Mike Gravel: “I’m Running to Win”
Announcement Follows Unexpectedly Strong Polling Results as Support for Campaign Surges
New York, NY: Senator Mike Gravel announced today that he would be running to win the nomination, and not just qualify for the debates. The decision follows a series of successful results in polls and a survey of supporters that found overwhelming support for running to win.
Previously, Sen. Gravel had been running just to qualify for the debates to spread his pro-peace, pro-political reform message. But the campaign met such a strong reaction—repeatedly beating Kirsten Gillibrand, Eric Swalwell, Tim Ryan, and Seth Moulton in polls, and even coming in sixth place among millennials in Iowa in one poll—that the candidate has decided to declare that he’s “in it to win it.”
The decision comes in part because some pundits have dismissed the campaign, despite significant online interest and polling results, as unserious because of the lack of desire to win.
“I have heard chatter that our efforts do not amount to a ‘serious campaign’ because we intend to drop out after the debates. I am confused. In many ways, I find our campaign to be, perhaps, the only serious campaign that’s running,” Sen. Gravel wrote in an email to supporters. “We aspire for a higher goal than the office of the President of the United States of America. While other candidates run on personality and egotism, our campaign is defining the change and progress we need to live dignified lives.”
“So here it is: I am running to win. Just as much as Seth Moulton, John Delaney, John Hickenlooper, Tim Ryan, or Eric Swalwell are,” he continued.
The decision was not an easy one for the senator and his campaign team. Supporters were polled online, with 11,000 of them voting. The results were clear: 83 percent of supporters wanted Sen. Gravel to run to win.
This decision does not change the fact that the campaign’s future will be determined in large part by Sen. Gravel’s support after the debates. The campaign remains committed to not being a “spoiler” in primary contests for other progressive candidates, and will determine paths to avoid that in the future.
