Heated debate kicks off 2008 Senate Campaign

By Jay Warren
WSLS10 Anchor
Published: July 19, 2008

It didn’t take two minutes before the first attack was leveled at the first debate of the 2008 Senate contest.

In his opening remarks, former Gov. Mark Warner said of his opponent, former Gov. Jim Gilmore, “He ended up using budget gimmicks, tried to hide the problem and drove Virginia into the fiscal ditch.”

And the attacks kept coming in almost every other answer and question of the debate. Throughout it all the candidates constantly complained that the other was “name calling.”

At one point Gilmore, the Republican nominee, said, “The more Mark that you mischaracterize things, the less people are going to be able to trust you.”

Warner said more than once, “Jim, you sometimes don’t let the facts get in the way of your positions sometimes.”

Most of the attacks centered on offshore oil drilling, which ended up being the dominant issue of the debate.

Governor Gilmore asked Warner, “Yes or no, when you go to the US Senate will you support offshore oil drilling and production to reduce gas prices and relieve the burden on the people of Virginia?”

Warner responded, “I will support what Senator McCain has supported which is to lift the federal moratorium to allow states to make that decision.”

That wasn’t good enough for Gilmore who called the answer “vague.”

“Clarity is what is necessary and without that clarity you can’t trust what Mark Warner will do in the US Senate,” he said.

Of Gilmore’s plan, Warner said, “Making sure we give the states the right to drill offshore is a piece of the solution but not the kind of silver bullet sound byte that Jim has put out, the drill now, drill here approach.”

After the debate, I asked Warner if he favored allowing oil drilling off the coast of Virginia. He said, “I think if we can do it in an environmentally appropriate way, I think yes. On the question of offshore drilling, Jim Gilmore can’t take yes for an answer. I said that repeatedly.”

To that, Gilmore said, “He’s all over the place on this and he’s trying to hide his own position and I think we revealed that today.”

WSLS Political Analyst Dr. Bob Denton said all of the focus on offshore oil drilling obscured many other pressing issues including national security, Iraq, and the economy.

“It was and it dominated about 75% of the whole debate. I do find it interesting and there was also a duel-ship of the governorship which was kind of interesting. But they didn’t cover any of the national issues such as Iran and some of the other security.”

The other big theme that came up repeatedly was trust. Both men used it to shape their arguments and attack the other.

Warner said, “Washington doesn’t need one more name-calling politician, 90’s style slash and burn partisanship at all costs. If that’s the kind of candidate you want, I’m not your guy.”

Gilmore went after Warner’s signature tax reform plan that raised taxes 1.4 billion dollars.

“Can you be trusted to go forward and do what’s necessary,” Gilmore asked. “You said previously that you would not raise taxes and you raised taxes. You said you’d finish out the car tax cut and you didn’t do it. You hid information to get a tax increase while you were governor.”

From all the interaction it was obvious that this is going to be a bare knuckle, bloody campaign.

“We have from Jim Gilmore constantly labeling me this, labeling me that, attacking folks in his own party that don’t walk lock step with him. You know Washington is full of politicians like that,” Warner said after the debate.

Gilmore complained, “He’s had a tendency to just toss a name around and usually he says you’re being negative or you’re mischaracterizing and he gets away with that. He’s not getting away with that this time.”

Dr. Denton said both men were successful in accomplishing their goals in this opening debate.

“I think Gilmore did do what he needed to do. He did directly confront he had the sound bytes down,” he said. “I think Mark Warner did a very great job. He didn’t get defensive at all and gave detailed responses, so they where both well prepared for this debate. I will say the intensity and the level of interaction; this is really one of the best debates we’ve seen in a while.”