THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, October 12, 1996 TAG: 9610120026
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 39 lines
Lest anyone doubt that Republicans threw away a U.S. Senate seat when they nominated Oliver North in 1994, new evidence has arrived from Mason-Dixon Political/Media Research.
Democrat Chuck Robb, the man who beat North, may have won a second term in office. But just because voters elected Robb, it doesn't mean they like him. Against a less-flawed opponent, Robb would likely have been swept from office.
Consider. When voters in the 50 states were asked last month to assess the job performances of their senators, Robb came in 96th. Only Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.; Carol Moseley-Braun, D-Ill.; Sheila Frahm, R-Kan.; and Alfonse D'Amato, R-N.Y., were less well thought of in their home states.
A dismal 5 percent gave Robb an ``excellent'' rating, while another 31 percent said his performance was ``good.'' In contrast, 62 percent gave him either a fair or poor rating.
The showing invites the suggestion that Democrat Mark Warner, who is spending millions in seemingly hopeless pursuit of Sen. John Warner, might see the value of his investment grow with time.
Democrats in 2000 will be as myopic as Republicans were in 1994 if they let Robb go unchallenged. The younger Warner could be laying the groundwork for such a race.
While Robb's combined excellent-good rating was 36 percent, John Warner's was 60 percent. As a result, Warner ranked 31st among the 100 senators in the nation.
Gov. George F. Allen was close on Warner's heels in popularity. Fifty-eight percent of Virginians gave him a good or excellent rating. But because American voters tend to look more charitably on their governors than their senators, Allen's rating put him squarely in the middle of the pack on gubernatorial popularity.
He ranked 24th of 50, another reminder perhaps of how evenly the scales of partisan allegiance are now balanced in Virginia. by CNB