From the top down, Virginia's 2025 elections are packed with contenders
The Executive Mansion in Richmond. (Photo by Markus Schmidt/Virginia Mercury)
The 2025 election season in Virginia is officially underway — and the landscape is coming into sharp focus after last week's filing deadline for the June 17 primaries. With the top of the tickets now set and the full list of candidates for the House of Delegates finalized, both parties are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential election years in the commonwealth's recent history.
Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears became the Republican nominee for governor by default after former state Sen. Amanda Chase and former Del. Dave LaRock failed to submit enough valid signatures to qualify for the primary ballot.
The GOP now avoids a potentially divisive nomination fight and can direct all of its resources toward the general election, where Earle-Sears will face former U.S. Rep. Abigail Spanberger, the Democratic nominee who left Congress in 2024 to run for governor.
Spanberger enters the race with a clear financial advantage. Her campaign reported raising $9.6 million by the end of 2024, with $6.6 million in cash on hand. On Monday, her team announced an additional $6.7 million raised in the first quarter of 2025.
'Our campaign is tremendously grateful for this record-breaking show of support,' Campaign Manager Samson Signori said in an email. 'We are proud to run a grassroots campaign with the strong support of thousands of volunteers across every corner of our commonwealth.'
Earle-Sears ended 2024 with $2.6 million raised and $2.1 million in cash. Last week, her campaign announced a $3.1 million haul for the first quarter — a figure she achieved despite being unable to raise money for much of the reporting period. As a sitting member of the legislature, Earle-Sears is barred from fundraising during the General Assembly session.
'Our campaign is proudly fueled by hardworking Virginians who want a leader who will cut taxes, defend parental rights, and keep our communities safe,' Earle-Sears said in a statement. 'The threat of radical change that would turn our commonwealth in the wrong direction is real and demands we fight back directly and aggressively.'
Two independent candidates, Donna Charles and Andrew White, have also filed to run for governor. No campaign finance disclosures have been filed for either.
Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor at the University of Mary Washington, said the absence of a gubernatorial primary gives both major candidates a strategic edge heading into November.
'This is the best case scenario for both of the candidates,' Farnsworth said. He noted that primaries often force contenders to cater to their party's ideological base — sometimes at the expense of their appeal in a general election.
'If you go through the primary process, you will have to say a number of things to win over the ideological extremists who vote in primaries, and the things that you say in the spring can come back to haunt you in November,' he explained. 'And now they don't have to deal with it.'
For Republicans especially, Farnsworth added, the early clarity in the race is a rare bright spot.
'With no primary, you can focus on the general election,' he said. 'It's a rare bit of good news for Republicans, who have a lot of headwinds coming out of Washington going into this election.'
The lieutenant governor's race has drawn large and diverse fields on both sides. Three Republicans are seeking the nomination: U.S. Navy veteran John Curran, Pat Herrity — the last remaining Republican on the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors — and conservative radio host John Reid.
The Democratic field is even more crowded, with six candidates vying for the nomination: attorney Alex Bastani; state Sens. Ghazala Hashmi, D-Richmond, and Aaron Rouse, D-Virginia Beach; physician Babur Lateef; former U.S. Department of Justice counsel Victor Salgado; and former Richmond mayor Levar Stoney.
Marlow Jones, a member of the Petersburg City Council and a Republican, is also running for lieutenant governor — as an independent.
In the race for attorney general, Republican incumbent Jason Miyares is seeking a second term. Miyares, who made history in 2021 as the first Latino elected to statewide office in Virginia, is running unopposed in the GOP primary.
Two Democrats are competing for the nomination to challenge him in November. Former state Del. Jay Jones of Norfolk, who previously ran for attorney general in 2021 but lost the primary to then-incumbent Mark Herring, is back for another attempt. Henrico County Commonwealth's Attorney Shannon Taylor, a veteran local prosecutor, is also seeking the Democratic nod.
In the House of Delegates, all 100 seats are on the ballot this year. Democrats are fielding 114 candidates in 96 districts, while Republicans are running 76 candidates in 66 districts. Democrats have primaries in 14 districts, and Republicans have primary contests in 10.
The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC) on Monday announced a seven-figure investment in the campaigns of four incumbents in what they view as winnable districts — Dels. Josh Thomas, D-Prince William, Josh Cole, D-Fredericksburg, Nadarius Clark, D-Suffolk, and Michael Feggans, D-Virginia Beach. Each won their 2023 races by 3 to 6 percentage points.
DLCC pours money into Virginia races, citing 'All eyes on 2025'
'The DLCC's investment is a clear signal that the eyes of the nation are on Virginia — and for good reason,' said Amber Gantt, a spokeswoman for the Virginia House Democratic Caucus. 'Our frontline delegates flipped some of the toughest districts in the state, and they're already delivering real results for Virginians.'
The margin for control of the House couldn't have been tighter in 2023, when just 975 votes statewide ultimately determined which party held the majority. That razor-thin outcome is a vivid reminder of how every district, and every ballot cast, could prove decisive in 2025.
Farnsworth, the political scientist, said that this year's political landscape carries echoes of 2017, when Democratic enthusiasm surged in response to Donald Trump's first presidency — a dynamic that appears to be resurfacing after Trump's return to the White House.
'In a lot of ways this does look sort of like eight years ago, where you have a lot of motivated Democrats in part because of the energy within the party, but also because of the frustration with President Trump. Both of these dynamics seem to be present this year.'
Farnsworth cautioned that Republicans could face a turnout challenge if they fail to field candidates in enough down-ballot races — a challenge that hurt Democrats in the past.
'There is a potential problem, though, in a statewide election if you don't have Republican candidates in a larger number of districts, because you may not be encouraging a Republican turnout,' Farnsworth said.
'The more Republicans there are on the ballot in House of Delegates races, the more likely there'll be people voting Republican up and down the ballot. That was one of the problems that the Democrats had four years ago were districts that didn't have a Democratic name on the ballot, and that hurt (Democrat) Terry McAuliffe's campaign.'
Only one GOP incumbent — Del. Terry Austin, R-Botetourt — faces a primary challenge this year, from Austen Schwend.
On the Democratic side, several incumbents are being challenged from within their own party.
Del. Patrick Hope, D-Arlington, faces Sean Epstein and Arjoon Srikanth in District 1. In Richmond's District 81, Del. Delores McQuinn is up against Alicia Atkins, while in Virginia Beach, Del. Kelly Convirs-Fowler is being challenged by Brandon Hutchins in District 96.
Democrats are also making a concerted push into Republican-held territory, with candidates running in 43 GOP-leaning districts this year.
Republicans, by contrast, are challenging Democratic incumbents in only 15 districts. The disparity is part of a broader Democratic strategy aimed at driving turnout — especially in areas that could also benefit Spanberger's gubernatorial bid.
Sen. Lamont Bagby, D-Henrico, who chairs the Democratic Party of Virginia, said the stakes in this year's elections have galvanized Democratic voters — and now the focus is on sustaining that momentum through November by winning back the governor's mansion and increasing Democrats' narrow 51-49 majority in the House.
'There's no question that folks are energized headed into this election cycle, we just need to make sure to keep the energy up,' Bagby said.
Framing the governor's race as a pivotal moment for Virginia's future, Bagby described the contrast between the candidates as sharper than anything he's seen in recent memory.
'We've heard it time and time again, but in my lifetime I don't think there's ever been a clearer choice between the two candidates for governor,' he said.
With that clarity, he added, comes a responsibility to channel enthusiasm into organizing and outreach — while recognizing that serious challenges remain.
'We are working to make sure we are prepared to move that energy in the right direction,' Bagby said. 'At the same time, we understand that there is a lot of work ahead, and some folks are committed to turn back the progress that we made related to health care and protecting families, we'll just have to run through the tape.'
But Ken Nunnenkamp, executive director of the Republican Party of Virginia, downplayed the idea that more Democratic candidates equals more enthusiasm.
'I'm still not seeing an enthusiasm gap here. We've got a bunch of really good candidates,' Nunnenkamp said. 'And at the end of the day, just because three or four people have filed in a Democratic primary, that doesn't mean that there is any enthusiasm.'
Democrats seize on enthusiasm gap in 2025 Virginia House races
He also expressed skepticism that a broader Democratic field in rural districts would pay off for Spanberger in November.
'Four years ago, Terry McAuliffe went and worked his tail off trying to get votes in the rural districts, and he couldn't do it because the Democratic message doesn't resonate with a lot of people in those areas,' Nunnenkamp said.
'I think (Spanberger) is going to spend as much time and money trying to turn out Democrats in those five districts where no Democrats are running, and I have a feeling just like last year, the Democratic message at the House of Delegates level is the same as it is on the statewide level. I think they're going to have a horrible time.'
Still, Democrats are making history with their field. Of the 114 Democratic House candidates, 58 are women — including 27 incumbents — and at least seven are veterans. Eight veterans already serve in the chamber. By contrast, just five GOP incumbents are women, and a total of 17 Republican women are running for the House in 2025.
Independent candidates are rare this cycle, appearing in just four House districts. One of the most closely watched is District 50, where former Democrat Trudy Berry is now running as an independent after being denied ballot access last year due to an email error.
Berry is up against Republican Del. Tommy Wright of Lunenburg and Democrat Earnadette Powell Farrar in a three-way contest that includes parts of Mecklenburg, Charlotte, Lunenburg, Prince Edward, and Halifax counties.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indianapolis Star
31 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
Why won't Republicans call on Joe Hogsett to resign?
It is shocking that only one out of six Republicans on the Indianapolis City-County Council have called on Mayor Joe Hogsett to resign following sexual harassment allegations that have rocked his office in recent months. Many constituents of Republican councilors are frustrated that their caucus has been more passive than council Democrats, three of whom are on record saying Hogsett should resign. It is hard to trust your leaders when they stay silent about a moral and ethical issue, especially involving one of their political enemies. If anyone should have the courage to speak up, it should be Republicans. Unlike their Democratic colleagues, Republicans don't have to worry about Hogsett continuing to be a power broker in their party for several years due to their trouble building an independent political machine. '[Calling on Hogsett to resign] could cause personal financial hardship to people,' Democratic Councilor Jesse Brown, the first to call on Hogsett to resign, told me. '[And he] is in good with all the biggest donors and he has a ton of money in the bank and so … he absolutely could you know levy those connections or that money to sink people's political careers.' Briggs: Hogsett's texts to women show Indianapolis mayor embodied toxic culture When I asked Republican Minority Leader Michael-Paul Hart why he hasn't called on Hogsett to resign, he said he didn't want to get political. He has focused his criticism on the investigation into Hogsett, rather than Hogsett himself. After all, many are starting to think the investigation was just a PR stunt aimed at clearing him of legal liability. 'I try to be as apolitical as possible because I think local government is just non-political … we're always talking about roads, water, trash, public safety,' Hart said. 'At the end of the day, we've got to focus on what we can control and what is symbolic.' Gov. Mike Braun expressed a similar sentiment when asked by WIBC-FM (93.1) host Nigel Laskowski about the scandal. 'What I'm more concerned about would be the potholes per linear mile,' Braun said June 18. I don't think fixing potholes, criticizing a political process and taking a moral stance against political leaders engaging in ethical violations should be mutually exclusive. However, Hogsett still controls the city budget and Council President Vop Osili appears to be positioning himself to succeed Hogsett. Either person could retaliate against Republicans who chose to make trouble and divert city funds away from their districts. Opinion: I was dragged out by sheriff's deputies. Indiana Democrats stayed silent. 'I try to remind folks all the time there's … 240,000 people that the six of us (Republicans) represent and I would certainly not want them to be disenfranchised,' Hart told me when I asked if he thought Hogsett would retaliate against Republicans. 'But I would hope that the mayor wouldn't punish the people of our districts for something of that nature.' Several councilors and their employers are also financially dependent on contracts with the city-county government, which Hogsett could push to terminate if councilors call on him to resign. Hart, for example, is employed as a director by SHI International, which has a six million dollar contract through 2027 with Indianapolis. The risk of retaliation, however, did not stop both Democratic and Republican leaders from calling on former Attorney General Curtis Hill to resign after he faced allegations of groping, and did not stop both Democratic and Republican leaders from condemning former Indiana Senate Minority Leader Greg Taylor after he faced allegations of sexual harassment. Taking the personal risk to call for greater ethical standards for political leaders may not fix the roads, but it will do something just as important. It will rebuild public trust in local leaders by providing some concrete evidence that they subscribe to a set of moral standards, and that they want our political system to be just and fair for both their constituents and employees.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Social Security Benefits Are an Estimated 8 Years Away From Being Slashed -- and the Cuts Are Even Bigger Than Initially Forecast
Most retirees rely on their Social Security income, to some varied degree, to make ends meet. The 2025 Social Security Board of Trustees Report is calling for an even steeper reduction to retired-worker and survivor benefits come 2033 than was forecast last year. Ongoing demographic shifts are (mostly) responsible for Social Security's financial woes. However, the longer Congress waits to implement reforms, the costlier it'll be on working Americans. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Social Security represents more than just a monthly check for most retirees. To many, it's a financial lifeline that surveys and studies have shown they'd struggle to make do without. For 23 consecutive years, national pollster Gallup surveyed retirees to determine how important their Social Security income was to covering their expenses. Every year, no fewer than 80% of respondents noted it was necessary, in some capacity, to cover their costs. A separate analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that Social Security pulled 22 million people above the federal poverty line in 2023, including 16.3 million adults aged 65 and above. If the Social Security program didn't exist, the poverty rate for this group would be nearly four times higher (37.3%, estimated) than it was in 2023 (10.1%). For lawmakers, ensuring the financial health of Social Security should be of paramount importance. But based on the latest Social Security Board of Trustees Report, America's leading retirement program is on anything but stable ground. In January 1940, the Social Security program doled out its very first retired-worker benefit. Since then, the Social Security Board of Trustees has published an annual report intricately detailing how the program generates income, as well as where every dollar in outlays ends up. But what tends to garner even more attention is the Trustees' forecasts of what's to come for Social Security. Specifically, the short- (10-year) and long-term (75-year) projections, which are regularly updated to reflect fiscal policy changes, monetary policy shifts, and an assortment of demographic adjustments. Last week, the 2025 Social Security Board of Trustees Report was released -- and it contained some rather chilling news for current and future retirees. To begin with, the program's long-term unfunded obligation continues to widen. Every annual report since 1985 has pointed to a 75-year funding deficit between projected income to be collected and forecast outlays, which includes annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs). In present-day dollars, discounted to Jan. 1, 2025, this 75-year deficit stood at a staggering $25.1 trillion. However, the more worrisome news is the short-term forecast for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund (OASI). This is the fund responsible for doling out monthly benefits to retired workers and survivors of deceased beneficiaries. Beginning in 2021, the OASI began outlaying more in benefits than was being collected in income. This outflow from the OASI's asset reserves is expected to grow with each passing year. By 2033, the OASI's asset reserves are projected to be completely exhausted. Before going any further, let's make clear that the OASI doesn't need a penny in asset reserves to remain solvent and continue to pay benefits to eligible recipients. With the lion's share of Social Security income collected from the 12.4% payroll tax on wages and salary, there will always be income to disburse to qualified beneficiaries. But if the OASI's asset reserves are depleted in eight years, as the latest Trustees Report predicts, the current payout schedule, inclusive of COLAs, won't be sustainable. The Trustees are forecasting a 23% cut to payouts may be necessary for retired workers and survivor beneficiaries by 2033 -- this is up from an estimated 21% cut outlined in the 2024 Trustees Report -- to sustain monthly benefits without the need for any further reductions through 2099. With Social Security providing a financial foundation to retirees for more than eight decades, the obvious question for current and future retirees is simple: How did Social Security get into this mess? What can be said with certainty is that "congressional theft" and "undocumented migrants receiving traditional Social Security benefits," which are two common myths/scapegoats mentioned by some people online, are the wrong answers. Rather, Social Security's worsening financial outlook is a function of numerous ongoing demographic shifts, as well as inaction on Capitol Hill. Some of these shifts are well-documented and understood by the public. For example, baby boomers reaching retirement age and leaving the workforce in larger numbers are weighing down the worker-to-beneficiary ratio. Likewise, people are living longer today than they were when Social Security initially began paying retired-worker benefits in 1940. To be somewhat blunt, the program wasn't designed to dish out payments to retirees for two or more decades, as is somewhat commonplace today. But a number of these demographic shifts aren't nearly as visible -- nevertheless, they're playing a key role in weakening the program. For starters, the U.S. fertility rate (i.e., hypothetical lifetime births per woman) hit an all-time low in 2023. A laundry list of factors, ranging from people waiting longer to get married and have children, to concerns about the health of the U.S. economy, have reduced the number of children being born and will, eventually, weigh down the worker-to-beneficiary ratio. Rising income inequality is another issue for Social Security. Based on data from the Social Security Administration, approximately 90% of all earned income (wages and salary, but not investment income) was subject to the 12.4% payroll tax in 1983. By 2023, only 83% of earned income was subject to this program-funding tax. In simple terms, the wages and salaries for high earners have been increasing at a faster pace than the National Average Wage Index, which determines the upper range of earned income exposed to the payroll tax. In short, more earned income is escaping the payroll tax as time passes. Insufficient net migration into the U.S. has been problematic, too. Social Security relies on younger people migrating to the U.S. and contributing to the program for decades via the payroll tax before earning a retirement benefit for themselves one day. Since 1997, the net migration rate into the U.S. has dropped off dramatically. The final culprit is the aforementioned lack of action by lawmakers in Washington, D.C. Although plenty of bills have been proposed, the cavernous ideological gap between Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill as to how best to strengthen Social Security has led to an ongoing stalemate. If there's a silver lining here, it's that lawmakers do have a knack for coming to Social Security's rescue in the 11th hour. But the longer Congress waits to tackle this issue, the costlier it's going to be on working Americans to fix. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Social Security Benefits Are an Estimated 8 Years Away From Being Slashed -- and the Cuts Are Even Bigger Than Initially Forecast was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON (AP) — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Donald Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful." 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month.
