From the Richmond Times-Dispatch
Published: May 7, 2008

Democrat Mark Warner officially has launched his campaign for the U.S. Senate. Virginia Republicans will nominate their candidate later this month. Most observers expect Jim Gilmore easily to defeat Del. Bob Marshall. If all goes according to assumptions, two former governors will compete for the seat now held by John Warner, who will retire at the end of his term.

Was it only last year that Gilmore and Warner were running for president, or thinking about running for the White House? Maybe it was the year before. Or did they first seek the office during the era of the Whigs? These are not new names.

The positive spin suggests their presidential flirtations may have prepared them for the Senate campaign, as senators address issues that also confront presidents. The Virginia race will focus on national security and the economy — surprise, surprise. The multitude of special interests and single-issue groups that inhabit both parties will make their demands as well. Warner will be described as the most liberal statewide candidate ever, Gilmore as the most conservative. Each camp will attempt to tie the other to divisive national figures — to George Bush, for instance, and the Clintons. The national Democratic apparatus will help Warner to the max. The national Republican apparatus inspires only cruel laughs.

Gilmore’s leadership of a panel that studied terrorism won high marks. Congress paid particular attention to the committee’s recommendations after 9/11. Warner boasts rather less experience on the global stage, unless one counts those trade missions during which the home team typically urges exotic lands to buy more Virginia peanuts. To his credit, Warner has staked out a position on Iraq superior to the dreadful platforms of his party’s presidential pretenders.

Regarding the economy, Gilmore is remembered, fairly or not, for the budget breakdowns whose consequences included the election of . . . Mark Warner. The grassroots still appreciate Gilmore’s reduction of the so-called car tax. Others consider the cut an example of bad policy made worse by incompetent delivery.

Warner left the governor’s office with strong approval ratings, earned in part by his administration’s reputation for efficent management. Gilmore is seen as the more polarizing figure. Opponents have a habit of underestimating him, too.

Gilmore and Warner are familiar figures. Virginians will not have to get to know either. The campaign might be plagued by a sense of ho-hum. Neither contender has a legislative record. If John Warner seemed a senator from central casting, then Gilmore and Warner have temperaments and talents more suited to an executive’s job than to a legislator’s. The electorate could face a dilemma.