealthy telecommunications businessman who had lost a close race for U.S. Senate to incumbent John W. Warner in 1996.6 With Warner’s automatic nomination, the

1. Code of Virginia: § 24.2-509 2. In the 1949 primary, only lt. governor was contested; in 1989, only governor was contested; in 1997 only attorney general was contested. Other offi ces had a single candidate and thus were nominated by unopposed primary method. 3. See Larry J. Sabato and Bruce Larson, The Party’s Just Begun, 2nd edition (Longman: New York) 4. See Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes 1975–1978, pp. 31–46 5. One exception occurred in 1993, when the incumbent Democratic Lt. Governor, , won re-election against Republican challenger Michael Farris. For further details, see Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes, 1991–1994, pp. 49–90 6. See Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes 1995–1998, pp. 51–93

87 Democrats were left to choose from multi- candidate fi elds for lieutenant governor and attorney general in June.

The Republican Convention

Delegates to the GOP convention were chosen in mass meetings held in every city and county from February 26 to March 31, 2001. The results were mixed, with Earley doing well in Tidewater and many rural areas and Hager generally winning in Richmond and inner .7 Overall, it was estimated by both camps that Earley had received about 49 percent of the slotted delegates and Hager about 39 percent, with the remaining 12 percent or so offi cially undecided. However, the delegates who had been selected had to show up in Richmond on June 2 to cast their ballots. The Earley forces were clearly better organized and their delegates apparently more determined to stand up for their candidate. Hager fought hard until the last day, refusing to drop out and run again for lieutenant governor— as he could have done—but to no avail.8 When the votes were counted at the conven- tion late on the aft ernoon of Saturday June 2, Earley won at least 62 percent of the ballots. (No fi nal tally was ever released, but a wide Earley margin was certain.) Even in many localities carried by Hager in the primary Hager delegates were not disci- plined. Earley delegates outnumbered Hager delegates even in some of these Hager won localities, thus giving Earley the majority of the ballots from those localities at the convention. It had been a diffi cult campaign for John Hager, and he was especially angry at his former ticket- mate, Governor Jim Gilmore, who—along with the gubernatorial staff —had done everything possible to push him out of the contest. Nonetheless, the race was not especially bitter, nor the disputes high profi le. Most of the GOP elders joined ranks quickly. Hager himself swallowed his disappointment and within two weeks he agreed to take a leadership role in Earley’s fall eff ort. Hager’s fi nancial backers were slow to follow, and some sat out the general election or endorsed the Democratic nominee. There was no contest for the other two slots at the GOP convention. Delegate Jay Katzen of Fauquier, a very conservative eight- year veteran of the House of Delegates, won the lieutenant governor’s berth. Katzen had unsuccessfully run against Hager four years earlier for the GOP nod, but this time his eff orts were crowned with success when his main opponent, state Senator Randy Forbes of Chesapeake, left the contest to seek the U.S. House seat of Congressman Norman Sisisky (D-4th), when Sisisky passed away in March. And fortunately for Katzen, Hager decided not to seek

7. Examples of the Mass meeting results included: Alexandria (Hager 45.1 percent, Earley 36.6 percent); Arlington (Hager 57.7 percent, Earley 29.4 percent); Chesapeake (Hager 1.3 percent, Earley 94.6 percent); Fairfax Co. (Hager 54.1 percent, Earley 36.6 percent), Goochland Co. (Hager 71.3 percent, Earley 24.3 percent); Hampton (Hager 27.5 percent, Earley 65.1 percent); Henrico (Hager 46.6 percent, Earley 44.8 percent); Newport News (Hager 26.8 percent, Earley 63.4 percent); Norfolk (Hager 40.1 percent, Earley 56.2 percent); Prince William Co. (Hager 59.2 percent, Earley 33.7 per- cent); Richmond City (Hager 51.4 percent, Earley 46.5 percent); Virginia Beach (Hager 34.9 percent, Earley 59.3 percent) 8. Aft er failed public and private attempts by Gov. Gilmore and others in the Virginia GOP to persuade Hager to run for lt. governor again and unify the ticket in January, the Republican Central Committee corrected what they referred to as a ‘glitch’ in convention rules and extended the fi ling period to May 10, aft er all the mass meetings had been held, when Hager’s chances of defeating Earley had become slim at best. For further details, see “Hager Still in Race for Governor Nomination” Michael Sluss, Roanoke Times, May.8 2001 pg. B1

88 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.01 Voter Turnout in Virginia Primary Elections, 1969–2001 Potential Voting Total Registered Primary For Total Votes Votes Cast as Votes Cast as Percentage Year Population Population Offi ce/Party Cast Percentage of Potential of Registered Population 1969 2,738,800 1,732,822 Governor—D only 433,613a 15.8 25.0 1970 2,823,000 1,792,115 U.S. Senate—D only 128,159 4.5 7.2 1977 3,590,000 2,022,619 Governor—D only 493,108 13.9 24.8 1988 4,467,000 2,649,486 President—D & R 601,344 13.5 22.7 1989 4,586,800 2,679,839 Governor—R only 403,795 8.8 15.1 1994 4,967,000 2,929,635 Senate—D only 268,045 5.4 9.2 1996 5,040,000 3,074,444 Senate—R only 495,393 9.8 16.1 1997 5,093,000 3,487,976 Atty. Gen.—R only 168,671 3.3 4.8 2000 5,208,500 3,856,679 President—R only 666,365 12.8 17.3 2001 5,340,000 4,057,203 Lt. Gov.—D only 161,401 3.0 4.0 2001 5,340,000 4,057,203 Atty. Gen.—D only 163,957 3.1 4.1 SOURCES: Total potential voting population for all years was based on population estimates provided by either the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service (formerly the Tayloe Murphy Institute), , or the U.S. Bureau of Census; fi gures for total registered population and total votes cast for all years were provided by the State Board of Elections. NOTES: Total potential voting population for 1969 includes all persons aged 21 and over, while after 1969 fi gures include those aged 18 and above. Total registered population fi gure for 1969 is an offi cial estimate provided by the State Board of Elections; after 1969 the State Board collected exact tabulations of registered voters by locality. a Total vote in the runoff primary held in August; the fi rst primary held in July held a lower turnout of 408,630. renomination when he had a new opportunity in May, as mentioned earlier. Delegate Jeannemarie Devolites of Vienna and State Senator of Mechanicsville had each briefl y campaigned for the nomination in 2000, but had dropped out well before the fi ling deadline. Finally, Jerry Kilgore, former Secretary of Public Safety in Governor George Allen’s cabinet (1994–1997), captured the attorney general’s nomination on his sec- ond try. In 1997 he was runner up to Mark Earley in the GOP primary for the post.9 Kilgore and his family (his twin brother Terry was a delegate from Scott County) had strong ties to the Southwestern part of Virginia, and he was a particular favorite in rural areas. Former Richmond City Councilman John Conrad explored the possibil- ity of running against Kilgore, but opted not to run before the fi ling deadline. All in all, it was a right- leaning Republican ticket. Earley was identifi ed in part with the Christian conservatives, and Katzen had become the champion of the most conservative elements of the state GOP. Kilgore was perhaps the most moderately conservative of the ticket. The mood of Republicans as they looked over their new ticket was hope tinged with great apprehension. Not only did they have to contend with an attractive Democratic gubernatorial nominee worth $200-$300 million, but their party had been seriously damaged by a vicious and long-running dispute between Governor Gilmore and the GOP-led state Senate. For the fi rst time in Virginia’s mod- ern history, the executive and legislature had been unable to agree on critical budget amendments, leaving many vital capital projects in limbo and yielding no raises for tens of thousands of state employees, school teachers, and college faculty—groups with a high voter turnout rate. The dispute was sparked by a disagreement over the pace of implementation of the car tax’s abolition—the very issue that had pro- pelled the last GOP gubernatorial candidate, Jim Gilmore, to a convincing victory in November 1997. Democrats were delighted that the Republican chickens were fl ying home to roost, just in time for an election. But fi rst, Democrats would have to survive and prosper from their fi rst open seat statewide offi ce primary in twenty- four years.10

9. See Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes 1995–1998, pp. 97–118. 10. Democrats did hold a U.S. Senate Primary in 1994. For full results, see Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes 1991–1994, pp. 96–102.

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 89 Democratic Primary

With the governor’s nomination uncontested, Democrats went about the task of fi lling out their ticket in a June 12 primary. There was certainly no shortage of con- tenders. The early frontrunner for lieutenant governor, state Senator Emily Couric of Charlottesville, might well have been unopposed in the primary, but tragically was forced to withdraw in July 2000 once diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. (She later assumed the position of state Democratic Party co- chair.) Running instead were two Tidewater politicians, Delegate Alan Diamonstein of Newport News, a thirty- three- year veteran of the House of Delegates and former state party chairman and head of the , and Delegate Jerrauld Jones of Norfolk, who had served 13 years in the House and was head of the General Assembly’s Black Caucus. Rounding out the fi eld was Richmond Mayor Timothy Kaine, who had served in that post for three years aft er spending the four previous years in his fi rst elective offi ce, as a member of the Richmond City Council. Kaine was the son-in- law of the fi rst Republican in the 20th century, A. (1970–1974). Holton was a moderate- liberal “Mountain / Valley” Republican who had become an outcast in his own party over the years. He had frequently supported Democrats, and one of his sons, Dwight, had worked in a series of national and state Democratic campaigns and administrations. Holton’s popularity with Democrats and Independents, especially in the western part of the state, would prove to be very helpful to Kaine in 2001. Ideologically, not much separated the three contenders. Kaine and Jones were considered liberals, and Diamonstein a moderate- liberal. For attorney general, four candidates fi led. Two were from western Virginia: state Senator John Edwards of Roanoke, serving his second term aft er a stint as U.S. Attorney and city councilman, and Delegate Whitt Clement of Danville, a se- nior legislator serving his seventh term in the House. Edwards was the more liberal of the two, stressing especially his consistently pro-choice voting record on abortion. Clement, the only moderate- conservative running for either offi ce in the Democratic primary, chose consumer protection and the dangers of electric deregulation as his key issues. The third candidate, liberal Delegate Donald McEachin of Richmond- Henrico County, had held his House seat since 1996. An African American, he, like Jones, hoped for a strong black turnout on primary day, and he sought to campaign to liberal whites on his pro-gun control stance. McEachin accused Edwards and Clement, who both represented more rural, pro-Second Amendment localities, of being soft on gun control—something the other two Democrats strongly protested. Yet McEachin’s battle cry was his “F” rating from the National Rifl e Association, a medal of honor for a liberal primary (and a scarlet letter for a general election in Virginia). Finally, a fourth candidate, liberal attorney Sylvia Clute of Richmond, fi led for attorney gen- eral. She had also run in the 1994 four- way U.S. Senate Democratic primary, when she captured 6.5 percent of the vote in a race won by U.S. Senator Charles S. Robb.11 It was a nearly invisible campaign with no candidate capturing the statewide imagination. The lack of excitement showed in a dismal turnout of 168,000, or about 4.1 percent of the over 4,057,000 registered voters in Virginia. As Table 4.01 shows, this is not only the lowest percentage turnout of registered voters in modern times, but it is also the lowest turnout of registered voters since the Democratic Party was founded in 1905.12 As a percentage of the 2001 potential electorate (5,340,000

11. Ibid. 12. The Republican state primary of 1949 had a lower turnout; just 8,565 people showed up statewide to nominate a candidate for lieutenant governor. Also, it should be noted that the total of

90 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.02 Virginia Democratic Primary Election Results for Lt. Governor, 2001 Candidate Total Number of Votes Percent Total Campaign Expenditures Tim M. Kaine 64,008 39.7 $871,028 Alan A. Diamonstein 50,753 31.5 936,248 Jerrauld C. Jones 46,640 28.9 400,728 Total 161,401 100.0 $2,208,004 SOURCE: Offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections.

TABLE 4.03 Virginia Democratic Primary Election for Lieutenant Governor, Election Results by Congressional Districts, 2001 Percent of Votes Cast for Lt. Gov. (D) Congressional District Total Vote Percent of Registered Voting Tim Kaine Alan Diamonstein Jerrauld Jones 1 13,818 3.4 26.5 54.5 18.0 2 10,998 3.6 13.3 39.2 47.6 3 24,759 8.7 40.6 22.9 36.5 4 30,394 8.4 26.5 25.0 48.5 5 16,815 4.8 45.6 25.2 29.1 6 13,547 4.0 51.9 32.1 16.0 7 14,178 3.2 71.5 15.5 13.0 8 13,967 3.6 43.8 39.1 17.1 9 8,722 2.6 58.0 34.1 7.9 10 5,961 1.3 39.2 44.7 16.1 11 8,242 2.2 29.4 45.7 25.0 SOURCE: Offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections

voting- age Virginians), the June 12 turnout was an even more dismal 3.1 percent. Notice that a Republican primary for a single offi ce (attorney general) in 1997 drew slightly more voters (168,671) and a larger percentage of a then-smaller population (5,093,000) to the polls. In the lieutenant governor’s contest, Tim Kaine came out on top (see Table 4.02), though with a plurality of under 40 percent (39.6 percent to 31.4 percent for Alan Diamonstein and 29.0 percent for Jerrauld Jones). Between them, the two Tidewater candidates garnered more than 60 percent of the vote, and probably, had only one of them run with the support of the other, he would have emerged victori- ous. But for Kaine, happiness was a divided geographic opposition. Kaine won 69 of 95 counties and 18 of 40 cities, though only in a few (56 counties and 11 cit- ies) did he achieve an outright majority (see Figures 4.03 and 4.04). Kaine swept the Richmond- area 7th Congressional district with 71.5 percent, and won the Southwest 9th handily with 58.1 percent, thanks to solid backing from Congressman Rick Bouncher (D-9th) and Big Stone Gap native Linwood Holton. All of Western Virginia fell into line for Kaine, including the Southside 5th and Roanoke 6th. As icing on the victory cake, Kaine managed to carry the majority African American 3rd district—quite a blow to Jones—with 40.6 percent to Jones’ 36.5 percent. Kaine also won the Northern Virginia 8th, supposedly a stronghold for Diamonstein. The Newport News delegate did manage to carry Northern Virginia’s two other districts, the 10th and 11th, while winning his native 1st district with a handsome majority of 55.3 percent. Delegate Jones was able to secure only his home Norfolk- Virginia Beach 2nd district and the neighboring Portsmouth- Chesapeake 4th district, neither registered voters was quite low for 1905–1964, because of Virginia laws that kept blacks and poor whites off the voting rolls.

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 91 TABLE 4.04 Virginia Democratic Primary Election Results for Attorney General, 2001 Candidate Total Number of Votes Percent Total Campaign Expenditures Whittington W. “Whitt” Clement 44,065 22.9 780,609 A. Donald McEachin 55,017 33.6 677,189 Sylvia L. Clute 16,470 10.1 27,877 John S. Edwards 48,405 29.5 403,715 Totals 163,957 100.0 $1,889,390 SOURCE: Offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections.

with an outright majority (see Table 4.03). Jones, who had been considered the early favorite in the contest by many observers, failed to raise much money or put together anything approaching a statewide organization. In six of the eleven congressional districts, his vote proportion fell under 20 percent, especially in Western Virginia. In the far Southwest he amassed just 7.9 percent of the vote. As modest as Tim Kaine’s plurality was, Donald McEachin’s win in the attor- ney general’s primary was of historic proportions—not big, but small. McEachin’s victory percentage of 33.7 was the lowest of any winning candidate for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, or U.S. senator in either party stretching back to the 1905 inaugural primary.13 McEachin very likely would not have been nominated had there been only one western Virginia candidate, since Whitt Clement and John Edwards together won over 56 percent. But Edwards’ 29.5 percent and Clement’s 26.9 percent were split so evenly that McEachin was able to squeak to victory with only 55,000 of 164,000 votes cast. Sylvia Clute may also have dis- proportionately hurt Edwards—the self-identifi ed pro- choice candidate. Clute’s 10 percent of the statewide vote was considerably better than her 6.5 percent in the 1994 U.S. Senate primary. It should be noted that Clute was the only woman on the ballot in 2001 (as in 1994), and the voters looking for gender diversity may have been at- tracted to her banner for that reason, among others. The stark regional split in this primary is clearly visible in Figures 4.01 and 4.02. McEachin won 33.5 (McEachin and Clement tied with 59 votes each in Richmond County, each garnering 38.0 percent of the county’s vote) of 95 counties and 13 of 40 cities—with his only victory in western Virginia coming in Waynesboro by a grand total of three votes more than Clement and four votes more than Edwards. Edwards captured 39 counties and 21 cities; Clement 22.5 counties and 7 cities; Clute won one locality, the city of Harrisonburg, where only 229 votes were cast. It is highly unusual, and actually unprecedented in recent decades, for a Virginia candidate to lose a majority of the whole number of cities and counties, and yet still win statewide. That is precisely what happened in the Democratic primary for attor- ney general, with John Edwards easily securing a plurality of cities and counties while Donald McEachin grabbed the party nod. Obviously, McEachin captured many of his localities with a higher percentage of the vote and / or a larger absolute voter turn- out than Edwards did (see Table 4.05). The congressional district pattern is similar. McEachin’s triumph was built pri- marily in the majority- black 3rd district and in the 4th, which has a 38 percent black population; McEachin won his only district majorities here (61 percent in the 3rd and 54.6 percent in the 4th). Slim plurality wins in the 1st, 2nd, and 7th added a bit to McEachin’s overall vote cushion. Edwards scored landslides in his native 6th (72

13. See Larry J. Sabato, The Democratic Party Primary in Virginia: Tantamount to Election No Longer. (University of Virginia Press, 1977).

92 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.05 The Top 10 Localities for Votes for McEachin and Edwards Total Vote Percentage Total Number of Votes for Percentage of Registered Localities of Locality Victorious Candidate Voter Turnout MCEACHIN Richmond 55.10% 6,496 12.00% Portsmouth 46.8 5,312 20.2 Henrico Co. 58.7 4,418 4.6 Chesapeake 54.3 3,266 5.4 Norfolk 43.0 3,142 7.1 Newport News 39.3 2,491 6.7 Hampton 51.2 2,411 6.5 Chesterfi eld Co. 50.6 2,356 2.9 Petersburg 84.7 2,122 14.0 Virginia Beach 30.8 1,917 2.6 Top 10 Averages and Totals 51.5 33,931 6.10% (Average) (Total) (Average) EDWARDS Roanoke City 88.3 4,684 9.9 Fairfax Co. 33.8 4,477 2.3 Roanoke Co. 91.7 2,856 5.4 Arlington Co. 42.4 2,390 4.8 Alexandria 37.4 1,261 4.1 Montgomery Co. 83.4 1,127 3.3 Salem 89.9 827 6.2 Prince William Co. 32.3 572 1.1 Franklin Co. 52.2 550 4.0 Botetourt Co. 85.3 544 3.3 Top 10 Averages and Totals 63.7 19,288 3.2 (Average) (Total) (Average) SOURCE: Offi cial vote results provided by the State Board of Elections. percent) and the Southwest 9th (79 percent), while he secured plurality victories in the Northern Virginia 8th and 11th (nearly tying Whitt Clement in the other Northern Virginia district, the 10th). Other than the 10th, Clement chalked up only his native 5th district, but he won there with an overwhelming 70 percent of the vote (see Table 4.06). McEachin’s nomination was remarkable because he is the fi rst major- party African American nominee for attorney general in Virginia, and so any plurality percentage is impressive. Still, it is highly unusual to see a candidate win overall but score so badly in a broad section of the state. McEachin won just 296 votes in the 9th district, for example, barely more than 259 votes secured by the fourth- place candi- date, Ms. Clute, and a mere 3.3 percent of the district’s total. The 6th district posted similar results. As noted earlier, the overall turnout in the primary was tiny, but there were signifi cant diff erences from district to district. The 4th district topped the turnout list with over 30,000 voters (8.9 percent of registered), in part because of a hotly contested commonwealth’s attorney race in Portsmouth. The African American 3rd also produced a respectable number of voters (about 25,000, 8.9 percent of regis- tered). The only other district to top 20,000 voters was the 5th, and it is undeni- able that many of these citizens went to the polls for the sole purpose of support- ing their hometown candidate Whitt Clement: while 20,742 voters cast a ballot in the attorney general’s race, just 16,818 did so in the lieutenant governor’s con- test in this district. Three districts generated under 10,000 voters for the primary:

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 93 FIGURE 4.01 The 2001 Attorney General Democratic Primary, by Cities

FIGURE 4.02 The 2001 Attorney General Democratic Primary, by Counties

NOTE: Richmond County was a tie between McEachin and Clements.

the Southwest 9th, which as a region has traditionally favored conventions as op- posed to primaries,14 and the Northern Virginia 10th and 11th. Northern Virginia is Washington- centered rather than Richmond- oriented, so the low rate was not unusual, though the turnout in the 10th of a mere 6,000 voters (1.3 percent of the registered) was exceptionally bad.

14. See Larry J. Sabato, The Democratic Party Primary in Virginia: Tantamount to Election No Longer. (University of Virginia Press, 1977) pp. 16–18.

94 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.06 Virginia Democratic Primary Election for Attorney General, Election Results by Congressional Districts, 2001 Percent of Votes Cast for Atty. General (D) Congressional District Total Vote Percent of Registered Voting Whitt Clement Donald McEachin Sylvia Clute John Edwards 1 12,909 3.2 25.5 31.0 16.2 27.3 2 10,545 3.6 22.4 33.1 16.6 27.9 3 23,739 8.3 12.7 61.3 11.0 15.1 4 29,874 8.2 20.5 54.6 8.5 16.4 5 20,742 5.9 67.3 15.6 3.1 14.0 6 14,618 4.3 17.2 6.6 4.7 71.6 7 14,075 3.2 27.6 36.8 14.7 20.8 8 14,081 3.7 24.7 25.2 12.7 37.4 9 9,037 2.7 14.7 3.3 2.9 79.2 10 6,005 1.3 31.7 22.0 15.1 31.2 11 8,332 2.2 26.4 25.3 13.7 34.7 SOURCE: Offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections.

Urban, Suburban, Rural and Black Voting

Democratic (and Republican) primaries attract a very diff erent group of voters to the polls than do November general elections. As Table 4.07 indicates, central cit- ies contributed 38 percent of the statewide vote total on June 12—almost exactly double their usual proportion of general election turnout. While suburbs accounted for 45 percent of the primary turnout, that is far less than the six in ten voters of all recent general elections. Similarly, rural areas generated about 16 percent of the pri- mary vote, but in general elections their proportion statewide is 20 percent or more. Overall, then, the liberal cities were a more dominant presence than in November, while the more conservative suburbs and rural localities had less infl uence on the primary than on general elections. In the race for lieutenant governor, the central cities were closely divided in thirds, with Jerrauld Jones narrowly edging Tim Kaine and Alan Diamonstein (36 percent to 33 percent to 31 percent, respectively). But Kaine easily won the suburbs with 43 percent and captured rural Virginia even more decisively with 48 percent. Diamonstein was a distant second and Jones a more distant third in both demo- graphic divisions. The lineup was a bit diff erent for attorney general. In that contest, the choice of the central cities, Donald McEachin, prevailed. McEachin’s 38 percent in the central cities easily outdistanced Clement’s 28 percent and Edwards’ 24 per- cent. McEachin also won the suburbs by a small margin, 33 percent to Edwards’ 31 percent and Clement’s 25 percent. But McEachin fi nished third in rural areas, with 26 percent to Edwards’ 40 percent to Clement’s 28 percent. Sylvia Clute ran a bit stronger in the suburbs (12 percent) and the central cities (10 percent) than in rural Virginia (7 percent). Of course, the African American vote played a major role in the central city results (see Tables 4.04 and 4.10). Not surprisingly, both black candidates (Jones and McEachin) carried the selected predominantly black precincts. Yet there were impor- tant diff erences. Jones won 61 percent of the votes in these precincts, a solid showing led by his pulling nine of ten votes in his home areas of Norfolk and Portsmouth. But Kaine secured a respectable 23 percent overall, primarily due to his winning 57 percent majorities in his home area of Richmond and nearby Petersburg. Similarly, Diamonstein garnered almost 69 percent in his home city of Newport News and did

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 95 TABLE 4.07 Metropolitan Proportions of Statewide Vote in Virginia, 1969–2001 Percent of Statewide Vote Election Central Cities Suburbs GENERAL ELECTIONS 1969 Governor 21.50% 35.0 1970 U.S. Senator 22.6 35.4 1971 Lieutenant Governor 18.6 28.4 1972 President 21.7 41.2 1973 Governor 22.0 37.6 1976 President 20.1 41.5 1977 Governor 20.6 39.0 1978 U.S. Senator 19.8 39.1 1980 President 17.0 44.3 1981 Governor 17.8 46.5 1982 U.S. Senator 18.0 46.9 1984 President 16.8 49.3 1985 Governor 17.1 47.5 1987 Lottery Referendum 15.1 48.5 1988 President 15.0 52.6 1989 Governor 22.5 48.6 1990 U.S. Senator 13.5 61.0 1992 President 13.7 60.0 1993 Governor 18.1 58.2 1994 U.S. Senator 17.9 59.6 1996 President 17.2 60.6 1997 Governor 17.2 58.6 2000 President 15.7 62.1 DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES 1969 Governor (fi rst primary) 28.1 26.3 1969 Governor (runoff ) 27.3 28.8 1977 Governor 26.9 37.8 1988 President 25.4 45.5 1994 U.S. Senator 24.4 48.2 2001 Lieutenant Governor 38.6 45.3 2001 Attorney General 38.3 44.9 REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES 1988 President 13.6 59.7 1989 Governor 15.0 55.6 1996 U.S. Senator 19.1 64.5 1997 Attorney General 17.1 64.6 2000 President 14.3 69.6 SOURCE: Compiled from offi cial election results of the state Board of Elections. NOTE: See the notes to Table 4.08 for identifi cation of the central cities and suburbs.

respectably (about 40 percent) in neighboring Hampton—winning 16 percent of the black precincts overall. Attorney general nominee McEachin outperformed Jones considerably in the black precincts, winning 77 percent in total. No other candidate topped 10 percent, and McEachin carried the cities’ precincts with 65 percent to 93 percent of the votes. As such, comprised at least a quarter, and perhaps a third or more, of the total voter turnout on June 12.

96 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 FIGURE 4.03 The 2001 Lieutenant Governor Democratic Primary, by Cities

FIGURE4.04 The 2001 Lieutenant Governor Democratic Primary, by Counties

Campaign Money

Over $4 million was expended by the seven candidates on the June 12 statewide ballot. The lieutenant governor’s race was the most costly at $2.2 million. Alan Diamonstein marginally outspent Tim Kaine, $936,000 to $871,000, with Jerrauld Jones at less than half his rivals’ war chests ($400,000). The four Attorney general’s contestants com- bined to spend almost $1.9 million. Whitt Clement outspent Donald McEachin by a modest $103,000 ($780,000 to $677,000 respectively). John Edwards’ second- place fi nish came relatively cheaply at $403,000, and Sylvia Clute spent but $27,000. It is

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 97 TABLE 4.08 The Urban Vote, Virginia Democratic Primary for Lt. Governor, 2001 Urban Measure Percent of Total Vote Kaine Diamonstein Jones Urban Corridora 66.2% 36.2% 32.6% 31.2% Metropolitan Statistical Areasb 83.8 38.1 31.7 30.2 Central Cities 38.6 32.9 31.0 36.1 Suburbs 45.3 42.6 32.2 25.1 Rural Areasc 15.8 47.7 30.8 21.6 SOURCE: Compiled from offi cial elections results of the State Board of Elections NOTES: a Includes cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Colonial Heights, Fairfax, Falls Church, Fredericksburg, Hampton, Hopewell, Manassas, Manassas Park, Newport News, Norfolk, Petersburg, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Richmond, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg; and the counties of Arlington, Caroline, Charles City, Chesterfi eld, Clarke, Dinwiddie, Fairfax, Fauquier, Hanover, Henrico, James City, Loudon, New Kent, Prince George, Prince William, Spotsylvania, Staff ord, and York. b The nine Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) for Virginia, as established by the U.S. Census Bureau, are Charlottesville, Danville, Lynchburg, Washington, D.C., Newport News-Hampton, Norfolk-Portsmouth, Petersburg-Colonial Heights, Richmond, and Roanoke. Central Cities and suburbs are included in the MSA fi gures. The Charlottesville and Danville MSAs were fi rst designated after the 1980 census. Various other MSAs have been expanded each decade, with new cities and counties added to them. Therefore, this grouping of MSAs is substantially, but not entirely the same as that listed in earlier chapters in this volume or in previous editions of Virginia Votes. c All Virginia localities not included in either an MSA or the Urban Corridor.

TABLE 4.09 The Urban Vote, Virginia Democratic Primary for Attorney General, 2001 Urban Measure Percent of Total Vote Clement McEachin Clute Edwards Urban Corridora 63.6% 21.1% 42.4% 12.7% 23.7% Metropolitan Statistical Areasb 83.2 26.7 35.1 10.7 27.5 Central Cities 38.3 28.4 38.1 9.7 23.9 Suburbs 44.9 25.3 32.5 11.6 30.5 Rural Areasc 16.0 28.1 25.8 6.7 39.5 SOURCE: Compiled from offi cial elections results of the State Board of Elections. NOTES: a Includes cities of Alexandria, Chesapeake, Colonial Heights, Fairfax, Falls Church, Fredericksburg, Hampton, Hopewell, Manassas, Manassas Park, Newport News, Norfolk, Petersburg, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Richmond, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg; and the counties of Arlington, Caroline, Charles City, Chesterfi eld, Clarke, Dinwiddie, Fairfax, Fauquier, Hanover, Henrico, James City, Loudon, New Kent, Prince George, Prince William, Spotsylvania, Staff ord, and York. b The nine Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) for Virginia, as established by the U.S. Census Bureau, are Charlottesville, Danville, Lynchburg, Washington, D.C., Newport News-Hampton, Norfolk-Portsmouth, Petersburg-Colonial Heights, Richmond, and Roanoke. Central Cities and suburbs are included in the MSA fi gures. The Charlottesville and Danville MSAs were fi rst designated after the 1980 census. Various other MSAs have been expanded each decade, with new cities and counties added to them. Therefore, this grouping of MSAs is substantially, but not entirely the same as that listed in earlier chapters in this volume or in previous editions of Virginia Votes. c All Virginia localities not included in either an MSA or the Urban Corridor.

worth emphasizing that both lead spenders lost. Money is vital in campaigns, and low spenders usually lose, but the biggest spenders do not always win either. The dollar is not the alpha and the omega of politics as it is oft en represented. The total number of primary and convention candidates in both parties in 2001 was thirteen, toward the high end of the expected (see Table 4.13). Democrats have not had so many candidates for state offi ces since 1977, when nine politicians off ered themselves, one more than in 2001. By contrast, the GOP total of fi ve con- tenders in 2001 was tied for the lowest number with three other election years (1977, 1981, and 1989). Both party tickets taken together had placed a premium on youth. Earley and Warner were both 46, Kilgore and McEachin especially young at 39, and Kaine close at 43. Only Jay Katzen, at 64, represented the older generation. Actually, this is not very unusual, as under- 50 youths have reigned in a substantial majority of statewide nominations from 1969 onwards.15 In 1981, for instance, gubernatorial

15. Ages of all party nominees for, in order, governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general from 1969 to 1997, are as follows: 1969: D—Bill Battle(49), J. Sargeant Reynolds(32), Andrew

98 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.10 Voting in Selected Predominantly Black Precincts in Virginia Cities, Democratic Lt. Governor Primary, 2001 Number of Total Votes Percent of City Precincts Cast Registered Voting Kaine Diamonstein Jones BLACK PRECINCTS Charlottesvillea 1 56 3.3% 33.9% 17.9% 48.2% Chesapeakeb 1 153 15.2 2.0 8.5 89.5 Emporiac 1 53 15.1 15.1 5.7 79.2 Hamptond 2 592 9.9 4.9 39.5 55.6 Newport Newse 8 1175 13.0 2.0 68.9 29.0 Norfolkf 10 1906 10.6 1.2 2.6 96.3 Petersburgg 4 679 16.6 57.0 4.6 41.4 Portsmouthh 2 1291 30.9 5.8 6.6 87.6 Richmondi 15 2237 12.7 57.9 3.2 38.9 Totals 44 8142 Average of All Votes Cast in Selected Precincts 13.2% 22.9% 16.1% 61.3% SOURCE: Compiled from offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections. a Charlottesville: Benjamin Tonsler (formerly Firehouse) precinct. b Chesapeake: South Norfolk Fire Station precinct. c Emporia: Precinct 2. d Hampton: Pembroke and Phenix precincts. e Newport News: Chestnut, Dunbar, Huntington, Jeff erson, Magruder, Marshall, Newsome Park, and Washington precincts. f Norfolk: Berkely, Bowling Park, Brambleton, Campostella, Chesterfi eld, Monroe, Park Place, Rosemont, Union Chapel, and Young Park precincts. g Petersburg: 5th Ward—1st precinct, 5th Ward—2nd precinct, 6th Ward—1st precinct, and 6th Ward—2nd precinct. h Portsmouth: Precincts 26 and 27. i Richmond: Precincts 301, 303, 304, 306, 602, 604, 606, 608, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 707, and 802.

TABLE 4.11 Voting in Selected Predominantly Black Precincts in Virginia Cities, Democratic Attorney General Primary, 2001 Number of Total Votes Percent of City Precincts Cast Registered Voting Clement McEachin Clute Edwards BLACK PRECINCTS Charlottesvillea 1 56 3.3% 14.8% 65.5% 11.5% 8.2% Chesapeakeb 1 153 15.2 7.3 83.2 4.4 5.1 Emporiac 1 53 15.1 9.4 84.9 0.0 5.7 Hamptond 2 592 9.9 9.3 68.6 11.3 10.8 Newport Newse 8 1175 13.0 10.2 75.1 7.3 7.3 Norfolkf 10 1906 10.6 16.1 68.4 2.9 12.6 Petersburgg 4 679 16.6 5.0 93.0 0.8 1.2 Portsmouthh 2 1291 30.9 11.2 80.8 2.5 5.6 Richmondi 15 2237 12.7 5.1 81.5 5.6 7.8 Totals 44 8142 Average of All Votes Cast in Selected Precincts 13.2% 9.6% 77.3% 4.7% 8.0% SOURCE: Compiled from offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections. a Charlottesville: Benjamin Tonsler (formerly Firehouse) precinct. b Chesapeake: South Norfolk Fire Station precinct. c Emporia: Precinct 2. d Hampton: Pembroke and Phenix precincts. e Newport News: Chestnut, Dunbar, Huntington, Jeff erson, Magruder, Marshall, Newsome Park, and Washington precincts. f Norfolk: Berkely, Bowling Park, Brambleton, Campostella, Chesterfi eld, Monroe, Park Place, Rosemont, Union Chapel, and Young Park precincts. g Petersburg: 5th Ward—1st precinct, 5th Ward—2nd precinct, 6th Ward—1st precinct, and 6th Ward—2nd precinct. h Portsmouth: Precincts 26 and 27. i Richmond: Precincts 301, 303, 304, 306, 602, 604, 606, 608, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 707, and 802.

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 99 TABLE 4.12 Major Statewide by Demographic and Black Voting Patterns, 1969–2001 Percent for Winner Election Central Cities Suburbs Black Vote GENERAL ELECTIONS 1969 Governor, Linwood Holton (R) 50.9% 56.5 37.2 1970 U.S. Senator, Harry Byrd, Jr. (I) 52.2 55.9 3.0 1971 Lt. Governor, (I) 50.6 39.8 91.7 1972 President, (R) 60.3 70.1 8.8 1972 U.S. Senate, William Scott (R) 42.5 52.7 6.7 1973 Governor, (R) 43.2 54.6 5.7 1976 President, (R) 43.6 53.9 5.0 1976 U.S. Senate, Harry Byrd, Jr. (I) 51.4 55.9 4.4 1977 Governor, John Dalton (R) 47.9 59.9 5.0 1977 Lt. Governor, Charles Robb (D) 61.2 51.1 94.9 1977 Attorney General, (R) 47.7 56.6 32.7 1978 U.S. Senate, (R) 45.4 53.7 7.1 1980 President, (R) 41.3 58.4 3.4 1981 Governor, Charles Robb (D) 64.5 49.5 96.4 1981 Lt. Governor, (D) 67.2 52.3 95.5 1981 Attorney General, (D) 62.7 45.4 95.9 1982 U.S. Senate, (R) 39.6 55.1 5.7 1984 President, Ronald Reagan (R) 47.9 66.8 8.2 1984 U.S. Senate, John Warner (R) 57.6 72.9 21.2 1985 Governor, Gerald Baliles (D) 66.2 51.5 94.1 1985 Lt. Governor, 64.4 48.8 96.6 1985 Attorney General, (D) 71.3 58.6 95.6 1988 President, George Bush (R) 45.2 63.4 8.6 1988 U.S. Senate, Charles Robb(D) 76.1 70.3 83.7 1989 Governor, Douglas Wilder (D) 68.5 47.0 96.2 1989 Lt. Governor, Donald Beyer (D) 64.9 53.4 87.8 1989 Attorney General, Mary Sue Terry (D) 72.7 61.6 94.7 1990 U.S. Senate, John Warner (R) 78.0 80.9 64.2 1992 President, George Bush (R) 33.1 47.1 7.0 1993 Governor, George Allen (R) 46.5 59.9 11.4 1993 Lt. Governor, Donald Beyer (D) 64.6 54.2 90.9 1993 Attorney General, James Gilmore (R) 46.1 57.7 10.6 1994 U.S. Senate, Charles Robb (D) 59.2 43.5 93.4 1996 President, Robert Dole (R) 36.6 51.1 4.8 1996 U.S. Senate, John Warner (R) 45.0 56.0 11.6 1997 Governor, James Gilmore (R) 43.7 58.3 11.2 1997 Lt. Governor, John Hager (R) 38.8 53.3 9.1 1997 Attorney General, Mark Earley (R) 48.0 59.9 15.6 2000 President, George W. Bush (R) 38.8 54.4 5.5 2000 Senate, George Allen (R) 38.5 53.8 8.1

Miller(37) / R—Linwood Holton(46), H.D. Dawbarn(54), Dick Obenshain(33); 1973: I—Henry Howell (52), D—J. Harry Michael(54), Andrew Miller(41) / R—Mills Godwin(59), John Dalton(42), M. Patton Echols(49); 1977: D—Henry Howell(56), (38), Ed Lane(53) / R—John Dalton(46), Joe Canada(42), Marshall Coleman(35); 1981: D—Chuck Robb(42), Richard Davis(60), Gerald Baliles(41) / R—Marshall Coleman(39), Nathan Miller(38), Wyatt Durrette(43); 1985: D—Gerald Baliles(45), L. Douglas Wilder(54), Mary Sue Terry(38) / R—Wyatt Durrette(47), John Chichester(48), Buster O’Brien(39); 1989: D—L. Douglas Wilder(59), Don Beyer(39), Mary Sue Terry(42) / R—Marshall Coleman(47), Eddy Dalton(53), Joseph Benedetti(60); 1993: D—Mary Sue Terry(46), Don Beyer(43), Bill Dolan(49) / R—George Allen(41), Mike Farris(41), Jim Gilmore(43); 1997: D—Don Beyer(47), L.F. Payne(52), Bill Dolan(53) / R—Jim Gilmore(47), John Hager(61), Mark Earley(42).

100 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.12 Major Statewide Elections in Virginia by Demographic and Black Voting Patterns, 1969–2001 (continued) Percent for Winner Election Central Cities Suburbs Black Vote DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY ELECTIONS 1969 Governor, William Battle (fi rst primary) 31.8 40.6 11.8 1969 Governor, William Battle (runoff ) 40.7 51.2 4.8 1977 Governor, Henry Howell 59.6 50.6 86.1 1977 Lt. Governor, Charles Robb 35.0 39.1 26.6 1977 Attorney General, Edward E. Lane 37.8 32.0 15.8 1988 President, Jesse Jackson 64.1 38.2 93.8 1994 U.S. Senator, Charles Robb 68.5 61.3 82.9 2001 Lieutenant Governor, Tim Kaine 32.9 42.6 22.9 2001 Attorney General, Donald McEachin 38.1 32.5 77.3 REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTIONS 1988 President, George Bush 54.5 52.5 37.7 1989 Governor, Marshall Coleman 34.6 35.9 42.8 1996 U.S. Senator, John Warner 75.1 64.7 84.6 1997 Attorney General, Mark Earley 36.9 38.0 38.5 2000 President, George W. Bush 49.6 51.4 31.4 SOURCE: Calculated by the author from data supplied by the State Board of Elections. NOTES: Party affi liations of winning candidates are abbreviated as: (D) = Democrat; (R ) = Republican; (I) = Independent. Figures for the 1970 Democratic primary of U.S. senator are not included in this table. Voter turnout in that election was miniscule. Central cities and suburbs used in this table are designated components of Virginia’s Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), as established by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Estimates of the black vote are based on results in the selected predominantly black precincts used in this and previous editions of Virginia Votes.

TABLE 4.13 Competition for Party Nominations for Statewide Offi ces in Virginia, 1977–2001 Year (Total # of candidates) Party Governor Lt. Governor Attorney General 1977 (14) D 2 3 4 R1 2 2 1981 (11) D 1 3 2 R1 3 1 1985 (13) D 2 1 1 R2 5 2 1989 (10) D 2 2 1 R3 1 1 1993 (11) D 1 1 2 R3 2 2 1997 (9) D 1 1 1 R1 1 4 2001 (13) D 1 3 4 R 2 2 1 SOURCE: Previous volumes of Virginia Votes. NOTE: For primary elections, only candidates who actually appeared on the election ballot were counted. For conventions, all candidates who contested party caucuses were counted, even those who may have withdrawn before or during the actual party convention. nominees Charles Robb (D) and Marshall Coleman (R) were 42 and 39 respectively. Nor is this an entirely modern phenomenon. In 1925, the dominant Democratic Party nominated Harry F. Byrd, Sr., at the tender age of 37, for governor. Of course, Byrd would essentially run state politics for forty years until his resignation from the U.S. Senate in late 1965 and his death the following summer.16

16. J. Harvie Wilkinson, Harry Byrd and the Changing Face of Virginia Politics:1945–1966

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 101 Democrats looked upon their newly shaped ticket with some of the same mixed emotions as the Republicans had viewed theirs two weeks earlier. On the one hand, this threesome’s vigor and youth, coupled with the fratricidal battles taking place in the GOP halls of power, gave genuine hope to a party that had lost all signifi cant statewide offi ces in the 1990s. On the other hand, many party leaders had frankly (if privately) wished for a diff erent combination; they had preferred a candidate from Tidewater, a key swing region, for lieutenant governor (either Jones or Diamonstein) and desired a nominee from western Virginia, where Democrats were struggling to fare better in raw vote totals, for attorney general (either Clement or Edwards). The actual party ticket theoretically left Democrats wide open to the GOP in both places, especially with Chesapeake’s Earley and Southwest’s Kilgore slated by the Republicans. In addition, the two Democratic nominees for lower offi ces were well to the left of Mark Warner (or at least Warner’s position in 2001). Kaine favored gay civil unions and a moratorium on the death penalty, while McEachin had trumpeted gun control and the capital punishment halt, too. McEachin was also a “personal injury” attorney, a controversial part of the legal profession derisively called “ambu- lance chasing.” Nonetheless, Democrats closed ranks immediately and for the most part enthusiastically. They were as desperate to regain power as they had been in 1981,17 and they were counting on Mark Warner’s assets to carry the whole ticket, however fl awed.

House of Delegates Nominations—2001

The golden age of the primary in Virginia ended years ago,18 but both parties still use primaries with some frequency—on a par with conventions, mass meetings, and the so called “fi rehouse primaries” (a version of the primary that is entirely party- run rather than state- run). In legislative election years, the heyday of the primary usually featured thirty to seventy contested seats; in the past twenty years, the number has steadily been between six and eleven seats. In terms of the primary total, 2001 fi t the modern mold, with nine primaries scheduled for August 21—a date more than two months later than usual because of the need for redistricting to be completed. What was unusual about 2001 was the party identity of the primaries. Every single one was a Republican primary. Never before, since the institution of the primary began in the early 20th century, had Democrats failed to schedule any legislative primaries. Moreover, while in recent years the GOP had occasionally sponsored more General Assembly primaries than the Democrats, never before had the margin been so wide (nine to zero). Clearly, the activity on the Republican side and its absence on the Democratic side refl ected the successful GOP eff orts to redistrict House of Delegates seats away from the Democrats. Fully 11 incumbent Democrats were drawn into just 5 seats, and some incumbents—including Delegate Thomas Moss of Norfolk, the former Speaker, and Minority Leader C. Richard Cranwell of Vinton (near Roanoke)— chose to retire. Other incumbent Democrats who retired in 2001 were: Ted Bennett of Halifax, Barnie Day of Patrick County, Alan Diamonstein of Newport News, A. Donald McEachin of Richmond, George Grayson of James City County, Thomas Jackson of Carroll County, and Donald Williams of Norfolk. The total number of

17. See Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes 1979–1982, pp. 55–86 18. See Larry J. Sabato, The Democratic Party Primary in Virginia: Tantamount to Election No Longer. (University of Virginia Press, 1977).

102 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 years of seniority lost by the Democratic caucus was a staggering 208. By contrast, just 5 Republican delegates retired (Paul Harris of Albemarle County, Roger McClure of Fairfax, Anne “Panny” Rhodes of Richmond, Jay Katzen of Fauquier, and Harry Blevins of Chesapeake) and their total seniority amounted to only 36 years. But this is not the entire story, of course. In 1991 the then- Democratic majority in the House redistricted 15 Republicans and one Republican- leaning Independent into just 8 seats. Yet the GOP managed to regroup and it actually gained two House seats in the November general election. The diff erence is obvious. In the early 1990s the Republicans were a party on the way up, and they already had a House majority in their sights; rallying their incumbents and challengers was easy, or at least doable. By 2001, however, the Democrats had become a House (and Senate) minority. Their chances of regaining control aft er an especially artful redistricting were slim to none, and it appeared more likely that the Republicans could substantially increase their House majority. Senior Democrats, so used to the perquisites of real power in earlier times, threw in the towel and retreated to the greener pastures of private life and fond memories. Legislatively, all the momentum had shift ed to the new and strengthening majority party. In the nine full-fl edged primaries, four GOP incumbents were challenged for renomination: Delegate John J. Welch III of Virginia Beach, Delegate Jack Rollison III of Prince William, Delegate Jeannemarie Devolites of Fairfax County, and Delegate Phil Larrabee, Jr. of Poquoson. Northern Virginians Rollison and Devolites were targeted by anti-tax advocates of the Republican right- wing. In the remaining fi ve districts, no Republican incumbent was involved. (All primary districts are listed with the results in Table 4.15.) All incumbents except Larrabee were easily renomi- nated. Larrabee lost to Thomas Gear by a mere 40 votes out of 4,670 cast.

4th Congressional District Special Election

On March 29, 2001 U.S. Representative Norman Sisisky of the Tidewater 4th district died suddenly following a lung cancer operation. A former member of the House of Delegates from Petersburg (1974–1982), Sisisky ran for Congress in 1982 against GOP Congressman Robert W. Daniel, who had held the seat for ten years. Aided by a recession- generated Democratic year, the basic democratic tilt of the district, and heavy personal expenditures from his own pocketbook, Sisisky handily defeated Daniel, 54.4 percent to 45.6 percent.19 Despite occasional challenges, Sisisky remained highly popular and was never seriously threatened during his nine full terms. Governor Gilmore called a special election for June 19, just one week aft er the statewide Democratic primary. Gilmore and others in the national GOP recruited Randy Forbes, a state senator from Chesapeake City—the most populous single ju- risdiction in the 4th. Forbes had served in the House of Delegates from 1990 to 1997 and in the state Senate since 1998. He was happy to leave a closely contested race for lieutenant governor (see above), and he hoped to secure the party nod easily. However, Delegate Kirk Cox of Colonial Heights, who had served in the legislature since 1990, challenged Forbes. It was a divisive and close battle, with Forbes winning the April 28th district convention by a vote of 467.77 to 332.75 for Cox.20 Many of

19. See Larry J. Sabato, Virginia Votes 1979–1982, p. 124–126 20. The 2001 4th District GOP Convention had a proportional voting system. In this system, Forbes received 467.77 votes, Cox received 332.75 votes, and Emporia Vice Mayor Woodrow Harris received 0.48 votes.

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 103 TABLE 4.14 Virginia 4th Congressional District Special Election, 2001 Candidate Total Number of Votes Percent Total Campaign Expenditures J. Randy Forbes (R) 70,917 52 $4,317,451.82 Louise L. Lucas (D) 65,190 47.8 $2,782,032.93 Write-ins 208 0.2 — Totals 136,315 100 $7,099,484.75 SOURCE: Offi cial election results provided by the State Board of Elections. Total campaign expenditures provided by the Federal Election Commission. Figures include money spent by the candidates, as well as money spent by the NRCC and the DCCC. The Lucas campaign spent $844,232.93, while the Forbes campaign spent $863,584.62.

the Cox supporters were angry that Forbes had “instructed” several large delegations to vote as a bloc for him; this was allowed under party rules, but Cox claimed that the candidates had agreed not to do so. The fi rst few weeks of Forbes’ post- convention campaign were consumed with eff orts to reunify his own party, which he was able to with the help of state and national GOP fi gures. Meanwhile, the Democrats had hoped to persuade Norman Sisisky’s son, Mark, to make the race. He declined to do so, leaving the nomination to state Senator Louise Lucas of Portsmouth, who had served in the General Assembly since 1992. Lucas hoped to become the fi rst African American woman ever elected to Congress from Virginia.21 In a district with a black population of 39 percent, Lucas had a good base but would obviously have to win a healthy slice of the white vote to secure victory.22 The election attracted the attention of the national parties and press. First of all, with an overall GOP margin of just fi ve in the U.S. House, every seat mattered. Moreover, out of a half dozen special elections for the House scheduled in 2001, the 4th district was the most competitive politically. In 1992, for example, won the 4th by about 700 votes, while George W. Bush was the 2000 winner by about 500 votes. In addition, the election came shortly aft er U.S. Senator James Jeff ords of Vermont switched control of the Senate by changing his party from Republican to Independent- Democrat. The Democrats wanted to demonstrate continued momen- tum while the Republicans were looking for a pick-me- up tonic that could calm the nerves of worried party activists. The campaign itself was Hobbesian: nasty, brutish, and (blessedly) short. Fueled by massive sums of state and national party money, both candidates aired attack TV ads about Social Security, crime, HMOs, the pledge of allegiance, and each other’s voting records in the state Senate.23 The vast majority were highly negative and insulting—to one another and the voters. The district was del- uged with harsh ads and similar direct mail pieces, as the Republicans and the

21. Two African American males have been Virginia Congressmen: of Southside from 1890–1891, and Robert C. “Bobby” Scott of Newport News from 1993 to the present. 22. The black percentage of the registered population may be closer to 33–35 percent. It is im- possible to say for sure since Virginians do not register by race, yet this is the estimate of political staff ers who work the district regularly. 23. See Bill Geroux, “Voter Criticize Negative Campaign,” Richmond Times Dispatch, June 20, 2001, p. A6; Harold Nedd, “TV Attack Ads, Phone Calls Sour Voters On Campaign: Many Lament Ads,” Norfolk Virginian Pilot, June 23, 2001, p. A1; Ray McAllister, “Sick of Those Commercials? Election’s Just 145 Days Away,” Richmond Times Dispatch, June 14, 2001, p. B1; Holly A. Heyser, “Ad Watch: 4th District Campaigns Intensify Their Claims: Lucas, Forbes Decry Each Other’s Pitches,” Norfolk Virginian Pilot, June 14, 2001, p. B1

104 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 TABLE 4.15 2001 Republican Primaries, House of Delegates District Candidate Vote Totals Percentage 21—Virginia Beach John J. Welch 953 63.8 M.A. Totin 540 36.2 Total: 1,493 100.0

31—Woodbridge L. Scott Lingamfelter 1,581 53.5 D.P. Ennis 858 29.0 G.E. Waters 518 17.5 Total: 2,957 100.0

35—Vienna Jeannemarie A. Devolites 2,064 82.8 A.G. Purves 428 17.2 Total: 2,492 100.0

52—Woodbridge John A. Rollison 1,073 68.6 R.D. Berry 492 31.4 Total: 1,565 100.0

67—Oak Hill Gary .A. Reese 970 39.5 J.M. Clerici 775 31.5 D.A. Warrington 712 29.0 Total: 2,457 100.0

86—Herndon Tom D. Rust 2,075 64.0 S.D. Whitener 1,166 36.0 Total: 3,241 100.0

88—Fredericksburg Mark L. Cole 1,180 35.5 R.C. Gibbons 986 29.7 S.G. Mccamy 765 23.0 J.I. Logan 266 8.0 W.D. Wornom 123 3.7 Total: 3,320 100.0

91—Hampton Tom D. Gear 2,355 50.4 Phillip E. Larrabee 2,315 49.6 Total: 4,670 100.0

99—White Stone R.A. Webb 1,116 59.2 R.R. Fountain 768 40.8 Total: 1,884 100.0

Democrats spent almost $7.1 million, a record for a Virginia congressional race (see Table 4.14).24 The voters were even more relieved than the candidates when Election Day arrived. As it happened, Randy Forbes won a narrow victory, 70,917 votes (52.0 per- cent), to Louise Lucas’s 65,190 votes (47.8 percent). The turnout of 137,598 (37.8 percent of the registered electorate) was very good for a special election, especially compared with the 8.9 percent that voted just a week earlier in the 4th district’s Democratic primary for state offi ces.

24. In addition, special interest groups such as AFSCME also spent many thousands of dollars in independent expenditures on the race.

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 105 Overall, Forbes won 11 of the 18 localities in the 4th. His home city, Chesapeake, alone provided his entire margin of victory and then some; he won 26,778 votes to Lucas’s 17,225 there. Lucas also carried her city in a landslide, but Portsmouth’s total vote of 24,344 was far less than Chesapeake’s 44,085. It is clear that Lucas won the overwhelming majority of black voters; on the Sunday prior to the election, Lucas and her key supporters had visited 74 black churches throughout the district to get out the vote. In heavily black Petersburg, for example, she received 81 percent of the votes cast. But Forbes was able to keep her portion of the white vote quite low (perhaps under a quarter, district- wide). In overwhelmingly white Colonial Heights, for instance, Forbes secured 84 percent of the votes. Close or not, the Republicans rejoiced, with Virginia delivering yet another prize to a party that had been thrown on the ropes. The Bush administration was particularly pleased because Vice President Cheney had personally campaigned for Forbes. In Virginia, the GOP was now in possession of eight of the state’s eleven House seats (counting Independent Virgil Goode of the 5th district, who caucuses with the Republicans). This was the party’s best showing since 1981–1983, when the GOP controlled nine of the ten Virginia seats.25 Nationally, the Republicans had clearly earned bragging rights—at least until the next special election. ★

25. Virginia gained an eleventh House seat aft er the 1990 Census.

106 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002

APPENDIX 6 Democratic Primary Election for Lieutenant Governor, June, 2001 T. M. Kaine (D) Deviation Percent of Number Percent from Choice’s Choice’s LOCALITY Total Vote of Votes of Vote State Average State Total STATE 161,401 64,008 39.7% CITIES 83,749 25,425 30.4% –9.3% 39.7% Alexandria 3,343 1,437 43.0% 3.3% 2.2% Bedford (City) 151 76 50.3% 10.7% 0.1% Bristol 250 129 51.6% 11.9% 0.2% Buena Vista 135 63 46.7% 7.0% 0.1% Charlottesville 1,031 383 37.1% –2.5% 0.6% Chesapeake 6,202 833 13.4% –26.2% 1.3% Clifton Forge 129 49 38.0% –1.7% 0.1% Colonial Heights 278 213 76.6% 37.0% 0.3% Covington 177 88 49.7% 10.1% 0.1% Danville 4,660 1,445 31.0% –8.6% 2.3% Emporia 329 82 24.9% –14.7% 0.1% Fairfax (City) 412 170 41.3% 1.6% 0.3% Falls Church 364 131 36.0% –3.7% 0.2% Franklin 445 64 14.4% –25.3% 0.1% Fredericksburg 357 212 59.4% 19.7% 0.3% Galax 123 92 74.8% 35.1% 0.1% Hampton 5,045 323 6.4% –33.3% 0.5% Harrisonburg 209 77 36.8% –2.8% 0.1% Hopewell 465 293 63.0% 23.4% 0.5% Lexington 186 64 34.4% –5.2% 0.1% Lynchburg 1,492 499 33.4% –6.2% 0.8% Manassas Park 31 8 25.8% –13.9% 0.0% Manassas 225 81 36.0% –3.7% 0.1% Martinsville 424 181 42.7% 3.0% 0.3% Newport News 7,333 469 6.4% –33.3% 0.7% Norfolk 7,791 544 7.0% –32.7% 0.8% Norton 68 32 47.1% 7.4% 0.0% Petersburg 2,321 1,481 63.8% 24.2% 2.3% Poquoson 235 34 14.5% –25.2% 0.1% Portsmouth 11,819 1,994 16.9% –22.8% 3.1% Radford 220 121 55.0% 15.3% 0.2% Richmond (City) 12,030 8,686 72.2% 32.5% 13.6% Roanoke (City) 4,758 2,862 60.2% 20.5% 4.5% Salem 851 443 52.1% 12.4% 0.7% Staunton 256 99 38.7% –1.0% 0.2% Suff olk 2,332 330 14.2% –25.5% 0.5% Va. Beach 6,444 1,106 17.2% –22.5% 1.7% Waynesboro 228 95 41.7% 2.0% 0.1% Williamsburg 346 70 20.2% –19.4% 0.1% Winchester 254 66 26.0% –13.7% 0.1% COUNTIES 77,652 38,583 49.7% 10.0% 60.3% Accomack 489 196 40.1% 0.4% 0.3% Albemarle 1,431 625 43.7% 4.0% 1.0% Alleghany 245 104 42.4% 2.8% 0.2% Amelia 287 182 63.4% 23.8% 0.3% Amherst 314 172 54.8% 15.1% 0.3% Appomattox 275 162 58.9% 19.3% 0.3% Arlington 5,591 2,910 52.0% 12.4% 4.5% Augusta 425 214 50.4% 10.7% 0.3% Bath 111 63 56.8% 17.1% 0.1% Bedford (Co.) 668 404 60.5% 20.8% 0.6%

108 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 A. A. Diamonstein (D) J. C. Jones (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total 50,753 31.4% 46,640 28.9% 26,692 31.9% 0.5% 52.6% 31,632 37.8% 1,182 35.4% 3.9% 2.3% 724 21.7% –7.2% 1.6% 63 41.7% 10.3% 0.1% 12 7.9% –20.9% 0.0% 101 40.4% 9.0% 0.2% 20 8.0% –20.9% 0.0% 55 40.7% 9.3% 0.1% 17 12.6% –16.3% 0.0% 242 23.5% –8.0% 0.5% 406 39.4% 10.5% 0.9% 1,484 23.9% –7.5% 2.9% 3,885 62.6% 33.7% 8.3% 70 54.3% 22.8% 0.1% 10 7.8% –21.1% 0.0% 48 17.3% –14.2% 0.1% 17 6.1% –22.8% 0.0% 72 40.7% 9.2% 0.1% 17 9.6% –19.3% 0.0% 1,044 22.4% –9.0% 2.1% 2,171 46.6% 17.7% 4.7% 35 10.6% –20.8% 0.1% 212 64.4% 35.5% 0.5% 177 43.0% 11.5% 0.3% 65 15.8% –13.1% 0.1% 114 31.3% –0.1% 0.2% 119 32.7% 3.8% 0.3% 144 32.4% 0.9% 0.3% 237 53.3% 24.4% 0.5% 85 23.8% –7.6% 0.2% 60 16.8% –12.1% 0.1% 17 13.8% –17.6% 0.0% 14 11.4% –17.5% 0.0% 2,634 52.2% 20.8% 5.2% 2,088 41.4% 12.5% 4.5% 100 47.8% 16.4% 0.2% 32 15.3% –13.6% 0.1% 56 12.0% –19.4% 0.1% 116 24.9% –4.0% 0.2% 78 41.9% 10.5% 0.2% 44 23.7% –5.2% 0.1% 336 22.5% –8.9% 0.7% 657 44.0% 15.1% 1.4% 13 41.9% 10.5% 0.0% 10 32.3% 3.4% 0.0% 103 45.8% 14.3% 0.2% 41 18.2% –10.7% 0.1% 147 34.7% 3.2% 0.3% 96 22.6% –6.3% 0.2% 5,650 77.0% 45.6% 11.1% 1,214 16.6% –12.3% 2.6% 1,897 24.3% –7.1% 3.7% 5,350 68.7% 39.8% 11.5% 25 36.8% 5.3% 0.0% 11 16.2% –12.7% 0.0% 167 7.2% –24.3% 0.3% 673 29.0% 0.1% 1.4% 192 81.7% 50.3% 0.4% 9 3.8% –25.1% 0.0% 3,959 33.5% 2.1% 7.8% 5,866 49.6% 20.7% 12.6% 87 39.5% 8.1% 0.2% 12 5.5% –23.4% 0.0% 763 6.3% –25.1% 1.5% 2,581 21.5% –7.4% 5.5% 1,251 26.3% –5.2% 2.5% 645 13.6% –15.3% 1.4% 314 36.9% 5.5% 0.6% 94 11.0% –17.9% 0.2% 104 40.6% 9.2% 0.2% 53 20.7% –8.2% 0.1% 581 24.9% –6.5% 1.1% 1,421 60.9% 32.0% 3.0% 2,832 43.9% 12.5% 5.6% 2,506 38.9% 10.0% 5.4% 86 37.7% 6.3% 0.2% 47 20.6% –8.3% 0.1% 225 65.0% 33.6% 0.4% 51 14.7% –14.2% 0.1% 159 62.6% 31.2% 0.3% 29 11.4% –17.5% 0.1% 24,061 31.0% –0.4% 47.4% 15,008 19.3% 147 30.1% –1.4% 0.3% 146 29.9% 1.0% 0.3% 439 30.7% –0.8% 0.9% 367 25.6% –3.3% 0.8% 122 49.8% 18.4% 0.2% 19 7.8% –21.1% 0.0% 38 13.2% –18.2% 0.1% 67 23.3% –5.6% 0.1% 89 28.3% –3.1% 0.2% 53 16.9% –12.0% 0.1% 74 26.9% –4.5% 0.1% 39 14.2% –14.7% 0.1% 1,923 34.4% 2.9% 3.8% 758 13.6% –15.3% 1.6% 153 36.0% 4.6% 0.3% 58 13.6% –15.2% 0.1% 30 27.0% –4.4% 0.1% 18 16.2% –12.7% 0.0% 213 31.9% 0.4% 0.4% 51 7.6% –21.3% 0.1% (continued)

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 109 APPENDIX 6 Democratic Primary Election for Lieutenant Governor, June, 2001 (continued) T. M. Kaine (D) Deviation Percent of Number Percent from Choice’s Choice’s LOCALITY Total Vote of Votes of Vote State Average State Total Bland 115 91 79.1% 39.5% 0.1% Botetourt 591 304 51.4% 11.8% 0.5% Brunswick 770 183 23.8% –15.9% 0.3% Buchanan 432 147 34.0% –5.6% 0.2% Buckingham 498 169 33.9% –5.7% 0.3% Campbell 561 302 53.8% 14.2% 0.5% Caroline 316 170 53.8% 14.1% 0.3% Carroll 479 301 62.8% 23.2% 0.5% Charles City 323 114 35.3% –4.4% 0.2% Charlotte 299 143 47.8% 8.2% 0.2% Chesterfi eld 4,712 3,259 69.2% 29.5% 5.1% Clarke 180 62 34.4% –5.2% 0.1% Craig 146 101 69.2% 29.5% 0.2% Culpeper 254 113 44.5% 4.8% 0.2% Cumberland 167 105 62.9% 23.2% 0.2% Dickenson 372 156 41.9% 2.3% 0.2% Dinwiddie 755 417 55.2% 15.6% 0.7% Essex 112 74 66.1% 26.4% 0.1% Fairfax (Co.) 13,104 4,099 31.3% –8.4% 6.4% Fauquier 494 317 64.2% 24.5% 0.5% Floyd 220 124 56.4% 16.7% 0.2% Fluvanna 299 196 65.6% 25.9% 0.3% Franklin 1,015 542 53.4% 13.7% 0.8% Frederick 310 103 33.2% –6.4% 0.2% Giles 278 183 65.8% 26.2% 0.3% Gloucester 482 84 17.4% –22.2% 0.1% Goochland 456 360 78.9% 39.3% 0.6% Grayson 292 219 75.0% 35.3% 0.3% Greene 92 39 42.4% 2.7% 0.1% Greensville 573 145 25.3% –14.4% 0.2% Halifax 781 362 46.4% 6.7% 0.6% Hanover 1,303 986 75.7% 36.0% 1.5% Henrico 7,546 5,393 71.5% 31.8% 8.4% Henry 994 489 49.2% 9.5% 0.8% Highland 80 53 66.3% 26.6% 0.1% Isle of Wight 775 147 19.0% –20.7% 0.2% James City 1,315 264 20.1% –19.6% 0.4% King and Queen 192 110 57.3% 17.6% 0.2% King George 133 90 67.7% 28.0% 0.1% King William 269 168 62.5% 22.8% 0.3% Lancaster 299 202 67.6% 27.9% 0.3% Lee 339 258 76.1% 36.4% 0.4% Loudoun 1,224 552 45.1% 5.4% 0.9% Louisa 486 271 55.8% 16.1% 0.4% Lunenburg 395 218 55.2% 15.5% 0.3% Madison 145 62 42.8% 3.1% 0.1% Mathews 179 33 18.4% –21.2% 0.1% Mecklenburg 398 164 41.2% 1.5% 0.3% Middlesex 219 90 41.1% 1.4% 0.1% Montgomery 1,283 689 53.7% 14.0% 1.1%

110 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 A. A. Diamonstein (D) J. C. Jones (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total 9 7.8% –23.6% 0.0% 15 13.0% –15.9% 0.0% 215 36.4% 4.9% 0.4% 72 12.2% –16.7% 0.2% 48 6.2% –25.2% 0.1% 539 70.0% 41.1% 1.2% 253 58.6% 27.1% 0.5% 32 7.4% –21.5% 0.1% 45 9.0% –22.4% 0.1% 284 57.0% 28.1% 0.6% 161 28.7% –2.7% 0.3% 98 17.5% –11.4% 0.2% 50 15.8% –15.6% 0.1% 96 30.4% 1.5% 0.2% 146 30.5% –1.0% 0.3% 32 6.7% –22.2% 0.1% 60 18.6% –12.9% 0.1% 149 46.1% 17.2% 0.3% 74 24.7% –6.7% 0.1% 82 27.4% –1.5% 0.2% 548 11.6% –19.8% 1.1% 905 19.2% –9.7% 1.9% 102 56.7% 25.2% 0.2% 16 8.9% –20.0% 0.0% 33 22.6% –8.8% 0.1% 12 8.2% –20.7% 0.0% 67 26.4% –5.1% 0.1% 74 29.1% 0.2% 0.2% 38 22.8% –8.7% 0.1% 24 14.4% –14.5% 0.1% 198 53.2% 21.8% 0.4% 18 4.8% –24.1% 0.0% 204 27.0% –4.4% 0.4% 134 17.7% –11.1% 0.3% 20 17.9% –13.6% 0.0% 18 16.1% –12.8% 0.0% 6,101 46.6% 15.1% 12.0% 2,904 22.2% –6.7% 6.2% 122 24.7% –6.7% 0.2% 55 11.1% –17.8% 0.1% 83 37.7% 6.3% 0.2% 13 5.9% –23.0% 0.0% 55 18.4% –13.1% 0.1% 48 16.1% –12.8% 0.1% 377 37.1% 5.7% 0.7% 96 9.5% –19.4% 0.2% 174 56.1% 24.7% 0.3% 33 10.6% –18.3% 0.1% 69 24.8% –6.6% 0.1% 26 9.4% –19.5% 0.1% 315 65.4% 33.9% 0.6% 83 17.2% –11.7% 0.2% 50 11.0% –20.5% 0.1% 46 10.1% –18.8% 0.1% 51 17.5% –14.0% 0.1% 22 7.5% –21.4% 0.0% 19 20.7% –10.8% 0.0% 34 37.0% 8.1% 0.1% 43 7.5% –23.9% 0.1% 385 67.2% 38.3% 0.8% 206 26.4% –5.1% 0.4% 213 27.3% –1.6% 0.5% 179 13.7% –17.7% 0.4% 138 10.6% –18.3% 0.3% 821 10.9% –20.6% 1.6% 1,332 17.7% –11.2% 2.9% 364 36.6% 5.2% 0.7% 141 14.2% –14.7% 0.3% 23 28.8% –2.7% 0.0% 4 5.0% –23.9% 0.0% 313 40.4% 8.9% 0.6% 315 40.6% 11.7% 0.7% 813 61.8% 30.4% 1.6% 238 18.1% –10.8% 0.5% 35 18.2% –13.2% 0.1% 47 24.5% –4.4% 0.1% 19 14.3% –17.2% 0.0% 24 18.0% –10.9% 0.1% 34 12.6% –18.8% 0.1% 67 24.9% –4.0% 0.1% 36 12.0% –19.4% 0.1% 61 20.4% –8.5% 0.1% 62 18.3% –13.2% 0.1% 19 5.6% –23.3% 0.0% 419 34.2% 2.8% 0.8% 253 20.7% –8.2% 0.5% 116 23.9% –7.6% 0.2% 99 20.4% –8.5% 0.2% 71 18.0% –13.5% 0.1% 106 26.8% –2.1% 0.2% 44 30.3% –1.1% 0.1% 39 26.9% –2.0% 0.1% 117 65.4% 33.9% 0.2% 29 16.2% –12.7% 0.1% 106 26.6% –4.8% 0.2% 128 32.2% 3.3% 0.3% 82 37.4% 6.0% 0.2% 47 21.5% –7.4% 0.1% 462 36.0% 4.6% 0.9% 132 10.3% –18.6% 0.3% (continued)

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 111 APPENDIX 6 Democratic Primary Election for Lieutenant Governor, June, 2001 (continued) T. M. Kaine (D) Deviation Percent of Number Percent from Choice’s Choice’s LOCALITY Total Vote of Votes of Vote State Average State Total Nelson 299 137 45.8% 6.2% 0.2% New Kent 292 174 59.6% 19.9% 0.3% Northampton 300 59 19.7% –20.0% 0.1% Northumberland 373 234 62.7% 23.1% 0.4% Nottoway 471 267 56.7% 17.0% 0.4% Orange 308 180 58.4% 18.8% 0.3% Page 157 53 33.8% –5.9% 0.1% Patrick 276 115 41.7% 2.0% 0.2% Pittsylvania 2,749 1,666 60.6% 20.9% 2.6% Powhatan 239 161 67.4% 27.7% 0.3% Prince Edward 433 229 52.9% 13.2% 0.4% Prince George 649 411 63.3% 23.7% 0.6% Prince William 1,766 628 35.6% –4.1% 1.0% Pulaski 608 422 69.4% 29.8% 0.7% Rappahannock 132 48 36.4% –3.3% 0.1% Richmond (Co.) 157 107 68.2% 28.5% 0.2% Roanoke (Co.) 2,791 1,515 54.3% 14.6% 2.4% Rockbridge 390 199 51.0% 11.4% 0.3% Rockingham 361 162 44.9% 5.2% 0.3% Russell 413 130 31.5% –8.2% 0.2% Scott 309 168 54.4% 14.7% 0.3% Shenandoah 323 104 32.2% –7.5% 0.2% Smyth 489 301 61.6% 21.9% 0.5% Southampton 866 239 27.6% –12.1% 0.4% Spotsylvania 533 288 54.0% 14.4% 0.4% Staff ord 557 407 73.1% 33.4% 0.6% Surry 359 63 17.5% –22.1% 0.1% Sussex 514 263 51.2% 11.5% 0.4% Tazewell 511 294 57.5% 17.9% 0.5% Warren 232 91 39.2% –0.4% 0.1% Washington 613 438 71.5% 31.8% 0.7% Westmoreland 286 165 57.7% 18.0% 0.3% Wise 364 158 43.4% 3.7% 0.2% Wythe 444 301 67.8% 28.1% 0.5% York 1,200 151 12.6% –27.1% 0.2%

112 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 A. A. Diamonstein (D) J. C. Jones (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total 70 23.4% –8.0% 0.1% 92 30.8% 1.9% 0.2% 46 15.8% –15.7% 0.1% 72 24.7% –4.2% 0.2% 109 36.3% 4.9% 0.2% 132 44.0% 15.1% 0.3% 52 13.9% –17.5% 0.1% 87 23.3% –5.6% 0.2% 113 24.0% –7.5% 0.2% 91 19.3% –9.6% 0.2% 58 18.8% –12.6% 0.1% 70 22.7% –6.2% 0.2% 93 59.2% 27.8% 0.2% 11 7.0% –21.9% 0.0% 135 48.9% 17.5% 0.3% 26 9.4% –19.5% 0.1% 556 20.2% –11.2% 1.1% 527 19.2% –9.7% 1.1% 51 21.3% –10.1% 0.1% 27 11.3% –17.6% 0.1% 89 20.6% –10.9% 0.2% 115 26.6% –2.3% 0.2% 93 14.3% –17.1% 0.2% 145 22.3% –6.6% 0.3% 830 47.0% 15.6% 1.6% 308 17.4% –11.5% 0.7% 147 24.2% –7.3% 0.3% 39 6.4% –22.5% 0.1% 65 49.2% 17.8% 0.1% 19 14.4% –14.5% 0.0% 34 21.7% –9.8% 0.1% 16 10.2% –18.7% 0.0% 1,050 37.6% 6.2% 2.1% 226 8.1% –20.8% 0.5% 105 26.9% –4.5% 0.2% 86 22.1% –6.8% 0.2% 155 42.9% 11.5% 0.3% 44 12.2% –16.7% 0.1% 252 61.0% 29.6% 0.5% 31 7.5% –21.4% 0.1% 117 37.9% 6.4% 0.2% 24 7.8% –21.1% 0.1% 190 58.8% 27.4% 0.4% 29 9.0% –19.9% 0.1% 147 30.1% –1.4% 0.3% 41 8.4% –20.5% 0.1% 319 36.8% 5.4% 0.6% 308 35.6% 6.7% 0.7% 141 26.5% –5.0% 0.3% 104 19.5% –9.4% 0.2% 104 18.7% –12.8% 0.2% 46 8.3% –20.6% 0.1% 74 20.6% –10.8% 0.1% 222 61.8% 32.9% 0.5% 82 16.0% –15.5% 0.2% 169 32.9% 4.0% 0.4% 162 31.7% 0.3% 0.3% 55 10.8% –18.1% 0.1% 111 47.8% 16.4% 0.2% 30 12.9% –16.0% 0.1% 129 21.0% –10.4% 0.3% 46 7.5% –21.4% 0.1% 41 14.3% –17.1% 0.1% 80 28.0% –0.9% 0.2% 183 50.3% 18.8% 0.4% 23 6.3% –22.6% 0.0% 122 27.5% –4.0% 0.2% 21 4.7% –24.2% 0.0% 756 63.0% 31.6% 1.5% 293 24.4% –4.5% 0.6%

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 113 APPENDIX 7 Democratic Primary Election for Attorney General, June, 2001 A. D. McEachin (D) J. S. Edwards (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent from Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s LOCALITY Total Vote of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total STATE 163,957 55,017 33.6% 48,405 29.5% CITIES 84,018 31,792 37.8% 4.3% 57.8% 21,447 25.5% –4.0% 44.3% Alexandria 3,373 986 29.2% –4.3% 1.8% 1,261 37.4% 7.9% 2.6% Bedford (City) 152 8 5.3% –28.3% 0.0% 101 66.4% 36.9% 0.2% Bristol 254 13 5.1% –28.4% 0.0% 217 85.4% 55.9% 0.4% Buena Vista 138 5 3.6% –29.9% 0.0% 115 83.3% 53.8% 0.2% Charlottesville 1,070 215 20.1% –13.5% 0.4% 438 40.9% 11.4% 0.9% Chesapeake 6,020 3,266 54.3% 20.7% 5.9% 1,350 22.4% –7.1% 2.8% Clifton Forge 133 9 6.8% –26.8% 0.0% 82 61.7% 32.1% 0.2% Colonial Heights 268 74 27.6% –5.9% 0.1% 62 23.1% –6.4% 0.1% Covington 182 25 13.7% –19.8% 0.0% 87 47.8% 18.3% 0.2% Danville 6,979 262 3.8% –29.8% 0.5% 76 1.1% –28.4% 0.2% Emporia 333 226 67.9% 34.3% 0.4% 25 7.5% –22.0% 0.1% Fairfax (City) 418 88 21.1% –12.5% 0.2% 164 39.2% 9.7% 0.3% Falls Church 369 73 19.8% –13.8% 0.1% 159 43.1% 13.6% 0.3% Franklin 438 181 41.3% 7.8% 0.3% 87 19.9% –9.7% 0.2% Fredericksburg 364 98 26.9% –6.6% 0.2% 164 45.1% 15.5% 0.3% Galax 124 0 0.0% –33.6% 0.0% 109 87.9% 58.4% 0.2% Hampton 4,710 2,411 51.2% 17.6% 4.4% 850 18.0% –11.5% 1.8% Harrisonburg 229 25 10.9% –22.6% 0.0% 65 28.4% –1.1% 0.1% Hopewell 470 232 49.4% 15.8% 0.4% 108 23.0% –6.5% 0.2% Lexington 187 15 8.0% –25.5% 0.0% 126 67.4% 37.9% 0.3% Lynchburg 1,537 98 6.4% –27.2% 0.2% 285 18.5% –11.0% 0.6% Manassas Park 31 8 25.8% –7.7% 0.0% 9 29.0% –0.5% 0.0% Manassas 225 50 22.2% –11.3% 0.1% 78 34.7% 5.1% 0.2% Martinsville 442 162 36.7% 3.1% 0.3% 75 17.0% –12.6% 0.2% Newport News 6,328 2,491 39.4% 5.8% 4.5% 1,299 20.5% –9.0% 2.7% Norfolk 7,316 3,142 42.9% 9.4% 5.7% 1,714 23.4% –6.1% 3.5% Norton 69 2 2.9% –30.7% 0.0% 47 68.1% 38.6% 0.1% Petersburg 2,505 2,122 84.7% 51.2% 3.9% 88 3.5% –26.0% 0.2% Poquoson 213 55 25.8% –7.7% 0.1% 58 27.2% –2.3% 0.1% Portsmouth 11,346 5,312 46.8% 13.3% 9.7% 1,972 17.4% –12.1% 4.1% Radford 228 3 1.3% –32.2% 0.0% 199 87.3% 57.8% 0.4% Richmond (City) 11,783 6,496 55.1% 21.6% 11.8% 1,957 16.6% –12.9% 4.0% Roanoke (City) 5,304 302 5.7% –27.9% 0.5% 4,684 88.3% 58.8% 9.7% Salem 920 18 2.0% –31.6% 0.0% 827 89.9% 60.4% 1.7% Staunton 262 56 21.4% –12.2% 0.1% 75 28.6% –0.9% 0.2% Suff olk 2,254 1,185 52.6% 19.0% 2.2% 417 18.5% –11.0% 0.9% Va. Beach 6,229 1,917 30.8% –2.8% 3.5% 1,783 28.6% –0.9% 3.7% Waynesboro 232 69 29.7% –3.8% 0.1% 65 28.0% –1.5% 0.1% Williamsburg 333 74 22.2% –11.3% 0.1% 119 35.7% 6.2% 0.2% Winchester 250 18 7.2% –26.4% 0.0% 50 20.0% –9.5% 0.1% COUNTIES 79,939 23,225 29.1% –4.5% 42.2% 26,958 33.7% 4.2% 55.7% Accomack 457 94 20.6% –13.0% 0.2% 137 30.0% 0.5% 0.3% Albemarle 1,494 272 18.2% –15.3% 0.5% 494 33.1% 3.5% 1.0% Alleghany 247 17 6.9% –26.7% 0.0% 160 64.8% 35.3% 0.3% Amelia 294 168 57.1% 23.6% 0.3% 29 9.9% –19.7% 0.1% Amherst 311 56 18.0% –15.5% 0.1% 82 26.4% –3.2% 0.2% Appomattox 284 69 24.3% –9.3% 0.1% 42 14.8% –14.7% 0.1% Arlington 5,635 1,256 22.3% –11.3% 2.3% 2,390 42.4% 12.9% 4.9% Augusta 426 55 12.9% –20.6% 0.1% 170 39.9% 10.4% 0.4% Bath 112 8 7.1% –26.4% 0.0% 43 38.4% 8.9% 0.1% Bedford (Co.) 682 55 8.1% –25.5% 0.1% 394 57.8% 28.2% 0.8%

114 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 W. W. Clement (D) S. L. Clute (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total 44,065 26.9% 16,470 10.0% 21,982 26.2% –0.7% 49.9% 8,797 10.5% 0.4% 53.4% 681 20.2% –6.7% 1.5% 445 13.2% 3.1% 2.7% 33 21.7% –5.2% 0.1% 10 6.6% –3.5% 0.1% 16 6.3% –20.6% 0.0% 8 3.1% –6.9% 0.0% 14 10.1% –16.7% 0.0% 4 2.9% –7.1% 0.0% 287 26.8% –0.1% 0.7% 130 12.1% 2.1% 0.8% 796 13.2% –13.7% 1.8% 608 10.1% 0.1% 3.7% 38 28.6% 1.7% 0.1% 4 3.0% –7.0% 0.0% 98 36.6% 9.7% 0.2% 34 12.7% 2.6% 0.2% 64 35.2% 8.3% 0.1% 6 3.3% –6.7% 0.0% 6,608 94.7% 67.8% 15.0% 33 0.5% –9.6% 0.2% 65 19.5% –7.4% 0.1% 17 5.1% –4.9% 0.1% 117 28.0% 1.1% 0.3% 49 11.7% 1.7% 0.3% 58 15.7% –11.2% 0.1% 79 21.4% 11.4% 0.5% 130 29.7% 2.8% 0.3% 40 9.1% –0.9% 0.2% 67 18.4% –8.5% 0.2% 35 9.6% –0.4% 0.2% 13 10.5% –16.4% 0.0% 2 1.6% –8.4% 0.0% 798 16.9% –9.9% 1.8% 651 13.8% 3.8% 4.0% 29 12.7% –14.2% 0.1% 110 48.0% 38.0% 0.7% 96 20.4% –6.5% 0.2% 34 7.2% –2.8% 0.2% 28 15.0% –11.9% 0.1% 18 9.6% –0.4% 0.1% 1,098 71.4% 44.6% 2.5% 56 3.6% –6.4% 0.3% 10 32.3% 5.4% 0.0% 4 12.9% 2.9% 0.0% 57 25.3% –1.5% 0.1% 40 17.8% 7.7% 0.2% 195 44.1% 17.2% 0.4% 10 2.3% –7.8% 0.1% 1,425 22.5% –4.4% 3.2% 1,113 17.6% 7.5% 6.8% 1,685 23.0% –3.8% 3.8% 775 10.6% 0.5% 4.7% 15 21.7% –5.1% 0.0% 5 7.2% –2.8% 0.0% 254 10.1% –16.7% 0.6% 41 1.6% –8.4% 0.2% 53 24.9% –2.0% 0.1% 47 22.1% 12.0% 0.3% 2,927 25.8% –1.1% 6.6% 1,135 10.0% 0.0% 6.9% 21 9.2% –17.7% 0.0% 5 2.2% –7.9% 0.0% 1,778 15.1% –11.8% 4.0% 1,552 13.2% 3.1% 9.4% 225 4.2% –22.6% 0.5% 93 1.8% –8.3% 0.6% 57 6.2% –20.7% 0.1% 18 2.0% –8.1% 0.1% 97 37.0% 10.1% 0.2% 34 13.0% 2.9% 0.2% 455 20.2% –6.7% 1.0% 197 8.7% –1.3% 1.2% 1,290 20.7% –6.2% 2.9% 1,239 19.9% 9.8% 7.5% 66 28.4% 1.6% 0.1% 32 13.8% 3.7% 0.2% 92 27.6% 0.8% 0.2% 48 14.4% 4.4% 0.3% 146 58.4% 31.5% 0.3% 36 14.4% 4.4% 0.2% 22,083 27.6% 0.7% 50.1% 7,673 9.6% –0.4% 46.6% 167 36.5% 9.7% 0.4% 59 12.9% 2.9% 0.4% 483 32.3% 5.5% 1.1% 245 16.4% 6.4% 1.5% 64 25.9% –1.0% 0.1% 6 2.4% –7.6% 0.0% 82 27.9% 1.0% 0.2% 15 5.1% –4.9% 0.1% 147 47.3% 20.4% 0.3% 26 8.4% –1.7% 0.2% 162 57.0% 30.2% 0.4% 11 3.9% –6.2% 0.1% 1,233 21.9% –5.0% 2.8% 756 13.4% 3.4% 4.6% 130 30.5% 3.6% 0.3% 71 16.7% 6.6% 0.4% 48 42.9% 16.0% 0.1% 13 11.6% 1.6% 0.1% 200 29.3% 2.4% 0.5% 33 4.8% –5.2% 0.2% (continued)

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 115 APPENDIX 7 Democratic Primary Election for Attorney General, June, 2001 (continued) A. D. McEachin (D) J. S. Edwards (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent from Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s LOCALITY Total Vote of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total Bland 119 4 3.4% –30.2% 0.0% 90 75.6% 46.1% 0.2% Botetourt 638 22 3.4% –30.1% 0.0% 544 85.3% 55.7% 1.1% Brunswick 782 631 80.7% 47.1% 1.1% 55 7.0% –22.5% 0.1% Buchanan 445 18 4.0% –29.5% 0.0% 254 57.1% 27.6% 0.5% Buckingham 505 330 65.3% 31.8% 0.6% 57 11.3% –18.2% 0.1% Campbell 588 73 12.4% –21.1% 0.1% 157 26.7% –2.8% 0.3% Caroline 324 136 42.0% 8.4% 0.2% 122 37.7% 8.1% 0.3% Carroll 495 8 1.6% –31.9% 0.0% 383 77.4% 47.9% 0.8% Charles City 363 320 88.2% 54.6% 0.6% 10 2.8% –26.8% 0.0% Charlotte 318 128 40.3% 6.7% 0.2% 64 20.1% –9.4% 0.1% Chesterfi eld 4,657 2,356 50.6% 17.0% 4.3% 829 17.8% –11.7% 1.7% Clarke 191 22 11.5% –22.0% 0.0% 34 17.8% –11.7% 0.1% Craig 151 7 4.6% –28.9% 0.0% 123 81.5% 51.9% 0.3% Culpeper 259 38 14.7% –18.9% 0.1% 46 17.8% –11.8% 0.1% Cumberland 183 91 49.7% 16.2% 0.2% 30 16.4% –13.1% 0.1% Dickenson 386 5 1.3% –32.3% 0.0% 346 89.6% 60.1% 0.7% Dinwiddie 766 496 64.8% 31.2% 0.9% 53 6.9% –22.6% 0.1% Essex 112 52 46.4% 12.9% 0.1% 12 10.7% –18.8% 0.0% Fairfax (Co.) 13,232 3,347 25.3% –8.3% 6.1% 4,477 33.8% 4.3% 9.2% Fauquier 497 83 16.7% –16.9% 0.2% 173 34.8% 5.3% 0.4% Floyd 226 5 2.2% –31.3% 0.0% 180 79.6% 50.1% 0.4% Fluvanna 319 109 34.2% 0.6% 0.2% 89 27.9% –1.6% 0.2% Franklin 1,054 87 8.3% –25.3% 0.2% 550 52.2% 22.7% 1.1% Frederick 315 39 12.4% –21.2% 0.1% 77 24.4% –5.1% 0.2% Giles 286 13 4.5% –29.0% 0.0% 235 82.2% 52.6% 0.5% Gloucester 468 131 28.0% –5.6% 0.2% 114 24.4% –5.2% 0.2% Goochland 456 162 35.5% 2.0% 0.3% 120 26.3% –3.2% 0.2% Grayson 313 3 1.0% –32.6% 0.0% 278 88.8% 59.3% 0.6% Greene 91 7 7.7% –25.9% 0.0% 43 47.3% 17.7% 0.1% Greensville 578 400 69.2% 35.6% 0.7% 53 9.2% –20.4% 0.1% Halifax 914 405 44.3% 10.8% 0.7% 103 11.3% –18.3% 0.2% Hanover 1,291 521 40.4% 6.8% 0.9% 279 21.6% –7.9% 0.6% Henrico 7,528 4,418 58.7% 25.1% 8.0% 1,013 13.5% –16.1% 2.1% Henry 1,048 146 13.9% –19.6% 0.3% 219 20.9% –8.6% 0.5% Highland 79 5 6.3% –27.2% 0.0% 14 17.7% –11.8% 0.0% Isle of Wight 748 233 31.1% –2.4% 0.4% 260 34.8% 5.2% 0.5% James City 1,258 321 25.5% –8.0% 0.6% 400 31.8% 2.3% 0.8% King and Queen 196 104 53.1% 19.5% 0.2% 26 13.3% –16.3% 0.1% King George 130 20 15.4% –18.2% 0.0% 51 39.2% 9.7% 0.1% King William 272 162 59.6% 26.0% 0.3% 26 9.6% –20.0% 0.1% Lancaster 289 116 40.1% 6.6% 0.2% 53 18.3% –11.2% 0.1% Lee 347 14 4.0% –29.5% 0.0% 284 81.8% 52.3% 0.6% Loudoun 1,243 322 25.9% –7.7% 0.6% 366 29.4% –0.1% 0.8% Louisa 486 212 43.6% 10.1% 0.4% 85 17.5% –12.0% 0.2% Lunenburg 429 307 71.6% 38.0% 0.6% 19 4.4% –25.1% 0.0% Madison 146 27 18.5% –15.1% 0.0% 40 27.4% –2.1% 0.1% Mathews 177 34 19.2% –14.3% 0.1% 54 30.5% 1.0% 0.1% Mecklenburg 440 186 42.3% 8.7% 0.3% 98 22.3% –7.3% 0.2% Middlesex 219 80 36.5% 3.0% 0.1% 47 21.5% –8.1% 0.1% Montgomery 1,352 69 5.1% –28.5% 0.1% 1,127 83.4% 53.8% 2.3%

116 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 W. W. Clement (D) S. L. Clute (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total 22 18.5% –8.4% 0.0% 3 2.5% –7.5% 0.0% 57 8.9% –17.9% 0.1% 15 2.4% –7.7% 0.1% 79 10.1% –16.8% 0.2% 17 2.2% –7.9% 0.1% 163 36.6% 9.8% 0.4% 10 2.2% –7.8% 0.1% 88 17.4% –9.5% 0.2% 30 5.9% –4.1% 0.2% 332 56.5% 29.6% 0.8% 26 4.4% –5.6% 0.2% 46 14.2% –12.7% 0.1% 20 6.2% –3.9% 0.1% 90 18.2% –8.7% 0.2% 14 2.8% –7.2% 0.1% 28 7.7% –19.2% 0.1% 5 1.4% –8.7% 0.0% 111 34.9% 8.0% 0.3% 15 4.7% –5.3% 0.1% 880 18.9% –8.0% 2.0% 592 12.7% 2.7% 3.6% 115 60.2% 33.3% 0.3% 20 10.5% 0.4% 0.1% 17 11.3% –15.6% 0.0% 4 2.6% –7.4% 0.0% 148 57.1% 30.3% 0.3% 27 10.4% 0.4% 0.2% 50 27.3% 0.4% 0.1% 12 6.6% –3.5% 0.1% 31 8.0% –18.8% 0.1% 4 1.0% –9.0% 0.0% 177 23.1% –3.8% 0.4% 40 5.2% –4.8% 0.2% 34 30.4% 3.5% 0.1% 14 12.5% 2.5% 0.1% 3,728 28.2% 1.3% 8.5% 1,680 12.7% 2.7% 10.2% 182 36.6% 9.7% 0.4% 59 11.9% 1.8% 0.4% 32 14.2% –12.7% 0.1% 9 4.0% –6.1% 0.1% 78 24.5% –2.4% 0.2% 43 13.5% 3.4% 0.3% 380 36.1% 9.2% 0.9% 37 3.5% –6.5% 0.2% 157 49.8% 23.0% 0.4% 42 13.3% 3.3% 0.3% 33 11.5% –15.3% 0.1% 5 1.7% –8.3% 0.0% 137 29.3% 2.4% 0.3% 86 18.4% 8.3% 0.5% 112 24.6% –2.3% 0.3% 62 13.6% 3.6% 0.4% 29 9.3% –17.6% 0.1% 3 1.0% –9.1% 0.0% 31 34.1% 7.2% 0.1% 10 11.0% 0.9% 0.1% 90 15.6% –11.3% 0.2% 35 6.1% –4.0% 0.2% 393 43.0% 16.1% 0.9% 13 1.4% –8.6% 0.1% 316 24.5% –2.4% 0.7% 175 13.6% 3.5% 1.1% 1,280 17.0% –9.9% 2.9% 817 10.9% 0.8% 5.0% 661 63.1% 36.2% 1.5% 22 2.1% –7.9% 0.1% 49 62.0% 35.1% 0.1% 11 13.9% 3.9% 0.1% 172 23.0% –3.9% 0.4% 83 11.1% 1.1% 0.5% 340 27.0% 0.2% 0.8% 197 15.7% 5.6% 1.2% 42 21.4% –5.4% 0.1% 24 12.2% 2.2% 0.1% 23 17.7% –9.2% 0.1% 36 27.7% 17.6% 0.2% 52 19.1% –7.8% 0.1% 32 11.8% 1.7% 0.2% 86 29.8% 2.9% 0.2% 34 11.8% 1.7% 0.2% 39 11.2% –15.6% 0.1% 10 2.9% –7.2% 0.1% 318 25.6% –1.3% 0.7% 237 19.1% 9.0% 1.4% 149 30.7% 3.8% 0.3% 40 8.2% –1.8% 0.2% 93 21.7% –5.2% 0.2% 10 2.3% –7.7% 0.1% 63 43.2% 16.3% 0.1% 16 11.0% 0.9% 0.1% 46 26.0% –0.9% 0.1% 43 24.3% 14.2% 0.3% 131 29.8% 2.9% 0.3% 25 5.7% –4.4% 0.2% 66 30.1% 3.3% 0.1% 26 11.9% 1.8% 0.2% 102 7.5% –19.3% 0.2% 54 4.0% –6.1% 0.3% (continued)

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 117 APPENDIX 7 Democratic Primary Election for Attorney General, June, 2001 (continued) A. D. McEachin (D) J. S. Edwards (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent from Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s LOCALITY Total Vote of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total Nelson 293 41 14.0% –19.6% 0.1% 85 29.0% –0.5% 0.2% New Kent 292 178 61.0% 27.4% 0.3% 29 9.9% –19.6% 0.1% Northampton 284 56 19.7% –13.8% 0.1% 76 26.8% –2.8% 0.2% Northumberland 383 226 59.0% 25.5% 0.4% 53 13.8% –15.7% 0.1% Nottoway 493 276 56.0% 22.4% 0.5% 44 8.9% –20.6% 0.1% Orange 312 77 24.7% –8.9% 0.1% 88 28.2% –1.3% 0.2% Page 155 21 13.5% –20.0% 0.0% 31 20.0% –9.5% 0.1% Patrick 297 20 6.7% –26.8% 0.0% 67 22.6% –7.0% 0.1% Pittsylvania 3,839 201 5.2% –28.3% 0.4% 100 2.6% –26.9% 0.2% Powhatan 237 117 49.4% 15.8% 0.2% 34 14.3% –15.2% 0.1% Prince Edward 452 222 49.1% 15.6% 0.4% 43 9.5% –20.0% 0.1% Prince George 660 388 58.8% 25.2% 0.7% 70 10.6% –18.9% 0.1% Prince William 1,769 545 30.8% –2.7% 1.0% 572 32.3% 2.8% 1.2% Pulaski 621 18 2.9% –30.7% 0.0% 519 83.6% 54.1% 1.1% Rappahannock 132 18 13.6% –19.9% 0.0% 58 43.9% 14.4% 0.1% Richmond (Co.) 155 59 38.1% 4.5% 0.1% 22 14.2% –15.3% 0.0% Roanoke (Co.) 3,116 93 3.0% –30.6% 0.2% 2,856 91.7% 62.1% 5.9% Rockbridge 398 40 10.1% –23.5% 0.1% 235 59.0% 29.5% 0.5% Rockingham 366 49 13.4% –20.2% 0.1% 147 40.2% 10.6% 0.3% Russell 425 14 3.3% –30.3% 0.0% 284 66.8% 37.3% 0.6% Scott 319 7 2.2% –31.4% 0.0% 285 89.3% 59.8% 0.6% Shenandoah 322 53 16.5% –17.1% 0.1% 75 23.3% –6.2% 0.2% Smyth 508 10 2.0% –31.6% 0.0% 418 82.3% 52.8% 0.9% Southampton 857 278 32.4% –1.1% 0.5% 182 21.2% –8.3% 0.4% Spotsylvania 530 155 29.2% –4.3% 0.3% 187 35.3% 5.8% 0.4% Staff ord 557 81 14.5% –19.0% 0.1% 275 49.4% 19.8% 0.6% Surry 348 148 42.5% 9.0% 0.3% 121 34.8% 5.2% 0.2% Sussex 514 314 61.1% 27.5% 0.6% 73 14.2% –15.3% 0.2% Tazewell 529 26 4.9% –28.6% 0.0% 397 75.0% 45.5% 0.8% Warren 233 37 15.9% –17.7% 0.1% 52 22.3% –7.2% 0.1% Washington 640 23 3.6% –30.0% 0.0% 458 71.6% 42.0% 0.9% Westmoreland 307 124 40.4% 6.8% 0.2% 55 17.9% –11.6% 0.1% Wise 373 12 3.2% –30.3% 0.0% 245 65.7% 36.2% 0.5% Wythe 449 8 1.8% –31.8% 0.0% 343 76.4% 46.9% 0.7% York 1,123 415 37.0% 3.4% 0.8% 276 24.6% –4.9% 0.6%

118 Virginia Votes ✰ 1999–2002 W. W. Clement (D) S. L. Clute (D) Deviation Percent of Deviation Percent of Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s Number Percent From Choice’s Choice’s of Votes of Vote State Average State Total of Votes of Vote State Average State Total 140 47.8% 20.9% 0.3% 27 9.2% –0.8% 0.2% 55 18.8% –8.0% 0.1% 30 10.3% 0.2% 0.2% 116 40.8% 14.0% 0.3% 36 12.7% 2.6% 0.2% 79 20.6% –6.2% 0.2% 25 6.5% –3.5% 0.2% 152 30.8% 4.0% 0.3% 21 4.3% –5.8% 0.1% 113 36.2% 9.3% 0.3% 34 10.9% 0.9% 0.2% 88 56.8% 29.9% 0.2% 15 9.7% –0.4% 0.1% 189 63.6% 36.8% 0.4% 21 7.1% –3.0% 0.1% 3,507 91.4% 64.5% 8.0% 31 0.8% –9.2% 0.2% 57 24.1% –2.8% 0.1% 29 12.2% 2.2% 0.2% 168 37.2% 10.3% 0.4% 19 4.2% –5.8% 0.1% 127 19.2% –7.6% 0.3% 75 11.4% 1.3% 0.5% 406 23.0% –3.9% 0.9% 246 13.9% 3.9% 1.5% 75 12.1% –14.8% 0.2% 9 1.4% –8.6% 0.1% 38 28.8% 1.9% 0.1% 18 13.6% 3.6% 0.1% 59 38.1% 11.2% 0.1% 15 9.7% –0.4% 0.1% 123 3.9% –22.9% 0.3% 44 1.4% –8.6% 0.3% 92 23.1% –3.8% 0.2% 31 7.8% –2.3% 0.2% 76 20.8% –6.1% 0.2% 94 25.7% 15.6% 0.6% 119 28.0% 1.1% 0.3% 8 1.9% –8.2% 0.0% 18 5.6% –21.2% 0.0% 9 2.8% –7.2% 0.1% 125 38.8% 11.9% 0.3% 69 21.4% 11.4% 0.4% 74 14.6% –12.3% 0.2% 6 1.2% –8.9% 0.0% 294 34.3% 7.4% 0.7% 103 12.0% 2.0% 0.6% 129 24.3% –2.5% 0.3% 59 11.1% 1.1% 0.4% 119 21.4% –5.5% 0.3% 82 14.7% 4.7% 0.5% 61 17.5% –9.3% 0.1% 18 5.2% –4.9% 0.1% 97 18.9% –8.0% 0.2% 30 5.8% –4.2% 0.2% 87 16.4% –10.4% 0.2% 19 3.6% –6.5% 0.1% 118 50.6% 23.8% 0.3% 26 11.2% 1.1% 0.2% 121 18.9% –8.0% 0.3% 38 5.9% –4.1% 0.2% 62 20.2% –6.7% 0.1% 66 21.5% 11.5% 0.4% 104 27.9% 1.0% 0.2% 12 3.2% –6.8% 0.1% 82 18.3% –8.6% 0.2% 16 3.6% –6.5% 0.1% 219 19.5% –7.4% 0.5% 213 19.0% 8.9% 1.3%

CHAPTER 4 ✰ The 2001 Statewide Nominations 119