Imagine pulling off a stunning political upset in the face of a damaging personal scandal— that's exactly what happened in Virginia's attorney general race, and it's got everyone talking about resilience, accountability, and the real impact of past mistakes on public office.
According to projections from CBS News on November 4, 2025, at 9:55 PM EST, Democrat Jay Jones has clinched victory in the race for Virginia's attorney general. This win comes despite a major controversy that erupted late in the campaign, centered around some inflammatory text messages Jones sent back in 2022 targeting a Republican lawmaker. For those new to politics, scandals like this can feel like career-enders, but Jones managed to weather the storm and defeat the Republican incumbent, Jason Miyares.
Miyares, who has been in the role since his 2021 election, tried to capitalize on those resurfaced texts to paint Jones as someone unreliable and potentially dangerous for the position. Backed by President Trump, Miyares faced his own challenges, though. Virginia is home to a massive federal workforce—more than 147,000 government employees, as per data from the Office of Personnel Management (https://www.fedscope.opm.gov/ibmcognos/bi/v1/disp?baction=powerPlayService&mencoding=UTF-8&BZ=1AAABnsT72MN42oVOsW6DQAz9mTNph0YwyVhYIDjUBiANLBXlFzSqsBFcB3y9xUwpFWGvidL9vN7lp2yWJdVcVRpHIzWDDqNn4DocyNI4jZU6PncQ0%7EtfIHRZiO5UKREtAWiZ2fKqvAo94ew2gdASWN6q3sLlJxNe9IDiAg87OtOgxuvDnXzVV%7E0Ka6a2tune7tCkQMlFyXzV%7E73QWEL0Aov4dhmTLT248p68SlXMsiz5Ws0iLPw0wF%7EWc6DU4IzKOiJwjYwyZQEbIJjIWXnTf3IAQ6ASEYdsCpkZ7eMpQJ8B7YBcBNIc6B3IXwR_F9gMIHey%7EwKfOXfLO3MtTyz4AbZLbJc%3D). The ongoing federal shutdown and the president's proposed budget cuts hit this group hard, creating strong headwinds for Miyares in a state where federal jobs are a big part of the economy. Think about it: when paychecks are delayed or jobs are threatened, voters often turn away from the party in power federally.
During their one and only debate (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-attorney-general-debate-jay-jones-jason-miyares-texts/), Jones didn't shy away from the issue. He offered repeated apologies for the texts, explaining them as heated moments from years ago, but he fired back by pointing out what he saw as Miyares' deeper problems—namely, his close ties to President Trump, which Jones argued made him even less suitable for the job. It's a classic political pivot: acknowledge your flaws, then redirect attention to your opponent's.
Republicans ramped up the pressure, urging Jones to withdraw from the race entirely after the scandal broke. But he stood firm, refusing to step aside. Even within his own party, there was friction—Abigail Spanberger, the Democrats' gubernatorial nominee who also triumphed that same Tuesday night, publicly criticized Jones over the messages. Yet, in a show of unity, Jones joined the Democrats' final weekend rally alongside former President Barack Obama, signaling that the party was rallying behind him despite the backlash.
But here's where it gets controversial: what exactly did those texts say? In them, Jones expressed extreme frustration, writing that he'd 'piss on the graves' of his GOP rivals and even fantasizing about a violent act against Todd Gilbert, who was the Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates at the time. For context, these kinds of statements, even if private and from three years prior, raise huge ethical questions in politics—do they reflect a person's true character, or are they just venting in the heat of partisan battles? Jones responded to CBS News back then with a full admission of responsibility, stating he was deeply sorry and owned up to his poor choice of words.
Polling had shown Jones with a lead heading into early October, based on a Washington Post survey (https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/10/03/virginia-election-poll-spanberger-earle-sears/). However, the texts resurfaced right before that poll dropped (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/virginia-attorney-general-candidate-jay-jones-faces-bipartisan-backlash-violent-inflammatory-text-messages/), shaking things up. Miyares pounced, launching ads that questioned Jones' fitness with lines like, 'Can you trust Jay Jones to protect your children?' It's a gut-punch tactic, playing on fears to sway undecided voters, and it highlights how personal attacks can dominate election narratives.
And this is the part most people miss: Miyares' own background played into the dynamics. He rode into office in 2021 on Virginia's 'red wave,' helping elect Governor Glenn Youngkin in a surprising GOP surge. As attorney general, he's been aggressive against the Biden administration, filing multiple lawsuits, but interestingly, he's only joined one against the Trump administration so far—a point Jones hammered during his primary run (https://www.vpm.org/news/2025-06-02/interview-jay-jones-attorney-general-taylor-miyares-trump-consumer-protection/). Jones promised boldly that, if elected, he'd file suits against the Trump administration 'into oblivion' starting day one, positioning himself as a fierce defender against what he sees as overreach.
Prior to the scandal dominating headlines, the race was more about policy clashes. Miyares pushed a 'tough on crime' stance, attacking Jones—who represented a district in the House of Delegates from 2018 to 2022—for supporting criminal justice reforms, like measures aimed at reducing mass incarceration and addressing systemic biases in the system. For beginners, criminal justice reform often means things like ending cash bail for minor offenses or investing in rehabilitation over punishment, which some view as softening law and order. Jones countered this in the October debate by emphasizing his commitment to civil rights and community safety. He outlined a detailed three-point public safety strategy, developed in collaboration with state and local law enforcement experts, focusing on prevention, accountability, and support services to keep neighborhoods secure without eroding protections for vulnerable groups.
In the end, Jones' victory flips the script on Virginia's political landscape, but it leaves us wondering: Does surviving a scandal like this set a dangerous precedent, forgiving inflammatory rhetoric too easily, or does it show that voters prioritize broader issues like economic stability over personal slips? What do you think—should past private messages disqualify someone from public service, or is forgiveness the real strength of democracy? Share your thoughts in the comments below; I'd love to hear if you're celebrating this win or questioning the outcome.
