Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Mark Warner expected to announce he is NOT running in '08

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:00 AM
Original message
Mark Warner expected to announce he is NOT running in '08
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 09:04 AM by welshTerrier2

source: http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/10/12/warner_may...

Warner May Not Run

The Hotline: "Mark Warner (D) plans to make a major announcement today about his 2008 presidential bid, three Virginia Democratic sources said. According to two Virginia Democrats who have been formally briefed, Warner is expected to say that he has decided not to run for president in 2008. Warner will speak to Virginia reporters at 11:00 am ET."

Update: Political Wire has confirmed with sources close to Warner that he will not run for president in 2008.


here's a second source on this story: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/WARNER_PRESIDENT...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. That must mean the DLC feels Clinton WILL run...
and probably has the nom. sewed up for the taking.

That's just my opinion, of course.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. It will be interesting
to hear more about the backroom discussions. I also think he figured out he was going to have it rough in the blogosphere. And more and more blog news is starting to leak into big media. Maybe that factored into the decision.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #6
48. The DLC will have several candidates
Warner and H. Clinton are only 2 of them. Kerry, Biden, maybe Edwards and Clark if they think they need him, (i.e., another Dean-type candidate comes along).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. Get your facts straight.
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 02:11 PM by Pithy Cherub
Clark is not nor never was a member of the useless DLC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. Being a "member" has
nothing to do with this discussion. I'm talking about from whom they take their orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. Clark does not and has not EVER taken orders from the DLC!
Geez!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. Here is the official email from Mark Warner
Nine months ago, I left the office of Governor in Virginia. I was immensely proud of what we had accomplished. We faced historic challenges and got real results.

Upon leaving office, I committed all my time and energy to Forward Together because we need a new direction in America.

Everywhere Ive traveled, I found hope that we could turn this country around. That Americans are looking for leaders who at this moment of enormous challenge for our country can actually bring us together and get things done.

Ive heard that regardless of the depth of dismay at the direction President Bush has taken our country, rank and file Democrats are energized, and want ours to be a party of hope, not of anger.

I am especially proud of the work weve done in supporting those kinds of candidates throughout America.

We got a lot done.

Forward Together has contributed more money this year to Democratic candidates and party organizations than any other federal leadership PAC. Our effort raised over $9 million.

I headlined 86 events in 25 states to help raise or directly donate $7.3 million to Democrats this cycle.

And our work is not doneespecially at home in Virginia, where I continue to work to help Jim Webb win.

But this has also been another kind of journeyone that would lead to a decision as to whether I would seek the Democratic nomination for President.

Late last year, I said to Lisa and my girls, Lets go down this path and make a decision around Election Day.

But there were hiring decisions and people whove put their lives on hold waiting to join this effort.

So about a month ago, I told my family and people who know me best that I would make a final decision after Columbus Day weekend, which I was spending with my family. After 67 trips to 28 states and five foreign countries, I have made that decision.

I have decided not to run for President.

This past weekend, my family and I went to Connecticut to celebrate my Dads 81st birthday, and then we took my oldest daughter Madison to start looking at colleges.

I know these moments are never going to come again. This weekend made clear what Id been thinking about for many weeksthat while politically this appears to be the right time for me to take the plungeat this point, I want to have a real life.

And while the chance may never come again, I shouldnt move forward unless Im willing to put everything else in my life on the back burner.

This has been a difficult decision, but for me, its the right decision.

Its not a decision I have easily reached. I made it after a lot of discussion with my family and a few close friends, and ultimately a lot of reflection, prayer, and soul-searching.

Let me also tell you what were not the reasons for my decision.

This is not a choice that was made based on whether I would win or lose. I can say with complete conviction that15 months out from the first nomination contestsI feel we would have had as good a shot to be successful as any potential candidate in the field.

As for my family, Lisa and our three girls have always had a healthy amount of skepticism, but would have been willing to buckle down and support the effort. I love them all and appreciate their faith in me.

So whats next?

First, I know that many friends, staff and supporters who have been so generous with time, ideas, energy, and financial support will be disappointed.

My decision does not in any way diminish my desire to be active in getting our country fixed. It doesnt mean that I wont run for public office again.

I want to serve, whether in elective office or in some other way. Im still excited about the possibilities for the future.

In the short-term, I am going to do everything I can do make sure Democrats win in 2006. Its an exciting year to be a Democrat. I leave shortly to go to Iowa to support folks running for state and congressional office. Hope they are still excited to see me.

I want to thank the thousands of Americans who have donated to Forward Together, hosted me in their homes, shared their ideas, and given me encouragement.

I also want to thank all of the staff and key advisors at Forward Together who have created a great organization. If we had chosen to go forward, I know they had the skills, talent, and dedication to take us all the way.

And finally, as I have traveled the country, I have been amazed at what pent-up positive energy for change exists.

In my speeches, I always acknowledge that what disappoints me most about this administration in Washington is that with all the challenges we face . . . and the tragedies we have experienced, from 9-11 to Katrina . . . that the President has never rallied the American people to come together, to step up, to ask Americans to be part of the solution.

I think a number of our partys potential candidates understand that. I think, in fact, we have a strong field. A field of good people. I think theyre all hearing what I heard: that Americans are ready to do their part to get our country fixed. I wish them all well.

And I want to say thanks to all whove been part of this effort.




Mark Warner
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #19
28. It's a shame when people's egos get in the way....
He could have won against Allen in VA easily. He would never have gotten the nom. for POTUS.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
33. Or maybe he just didn't want to do it
Everything is not a DLC conspiracy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cascadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
44. Heaven forbid.
Don't support her, folks. Hillary's nomination would give the White House to the GOP for another four years. Think about it!


John
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
59. Yeah - I never understood how he was the "anti-Clinton."
I mean, they're both DLC - how is that opposite?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fabio Donating Member (929 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
2. Bad news
Not necessarily a Mark Warner guy, though I think he is loaded with potential. Unfortunately, I take this to mean he couldn't pass his internal vetting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
3. Then why the hell didn't he run for Senate against Allen?!
With Warner in the race, and Allen sticking his foot in the mouth, this Senate seat would have been ours EASY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Well at the time Warner was definitely going to run for POTUS
I got that info second hand but from a very reliable and connected source. He either changed his mind or he (DLC see post #1) had it changed.

Who knows?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Yeah, I figured...
it's just kinda frustrating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #3
22. Could be just what he said in his letter...
He wanted to have a real life for a while...

He can take on John Warner in 2008, or run for Governor again in 2009...

He would win either race


Might depend on how Webb does this year. If Webb wins I bet Warner goes after the Senate seat. If Webb loses, I bet Webb is the nominee for Senate again in 2008, and Warner runs for Governor again.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. wow. (eom)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
budkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
5. Man this sucks... he would have pwned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ACK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
9. That bums me out being from VA
He was a good governor balancing a mess of a budget and being well it will sound corny but he was a good man.

That might seem like much but it is. He is just a good man and its a shame he won't run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SKKY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
10. I'm way, way bummed about this...
...I already kinda had him pegged as "my guy". Please tell me the Democratic party hasn't put
all their eggs in Hilary's basket this early.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. I would say there are three others who won't back down to a Hillary run.
Kerry. Clark. Edwards. Not sure if Feingold will run or not at this point, so I'm not including him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Good, why should she be so entitled to the position without a fight?
She wants it, let her fight for it. I don't like the party anointing anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #16
30. Dems don't react to anointing the way GOPs do - they favor full debates
and most make up their mind during those debates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mudoria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #14
35. Disappointed to see him drop out
of the race. Of the ones you mentioned I don't see any that excite me in the least. Clark would get my vote if he's the choice since he's the best of the lot. If Clinton or Kerry are the nominee I'll stay home that day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. I'm an anti-corruption, open government Dem, and I see Kerry as the most
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 11:50 AM by blm
dependable representation for me and those Democrats who want the books opened on BushInc.

And THAT thrills me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
11. About Warner. Very interesting. Even with money & media he never took off
Warner was the darling of the beltway pundits for 6 months, maybe because so many of them live in Virginia that he was sort of a National favorite son candidate, who knows? I never saw a one term Governor with no experience on the national stage ever hyped this much for President so far ahead of the Primaries before. "Smart money" almost always ranked him in the top three or four contenders.

No doubt Warner was an excellent Governor and maybe he could have made an excellent President, I am only commenting on politics here, but his campaign never took off. He usually ranked in the low single digits in national polls, maxing out at 5% at best, even while he continued to be talked about as a probable Clinton alternative for the big prize. That in itself is nothing to be ashamed about, frequently candidates with relatively little national exposure don't begin their rise in the polls until after the actual race is well under way. But in Warner's case it had to be disappointing, because he poured large amounts of money into his campaign early on. Witness his notorious extravagant Yearly Kos party for one petty example, but his web site is another. To say that I am curious to hear the back story on this is beyond an under statement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. "He usually ranked in the low single digits"
How was Clinton ranking in 1990? Kerry in 2002?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. I was commenting only on the gap between the "Buzz" and the Polls
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 10:01 AM by Tom Rinaldo
I pointed out that it is not unusual for a lesser known candidate for national office to poll in that range at this point (lesser known as compared to someone who previously was on a national Democratic ticket or married to a President). But Clinton wasn't getting such constant media pundit "buzz" in 1990, he wasn't automatically ranked as a top contender by every expert with a mouth to open. Kerry was already a fairly well known national Democrat in 2002, and it wouldn't surprise me if in fact he was ranking higher than that in polls at that point, I would have to go check.

edited to add: And I did not say this was a good thing for the Democratic Party to have Warner withdraw, I said nothing negative about Warner personally in my post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. I understood your post. Some posters may be very upset by this new
development.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
12. Too bad. We need more non-senators from flippable red states
running for the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
38. That was my thought on Warner too...
I liked the fact that his running would keep all the Dems in the Senate, and also that he was from a borderline red state. I mean, what other potential candidate meets both those criteria? Wes Clark, I suppose. Maybe Al Gore. But that's about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrCoffee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
18. Balls balls balls. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWebHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
20. well I'd say the big winner in this announcement is Bayh
it seemed they both were targeting the moderate dem demographic. It surprises me, almost makes me think conspiratorialy he agreed not to run in exchange for Hillary guaranteeing she'd select him as her VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #20
36. I'm certain Mrs Clinton is far far too smart to be giving away big prizes.
At least this far from the primaries, I just don't see how she or any smart pol could be offering the biggest patronage gig they've got to a guy still in the single digits. An exit like this makes me think some pretty major obstacle presented itself to Gov Warner and he realized he'd pay dearly for throwing in his hat.

I think your Bayh theory makes sense. But our nomination fight is a little poorer for Warner's absense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #36
39. good points. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #20
45. Bayh? Oh, puh-leeze!
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 01:02 PM by Lydia Leftcoast
Another Republicanite-enabling lightweight?

I'd have voted for his dad, but he himself does not measure up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
47. Oh Goody. The Dems depending on another Senator
with a long a-s voting record to win? Terrible. We need a Governor to step up and Fast. What about Easley in NC?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Superman Returns Donating Member (804 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
21. Big winner
Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Probably Hillary. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. The rest of the field "wins".
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 10:56 AM by Tom Rinaldo
Warner was locking up a lot of Democratic campaign talent and campaign money. He also took up a lot of newsprint and media minutes devoted to the 2008 race that made it that much harder for non favored candidates to get any coverage. It does helps Edwards in the sense that it knocks out another Southerner, and to a lesser extent it helps Clark in that way also. But Kerry and Edwards were always guarenteed a lot of press coverage if they decide to run because of their high profile coming out of 2004. So in a way this is more helpful to the current second and third tier of potential candidates, folks like Clark, Biden, Feingold, Bayh and Richardson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #21
53. No doubt
true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
citizen snips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #21
60. I agree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
24. Good. One less in the field.
He never impressed me to begin with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
25. He'd be a strong VP candidate...
It's too bad he didn't want to give it a shot...but I can understand why... it's an ugly, long, expensive process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Maybe That's The Plan (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
29. Well OK........
He wasn't my cup of tea anyhow, and the more he said, the less I liked his approach to just about everything that he dared to talk about. Plus, his lack of Foreign policy and national Security experience truly would have made him a liability for Democrats at the top of any Democratic ticket (even if some would have never admitted that obvious detail). Considering that National Security will be one of THE, if not THE top issue in 2008 (since Junior has ceded Iraq to the next President), one thing Democrats Don't need is lack of experience where we could have an advantage for a change if we really want to win in 2008!

But enough about all of that....back to 2006! Let's kick some ass for a change! I've been waiting to win somethin' since year 2000, which seems like an eternity!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hijinx87 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
31. that is a severe loss.

governors are frequently successful candidates for president.
and he is a democrat that was elected to govern a red(dish)
state. if he could have flipped VA and maybe just one or two
other southern states, we would have had the white house to go
with both houses of congress in 2009.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
32. Never a fave of mine. The CW is usually wrong.
Bayh seems to be consolidating DLC support - and that is powerful on corporate money not with the boots on the ground. This is actually fighting over a shrinking piece of pie not an enlarged one. The CW in DC wants to prove they have gravitas in naming who they think are the top tier candidates. Edwards has some of the self same issues of Warner - a lack of credibility on the national security stage plus an avid aye vote for this eggregious war. He apologized years later for voting for the biggest strategic blunder this country has ever made.

So after the 2006 mid-terms we shall see. Wes Clark wants us to focus on that rather than presidential aspirants. But still the backstory will be fascinating. :popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #32
40. but...
money that the DLC has cannot be transferred to candidates. So that isn't an issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. Huh! Never said that it was to be transferred.
DLC corporate donors can give to multiple candidates or winnow it down to one or two currently leading the bull moose droppings sweepstakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
34. My sister met Warner several months ago and felt sure he WAS running
I think someone may have rattled a skel in his closet. He was rock certain to run, my sister felt, so something like this may mean that he had a swiftboatable issue in his background. That's a major shame, because he looked like a good guy. He was fairly low on my list--Clark & Gore are the top contenders for the Bucakroo Primary right now and, sadly, national security is going to probably dominate the next couple of presidential races because of the long term shits Bush is leaving on the national table--but Warner could have brought a lot of important issues and ideas forward in a national debate. I hope he continues to stick around to contribute and remains available for a hitch in somebody's cabinet in '09.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BluegrassDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #34
42. This is very suspicious
Is there something fixing to come out about him? I mean really. He was traveling all over the country just like a candidate. And now, in 2006, he pulls the plug on everything all of a sudden. I'm very suspicious. Something doesn't past the smell test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. I'm curious about the timing as well....it's not like he couldn't have
waited till after the election to tell us this. Why less than 30 days beforehand? In other words, why now? Makes no sense to me either (although, I don't have a problem with him not running)!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #43
51. Ditto, this is weird timing
I though Warner was one of the brighter choices in a rather boring group (except for Wes of course!) Kerry, yawn. Edwards, kinda yawn. The rest: forgettable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #34
49. I met him too back in June in NYC
...At a random street corner in Soho of all places!
I asked him if he was going to run for President and he said he was definately considering it." Or something to that effect.
I think we have lost our best candidate for 2008, unless if Al Gore chooses to run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #49
55. I disagree with your assessment.....that Warner was the "Best"
but then, I didn't think Warner was "the" Dem candidate that would provide us with that many advantages to win in 2008 to begin with. :shrug:

Considering that the headlines for today is that we will be fully extended into Iraq for another 4 years minimum according to BushCO....and in effect providing certainty that Iraq will be one of the many pressing "National Security" issues for 2008; Warner with his "let's not worry about how we got to Iraq", and no real strategy for how to get out.....plus his "Kerry was all wrong with his tax proposal" recent comment added to his Bildenberg and AIPAC attendance; I don't think he was really as strong just for the fact that he was a one term governor from a southern state.

What your comment does, however, is strongly underestimate our other candidates....several who were and still are a better option to a Mark Warner nominee even had he thrown his hat into the race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
46. Clinton running? Oh Boy
Say hello to another republican winning President. Warner not running is disappointing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
52. Good. We don't need milktoast in '08
Its time for someone who will bring real progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demdiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
56. I'm not a huge Mark Warner fan ...I wanted to be
because I think he did a lot of good in Virginia, but when he was on Meet the Press last January (or so) I definitely felt that he was not ready for prime time. I hate to say I'm happy to hear this but ....yeah I am....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
58. that's odd, I was in New Hampshire two weeks ago
and he was in the local paper up there talking about new voting technology to a New Hampshire audience.

Why would he be in New Hampshire in September, two years before an election, if he wasn't going to run?

Odd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 01st 2014, 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC