In Virginia’s 7th Congressional District, Republican Derrick Anderson and Democrat Eugene Vindman are both ringing alarm bells over the state of American democracy. Each believes the government has failed its citizens, with extreme politics taking the place of effective leadership. For both candidates, this election represents a pivotal moment for the country’s future, though their views on what’s at stake diverge sharply.
Anderson, a former Army Green Beret, emphasizes his focus on getting things done without the theatrics, presenting himself as a down-to-earth candidate who values results over rhetoric. “At the end of the day, people are ready for someone to govern, not just stir things up,” he shared in a recent interview.
Vindman, an Army colonel turned whistleblower, sees Donald Trump as the primary threat to democracy. His role in Trump’s first impeachment thrust him into the national spotlight, and he believes his experience underscores the importance of defending democratic norms. “This isn’t ancient history,” Vindman noted, “especially since Trump is the leading nominee.”
In a race where veterans make up roughly 12% of the population, both candidates, each with military service but no prior elected experience, are contending for the seat of retiring Rep. Abigail Spanberger. Anderson focuses on the economy and immigration, while Vindman stresses abortion rights and resisting extremism. Their positions reflect two distinct anxieties over the health of democracy in a deeply divided America.
Democrats hope to hold onto the district that Republicans once controlled for nearly 50 years, until Spanberger flipped it in 2018. For Republicans, it’s a chance to recapture a seat in a pivotal area. Stephen Farnsworth, a political science professor, noted that this is Virginia’s most competitive race, adding that “if you can’t win suburban counties like these, it’s hard to gain a majority in Congress.”
Vindman’s Unique Position
Vindman’s campaign builds on his national profile as a defender of democracy, portraying his actions against Trump as a call to serve an “unblemished” democracy. His 2019 whistleblowing role during Trump’s pressure campaign on Ukrainian officials ultimately led to Trump’s first impeachment. Vindman and his twin brother raised concerns over a call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, which Vindman describes as one of the most challenging but necessary decisions of his career.
Although his actions were divisive, Vindman insists it wasn’t personal. “It’s about highlighting actions taken by a major party nominee,” he explained. His history with Trump helped him in a crowded primary and has bolstered his campaign finances, with nearly $3 million by the end of September, far outpacing Anderson’s $1 million.
However, Vindman’s ties to Trump’s impeachment could limit his appeal to moderate voters in a district that spans a range of communities from Washington exurbs to the Blue Ridge Mountains.
Anderson’s Strategy
In contrast, Anderson has taken a more traditional Republican approach, highlighting Vindman’s ties to the Trump impeachment as a liability. Anderson portrays Vindman as overly focused on the past and claims his opponent thrives on divisiveness. Anderson, positioning himself as a unifying figure, criticizes Vindman’s actions as part of a “revenge tour” against Trump. “We’re focused on the future, while he’s caught in the past,” Anderson argued.
Vindman counters that his “moral courage” in speaking out on Trump sets him apart from Anderson, asserting it as a trait valuable in times of national division.
The Trump Factor
Both candidates face a delicate balance in a district with significant federal employee populations and a mixed history with Trump. Anderson has to navigate Trump’s endorsement while distancing himself from unpopular policies, such as Trump’s proposal to move federal jobs out of the D.C. area, which his campaign says he opposes.
Democrats have heavily outspent Republicans on advertising, and Vindman has labeled Anderson as beholden to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement, arguing that Anderson’s campaign has been funded by MAGA-aligned groups. Anderson, however, stresses his commitment to independent governance.
“When I served overseas, it didn’t matter who you were — we were all on the same team with a mission,” Anderson said, emphasizing unity over partisanship.
In a race marked by intense contrasts, Vindman suggests that a victory for democracy in this election would require significant rebuilding. “If democracy wins this next election, we’ll have a lot of work to do,” he reflected.
