"As I’ve made clear, I am talking to a lot of my fellow Republicans in Virginia about running against Mark Warner,” Gillespie said in an e-mail Thursday. “I’ve been encouraged by people all across our party and our commonwealth. The filing deadline is February 1st, so I will be announcing my intentions in the near future.”
Gillespie, who is also a former lobbyist, quietly began discussions with senior Virginia Republicans about the race in the summer. He accelerated his plans after November’s elections, when Democrats won the races for governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general. That sweep left the GOP with a thin bench for upcoming contests — including the 2017 governor’s race, which many Republicans previously thought would be Gillespie’s first campaign.
Republicans say Gillespie is well aware that Warner, with a campaign war chest of $7.1 million and the personal wealth to spend far more, will be a formidable opponent. The former governor frequently rates as the most popular statewide official in public opinion polls. But GOP strategists hope that the flawed rollout of the Affordable Care Act will drag down all Democrats who supported it, including Warner.All well and good, in an era where the GOP conventional wisdom has them winning back the Senate. But Ed Gillespie is not the right choice to go against Warner, or take on issues like the risky scheme known as Obamacare, despite the cheerleading from the Tea Party-hating, liberal-posing-as-Republican Compost writer Jennifer Rubin.
A passage from the Epilogue of Craig Shirley's must-read book "Rendezvous With Destiny, Ronald Reagan and the Campaign That Changed America" tells me all I need to know about why Ed Gillespie is not the right candidate to run against Warner, that he's only a pawn for the GOP establishment and close political partner Karl Rove. Shirley wrote how Gillespie met with the Manchester Union-Leader editorial board in 2003 and...
"said in no uncertain terms that the days of Reaganesque Republican railings against the expansion of federal government are over." "Today's Republican party stands for giving the American people whatever the latest polls say they want...The people want expanded entitlement programs and a federal government that attends to their every desire, no matter how frivolous? Then that's what the Republican Party wants too."So? Where's the difference between Richard Milhous Obama, Mark Warner, and the Republican Party of "me too" big government statism that Ed Gillespie and Karl Rove want? Not much difference. It's what Reagan himself termed a party of "pale pastels."
Ed Gillespie is pro "immigration reform" (read: amnesty) and advocated for an individual mandate later seen in RomneyCare, the grandfather to Obamacare.
In Gillespie’s 2006 book, “Winning Right,” he enumerates five tenets to “ensure that efficiency, affordability, and availability would prevail in the health care sector.” The fifth principle was “all adults participate.”
Gillespie proposed ensuring "that every emancipated adult capable of providing for his or her health care do so. One way to accomplish this is to use the tax code to gain compliance.”
The goal of this, as with the mandate in the federal health care law now in place, was to reduce insurance costs across the board.
Some of Gillespie’s other proposals from his book also sound familiar, either because they are similar to the health care law Mitt Romney crafted when he was governor of Massachusetts or because they have been incorporated into the federal health care law, including a system anchored in insurance exchanges with “portable” coverage.Again, I ask, where's the difference between Obama, Warner or Gillespie? Why do we want to have a big government RINO run against Mark Warner? Gillespie and Karl Rove are both allies, co-founding American Crossroads, so they have the arrogant "we know what's best for the GOP" attitude. If that's the case, why didn't their boy Mittens Romney win in 2012? Why do their candidates not win elections? Can we also attribute the declining voter identification of the GOP to Rove and Gillespie's idea of a party trying to be all things to all people?
Sorry, but I'm taking a pass on this Karl Rove-approved candidate, espeically after how Rove and his fellow Rovebots kneecapped our statewide GOP ticket this past November. We don't need big government Republicans like Ed Gillespie or Bill Bolling in Washington, helping Mitch McConnell and John McLame aid and abet the socialism of Obama and Harry Reid.