Abigail Spanberger, the Virginia gubernatorial nominee, dodged reporters’ difficult questions on hot topics for an entire year. She refused to provide Virginians with answers despite being given multiple chances to do so during a debate. Her answers seemed to be geared towards professional campaign consultants and focus group members over Virginia voters. She appeared unprepared when answering difficult questions. This shows a lack in leadership.
Abigail Spanberger’s best dodges in her debate with Republican Winsome Earle Sears. Some answers have been shortened for clarity. Full answers are available by clicking this link. Warning: The full answers contain a lot of indecipherable words.
The Car Tax
Question To Spanberger Will you commit to ending the car tax?
Answer: “My husband wrote a paper about the hated auto tax in high school.”
Answer to the question:
Answer: I will bring people together, because it takes a constitutional change to make it happen.
Spanberger did not answer the question. Her answer is incorrect in fact, since the legislature can end the car tax. The car tax was reduced by previous legislation, but Democrats stopped the reduction after they gained control. This response shows that she does not plan to push her agenda through the legislative body.
Spanberger’s agenda is strikingly similar to that of socialist New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mahdani, despite Spanberger’s attempts to portray herself as a moderate. Her plans include expanding the use of taxpayer money for government-run childcare and subsidised housing. Spanberger will not cut taxes, but increase them.
Spanberger claimed that Earle-Sears – the current lieutenant Governor – failed to abolish the car tax in her tenure. The Democrats controlled the Senate and the House, and they killed legislation to repeal the car tax. Earle-Sears said that her administration had more than $10 billion in surpluses, which could have been spent to end the vehicle tax. But Democrats refused.
Boys in girls’ sports and private spaces
Question To Spanberger “Should transgender girls, who are biologically men, be allowed to use the girls’ restrooms and play on girls sports teams?”
Answer: “I am a former federal agents. . . “I’m the mom of three girls”
The follow up question is: “Once more, should transgender boys who are biological females be allowed use girls’ restrooms and play on girl’s sports teams?”
Answer: “It is up to parents, educators, and administrators of each local community in order to make decisions locally.”
Spanberger voted no on the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. This legislation would have banned biological males from participating in sports that are only meant for girls. She also voted in opposition to the Parents Bill of Rights, which would have required that schools notify parents if biological men were allowed in girls’ bathrooms or locker rooms.
Spanberger’s solution, which is to leave it to the local school districts, has been proven to be a failure and does not protect civil rights for all Virginians. Loudoun County Public Schools implemented policies that allowed students to select the locker room or bathroom of their choice, regardless of biological sex. Spanberger’s response indicates that she does not oppose Loudoun policies which allow boys to enter girls’ private areas, despite the fact that this has led to many controversial outcomes. Her answer indicates that she would also likely reverse Governor Glenn Youngkin’s statewide policy prohibiting access in bathrooms, lockers and sports because of gender identity.
Abortion
Question Spanberger “Do you support any limitations on abortion?”
Answer: “My opponent threatens to murder women who have abortions.”
Answer to question “Do you have any restrictions on abortion access, including for minors?”
Answer: “I am in favor of the current laws.”
Spanberger wants Virginia as a place where abortions are allowed to continue indefinitely.
Virginia’s abortion law is one of the most liberal in the country. It allows abortion without restrictions until the end of second trimester. The law allows abortions up to the birth of a child if two other doctors sign off.
Restoration News contacted the Spanberger Campaign to get more information on her accusations against Lt. Governor Winsome-Sears. No response from the Governor.
Spanberger was interrupted by Earle-Sears during the debate after she had been accused of threatening to murder her. She called it a lie. Earle-Sears was not allowed to respond.
Political violence
Question to Spanberger: Did you know about the texts before their release and will you continue recommending Jay Jones as the next Attorney General of Virginia?
Answer: “My opponent denounces violence only when she is the victim.”
The follow up question is: “I did not hear a response on the issue of endorsement.” . Will you continue to support Jay Jones?”
Answer: The voters will decide.
A follow-up question “Do you continue to endorse Jay Jones?”
Answer: “I’m running to serve Virginia.”
Days before the Governor’s Debate, Jay Jones’ previous text messages in which he wished death on his political rival were revealed. Virginia Democrats led by Abigail Spanberger are refusing to withdraw their support and endorsement for Jay Jones.
No surprise, Spanberger will not retract her endorsement of Jones. She voted against , a resolution at Congress condemning attacks on facilities pro-life in the wake of Roe V. Wade.
Recent polls show that Republicans are gaining ground as the election approaches. Despite the fact that all three Democrat candidates in the top spots had significant leads early on, the races are now very tight. Spanberger is ahead by less than 2 points. Lieutenant Governor Ghazala Hahmi (D), who is running against John Reid (R), has a lead of just under 1 point. Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares trails Jay Jones (D), by more than 5 points.
With only a few weeks remaining in the campaign season, Spanberger’s refusal to answer questions and support of a candidate who spewed violence against the government revealed his true colors: extremist, lacking in leadership and unwillingness to answer the voters.
