Larry Sabato: "Warner was maybe 'the strongest' Democratic candidate"

[Bucky]

alternate headline: Smart Guy Offers Inconsequential Analysis: flim at 11.

Analyst says Warner's decision leaves Democrats in a bind

A tragedy for the Democratic party" is how one analyst sums up Mark Warner's decision against running for president in 2008.

Larry Sabato (SA'-buh-toh) of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics believes Warner was "one of the strongest, if not the strongest" candidates the Democrats had. He thinks Virginia's former governor could have been the main challenger to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who is considered by many pundits to be the front-runner.

Warner's decision has the Democrats in a bind, the way Sabato sees it. He says that while a lot of candidates are running, few are electable come November 2008. And Sabato warns if the Democrats don't find a centrist candidate, they may watch a third straight presidential election go to the Republicans.

Sorry, Larry, no sale. In 1976 our strongest candidates were Ted Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey. In 1960 our strongest candidate was LBJ. In 1992 our strongest candidate was Mario Cuomo. Democrats never win with our supposedly stongest candidate. Warner had a nice sales pitch and looked like good candidate, but he wasn't the only game in town. What a maroon.