Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I am so glad that Mark Warner is not running

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
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:35 PM
Original message
I am so glad that Mark Warner is not running
The last thing we need in 2008 is another political lightweight in the White House.

The rah-rah Warner crowd was always more about image than substance, and instead of saying, "This is strong personality with a clear vision for the future of the country, who can lead us in cleaning up the mess left behind by the worst administration in American history," they were going on about how he had won a Red state.

Well, woop-de-do.

If the Democrats are going to win in 2008, they need someone with vision and determination. They need someone who won't flounder in trying to set a course correction. They need someone who fully appreciates that we NEED a course correction, not just kinder, gentler corporate rule. They need someone who is savvy enough not to listen to the Republican moles. They need a strong personality who doesn't give a damn what the Republicans say about him and who sets the agenda instead of reacting to the Republicans. They need someone who knows how to appeal directly to the American people to gain support for his initiatives.

What we do not need is a pretty boy who just bumbles along with business as usual, basically accepting the Republicans' framing of issues and continuing some of their programs, only in slow motion.

In other words, we don't need a Tony Blair. We need an FDR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. They need someone to open the books on BushInc. and let the chips fall
where they may.

And someone who knows that the machines get rigged and will stay on top of the DNC to make sure the election process is secured for ALL the candidates on the ballots and for the voters who want to cast their ballot for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Yes, that too
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr Rabble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
35. Never going to happen. Ever.
This would be such a a great start that it will be avoided at all costs.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #35
41. I disagree. There are some who believe in open government and sharng
documents with the public citizens.

In fact, some have even gone to court to force release of documents that most powerbrokers want hidden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. What I liked about Warner...
was that he was not in Congress and that he was from a borderline red state.

I'd like to keep all our Dems in Congress, and running someone from an easily flippable red state seems a good idea.

Of course, this is all just pure politics, not issues or policy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. As you yourself say, you're thinking game plan, not
actually governing the nation, no, LEADING the nation away from the edge of a cliff.

The people are sharply divided these days, and we need someone who is literally INSPIRING.

(If anything, I like Bayh even less.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Granted. And, there are a couple others who meet those same criteria...
For example, Wes Clark and Al Gore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. You make a good point - but how divided would the country be if they
were able to see for themselves the entire back stories to everything happening today?

I think many who supported BushInc all these years would be horrified to hear about the 30 years of protecting and facilitating the terror networks and nuclear proliferators.

Once that cat is out of the bag and documents aired, there will be no turning back for this country, and we really WILL be able to move on and correct course for the long haul.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. And we need someone who is willing to put all the skeletons on
display. I don't see inexperienced state governors as appropriate for the role.

We need someone with guts, with high intelligence paired with the ability to talk to all types of people on an easy basis, a clear vision of the future, and a willingness to let the chips fall where they may.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #7
31. What makes you think Warner wouldn't?
with the right team behind him, he could accomplish that, I fail to see what he has or hasn't done to make you think otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Would he do it if he had the wrong team behind him, i.e.
the usual gang of Beltway figures whose major concerns are 1) How will it look in the polls? and 2) Will the Republicans criticize us?

Would he buck chicken-livered advisors, or would he be dependent on them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hijinx87 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. and you can't govern if you don't win.
and warner would have been a formidable candidate.

and I flatly reject the notion that a man who successfully governed a
state as large and diverse as virginia for four years is somehow less
qualified or inspiring than anyone else that has been mentioned.

he just doesn't pass some people's personal litmus test.

the man left office with approval ratings damn near into the 80's for
heaven's sake. warner is a winner. we should make him our winner.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #20
27. Four whole years? Wow.
But what's his vision for America? Seriously. What is his vision for America and where does he want to take it?

Does he want to make bold plans that reverse the depradations of the Bush era? Or does he just want to put band-aids on a few of the owies?

If the latter, then he's just an American Tony Blair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hijinx87 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #27
42. well, it's not exactly his fault . . . .

the VA governor is limited to a single term in office.

and I'm not sure any of the potential candidates have
filled out the mandatory "DU Vision Declaration Statement"
yet.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loyalsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #20
47. when does it stop?
Next we'll hear "We can't win again in '12 if we govern during the first four years."
I have heard this line about waiting until we win to stand up for Democratic values before, and it doesn't fly for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #20
57. Personal litmus test?
It's "personal" to want someone with some foreign policy and national defense creds, particularly when Bush has made it so the rest of the world would sooner set us ablaze that spit on us if we WERE on fire? I should think that, to beat the alleged "party of national security" (and, yes, I know this week, they're not, according to the polls), we would need someone with some FP gravitas. That's not "personal," that's good judgment.

Don't you want someone who, not only can lead from the position of having known what it's like to be middle class in America, but also someone who knows how to handle foreign affairs?

I don't know much about Warner's background, so he may have been middle class at one time, but I do know he didn't have much FP experience.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
8. We need Al freakin' Gore.
PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. At this point, I don't know who we do need (I'm concentrating on 2006)
but I will not vote for any pretty boys who have no vision of their own and have to rely on Beltway advisors to figure out how the federal government works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. We don't have an FDR.
This helps Edwards and Gore (if he runs).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. And why not?
Is it because the party establishment tends to support and put forward only those politicians and candidates who play along with conventional wisdom?

Is it because the corporate interests will not fund any bold thinkers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. The latter I think.
the era of 24 hour news is not condusive to helping an iconic candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. But also some of the former, from what I've seen
The Democratic bigwigs don't actually want someone who will rock the boat and ruin their cocktail parties with their golfing buddies across the aisle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #13
23. FDR did not run as FDR....if you take my meaning
FDR ran on a pretty conservative platform initially...

No one runs on a platform of that kind of profound change as it always results in defeat. FDR only became the FDR we know and respect now once he was in office...

He had the most important mark of greatness...being able to overcome his own inclinations to recognize and act upon the solutions that were best for the country...


Mark Warner, or any of the other candidates we have could end up being equally as great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. I haven't been able to google up any quick &dirty info on FDR's
1932 campaign. However, as I recall hearing from my older relatives (my mother is 85, my grandmother died a few years ago at the age of 100, and I have plenty of relatives over 70), Roosevelt indeed did not offer a set of wonkish (I'll add the smirk, so you don't have to) "far left" programs, but he did offer a credible VISION of a better America. I do recall that he said he was running for the "forgotten man." (I'll excuse him for that--it WAS 1932.)

It could well be that he won because he was the first to acknowledge that whole classes of Americans had been "forgotten" and to do so credibly. If that was his overriding vision, then the details could wait. But once he figured out the details, he had them ready to go. Remember "the first hundred days"?

What I see from too many Democratic candidates is word-heavy websites full of wonkish position papers that spell out details only legislators really need to know. On the website of the current candidate for governor (Mike Hatch) you actually have to read a whole damn paper full of historical background and to find out what he thinks about an issue.

I am sick to death of politicians who are nothing but the sum of their position papers and their much vaunted managerial ability. I'm sick to death of politicians who won't adopt a firm position unless it plays well in the polls.

Bush brought two elections close enough to steal because he was able to FAKE an image that a lot of Americans find attractive. A candidate who can project a TRUE image of understanding and caring about ordinary Americans could go a long way, if the corporate establishment Beltway pundits didn't tear him to shreds first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Well I agree with you in part...
A politician has to offer something more compelling than their stands on the issues. Although from what I hear Hatch is giving Timmy a run for his money!

FDR's 1932 platform was actually indistinguishable from Hoover's...and even through the entirety of the 1930's FDR was loath to run a deficit. He did offer hope, and he rose above his class...that is what made him great.

However, there was precious little inkling of that future greatness in his first campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PeaceProgProsp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
45. FDR was considered a lightweight when he ran.
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 03:56 PM by PeaceProgProsp
He was mediocre student in college and law school and people thought he got ahead only because of his wealth and his name. He hid from the public his polio, which was the thing that built in him the character that America saw when he fought for the common person.

America didn't know it was electing "FDR" when it elected FDR, which is, perhaps, an important lesson for people who think we need to elect the most heavyweight candidate out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #10
58. Edwards = another pretty boy with no experience.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. He was in the Senate. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Poverty is an issue, but, guess what, the Dems already win on that issue.

What does he know about the world? Other than that time he attended the Bilderberg conference and that time he voted for the Iraqi War Resolution and that time he co-wrote the Patriot Act?

:eyes:

Al Gore, I'll fully accept, except he's probably not going to run (and I say this as a Tennessean).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
72. Nonsense
You're not looking hard enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
11. I would take him over ANY puke out there...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. That's not a very high level of recommendation, is it?
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 01:31 PM by Lydia Leftcoast
Have we set our sights so low?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
29. Warner wouldn't be that terrible...
he was a good Governor for Virginia anyway, and he was very good at keeping the right wing fundies in line.

I have no complaints about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indygrl Donating Member (49 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
12. I wish Bayh would drop out
He wasn't a bad gov. but since he's been in the senate until recently he has been a 'me too' Bush man. I like Edwards but not for pres. My choice is still Wes Clark, Bill Richardson, or Hilary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. I wish Bayh would drop out, too
Don't know enough about Richardson, and if Hillary runs, we may as well just throw the Republicanites' victory party for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TygrBright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #14
56. Richardson has charisma in gobs...
...and we could do a lot worse.

Charisma... ay, yi-yi! He's got the Clinton thing DOWN. Walks into a room, instant center of attention. People want to be around him. When he's talking to you, he's LISTENING, and you're the only person that matters. Plus, he's just so damn' cute... looks like someone's good-natured uncle, with the unassuming charm of a jolly taco vendor. Without for an instant seeming undignified or awkward or unsophisticated. Smart without being offputtingly wonky or pencil-neck geek or elitist.

He's got way better foreign policy chops than most Goobers, since he spent a term as Clinton's UN Ambassador. He's a good negotiator, good diplomat, and believes in the value of talking and listening BEFORE acting. (Whoa! What a concept, eh?)

He's done very well as Goober in a state with a diverse population and many strands of us-vs-themness. A poor state that until recently was pretty much a two-industry enclave (military and tourism) without any real economic base. A state with real challenges facing its education system (bilingual population, inadequate and aging infrastructure, terrible teacher shortage.) He's made solid steps in getting a robust economic base started (high tech, sustainable energy, and entertainment,) and made some real solid improvements in the education system.

He's one of the few who can speak authoritatively on immigration issues without sounding like a zealot or bullshit artist, and he is an excellent public speaker in general. In domestic policy he's more centrist than I like (gung-ho on globalization of the economy, for one thing,) and pretty DLC in many of his economic positions. OTOH, he's a very solid environmentalist. On labor he's mixed, mostly good.

As I said, we could do worse.

With all that in mind, he's got downsides. He's definitely a Good Ol' Boy, relies on Business As Usual in politics to get things done expediently. Cozier than I'd like to see with some big business interests. Definitely a grandstander and a self-inflator, can certainly be tarred with the "will say anything his audience wants to hear" brush. On rare occasions, he shoots off his mouth without thinking, and sometimes, it's a doozy. That would all likely come back to haunt him. And of course, he's BROWN (his mother was Mexican,) which would send the bubba vote shrieking for Pat Buchanan's apron strings, for what THAT'S worth (not much, by me, but then I'm not responsible for pulling out a Presidential victory for the Party.)

On a "liberalism" scale of 1-10, with Lieberman being a 1 and Chomsky a 10, he's probably not much better than a 6.

That's the skinny on my Goob. I like him, but I'm ambivalent about whether I'd want him to be Prexy.

helpfully,
Bright
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #56
59. Richardson has charisma?
I'm sorry, I don't see that.

He's sort of, well, "blobby," in my opinion. Cute? I guess to each his own - I'll foot you that - but I'm pretty much guaranteeing that most people wouldn't agree with you on the "cute" part. I mean, I can't stand Edwards, but I can see why people might think he's cute.

I'm sure Richardson is a fine Democrat and a great governor, but I don't get the charisma part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TygrBright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #59
65. Watch him work a room, sometime...
...it's amazing. People just light up as he approaches. I don't really get it, either, but then I was pretty immune to the Clinton thing as well.

And he has dimples. I don't mean "cute" in the sense of "hunky." I mean "cute" in the sense of "golden retriever puppy." Killer grin. He may look dumpy on TV, physically, but in person he's just a big guy. He rides and fishes and does all that he-manly stuff, too. In decent shape physically.

As to fine Democrat, well... he's OK as a Democrat. "Fine" might be going a tad far. He's definitely a GOOD Governor, for New Mexico at least. Greatness is something history has to judge.

equably,
Bright
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jai4WKC08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #65
71. Working a room doesn't mean a damn
Outside of NM, 99% of the voters will never meet him in person, and 90% will never know anyone who ever met him in person.

Richardson comes across as dumpy and winkish on TV, and that's how the voters will see him.

No wait... that's the BEST that the voters will see. They'll see far worse from the GOP slime machine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
18. Mark Warner was an incredibly competent and effective Governor...
Part of what the American people are going to be looking for in 2008 is an antidote to the bumbling, childish incompetence of the current buffoons in office. Mark Warner exudes competence and intelligence. Precisely the type of person I believe the voters will be looking for.

Governing a red-state like Virginia, dealing with an overwhelmingly Republican legislature and still getting much of his agenda through, and becoming the most popular politician here hardly warrants the designation lightweight.

Had Warner made a run for the White House, not only would he have been a very strong contender for the nomination, but had he gone on to be elected, I believe he would have been a very effective President...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hijinx87 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. well spoken.

:applause:

it's obvious that the key to winning in 2008 is retaining all the blue
states while flipping just one or two (possibly southern) red states.

a former red state governor would have been a freaking home run.

have we all already forgotten the lesson we learned from bill clinton?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. Yes, I lived in VA while he was gov., he did a fine job
managed to overcome all the partisan bickering and get things done. I am sorry that he is NOT in the running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loyalsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #22
50. One question
In some southern areas, the differences between Democrats and Republicans seem to dissipate. That is true in Missouri.
Is there a huge difference between a lot Democrats and Republicans in Virginia?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
40. Governing a state and governing the country are different things
I'm not saying that Warner wouldn't make a good President, because I think that we don't know all that much about him. However, his governing of a state alone hasn't proven to me that he'd do well in the oval office. I know that you could say that I would've been saying the same about Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter, but both of those men are absolutely brilliant and had an understanding of foreign affairs that I haven't seen Mark Warner display yet. I don't doubt that Warner was a smart guy but Clinton and Carter were two of the most brilliant men that we've ever had in the oval office and this I think made up for their lack of experience in foreign affairs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. I don't think there is anything like governing the country...
The closest thing is governing a state - assuming you govern in a state where the Governor has real power (unlike Texas).

Having been a constituent of Mark Warners I have absolutely NO doubt in my mind that he would be a very quick study on foreign affairs...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrCoffee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
62. Great post. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
19. I respect him for doing what he needed to do early on.
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 01:50 PM by madfloridian
I really do. He had a pretty good amount raised overall in his PAC, a whole lot more than some others.

And there are others who are already pretty much aware they are not going to run, and they need to be forthcoming as well.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:20 PM
Response to Original message
24. Conviction and vision win votes.
I'd like to think we can find a candidate who has vision and conviction...if they have also won in a red state and look good on TV, that's a bonus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
25. I consider Warner a real thinker with plenty of intellectual heft,
and a brave soul to oppose the death penalty in a state where it has enjoyed strong support.

I attribute the rise of the Democratic Party in Virginia in significant part to Warner's efforts to build the party and inspire its operatives and volunteers.

He appeared to me to be a formidable contender for the nomination and would have received my vote over any Republican you can name except Pete McCloskey.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. But what would his vision for the country have been?
What would he have done to reverse (not just paper over) the damage done by the Bush admin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. He may actually have been a uniter...
we have to find some common ground again, we can't continue on in this divided and bitter state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. A uniter to do what, though?
One who can inspire the people to allow him to make sweeping changes that get the country back on track?

Or one who can do minor repair work because he doesn't scare the Republicans too much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. We won't know now, will we?...
at least for another 6 years!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #28
69. A fair question, one I can't answer without somehow knowing in
advance Warner's specific take on policy.

Any new president of either party is going to have to re-establish better diplomatic relations with other nations generally and our European allies especially. Bush has done a lot of damage there. I'm with you all the way on that, and can't say whether this Democrat or that Democrat would be better at it. Only to say that I'd vote for any Democrat over any Republican to undertake the process.

I have a group of 5 or 6 Democratic 08 candidates I'm more enthusiastic over than I was Warner, but thought Warner was formidable and had a true shot at the top prize. I'm kind of surprised that he's dropped out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rep the dems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
36. At this point I'm not glad.
We really have no way of knowing what kind of President Warner would be, so saying it's a good thing he's not running seems a little premature. And as many people have said, he would probably have a good chance of winning, thus guaranteeing things would at least get somewhat better after Bush leaves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
38. "bumbles along with business as usual..."
That's precisely how I see it, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
39. Hopefully, he'll run for Senator Warner's seat in 2008.....
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 03:21 PM by Rowdyboy
I'd love to see him in the senate.

A presidential run with just 1 term in a governors' chair is a bit premature. Also he could easily be re-elected governor when Kaine leaves office in 2009.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cnlst8 Donating Member (195 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #39
48. just imagine Warner (D) v. Warner (R) for senate.
providing Warner (R) doesn't retire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. It's happened before...
Mark Warner challenged John Warne rin 1996 I think...

He had bumper stickers that read...

MARKNOTJOHN


He came pretty close actually...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #49
66. I think he came surprisingly close and I really doubt John Warner will
run again. Its definitely a new day in Virginia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
44. Happy? PLEASE This is not good at all
He was exactly what the DEMS needed from a candidate. When are you people going to realize that the Hilary Clinton's and John Kerry's aren't going to win. We AREN'T going to win running some Senator with a mile long voting record that can be distored. This is not good. I was putting all my chips on Warner. I'm very disappointed in this news
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ninja Jordan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Don't want Hillary either
I'm an Edwards fan. I also like Clark and Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #44
60. You're right - we wouldn't win with a senator.
But I still would like someone with a modicum of foreign policy experience. I mean, not to put him too far down, but Warner has about the same as Bush did when he started. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #44
63. For the record, I am not happy with Kerry and I think that nominating
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 06:16 PM by Lydia Leftcoast
Hillary "More than anything I want the rich and powerful to like me" Clinton would be suicidal.

I'm looking for guts, an inner core of principles independent of what big business wants, a willingness to fight for those principles, and the ability to communicate that integrity to the voters.

It has nothing to do with being a senator. It has everything to do with not looking like a typical pol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #63
68. I completely agree
and I don't know who yet. I haven't seen a non-corporate Democrat throw their hat in the race yet. Edwards seems to be a potential, other than him I can't think of one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
51. "The last thing we need in 2008 is another political lightweight"
John Edwards, anyone?

How about running another Senator? Maybe, if the party gets really imaginative, we can even get two Senators on the ticket again.

Image, not ability or vision, is what the American people are going to buy; otherwise, Dennis Kucinich would be President. Instead, we'll get a milky safe counterfeit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #51
53. Only ONE Reason Gore and Kerry aren't in office - DNC failing to secure
Edited on Thu Oct-12-06 04:51 PM by blm
the election process on the state level where the votes are counted, which meant they were overseeing the collapse of the Dem party infrastructure in crucial states all over the country since 1997.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #51
64. When people actually got to hear Dennis, they liked him
I'm tired of explaining how he was marginalized, but believe me, he was, the last straw being when the DNC had him speak to the convention just BEFORE national TV coverage started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Count Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
52. Hear, hear! Another media made candidate...
Let the wishy washy clutter thin a bit. Happy trails, Mark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
54. Did Warner rule out running for Vice President? That might be
a really good choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #54
61. I would accept that before I would his being at the top of the
ticket.

I just don't like his DNC, Bilderberg connections - but at least we wouldn't have to worry about his lack of FP experience as VP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
55. That's a relief.
Warner just didn't seem to have anything special going for him except, apparently, that he's a fairly competent governor. He's bland and inoffensive; he doesn't seem to have strong positions on much of anything; and he has no foreign policy experience. We can do a lot better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MattP Donating Member (525 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
67. Warnet
Why didn't he run against Allen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
70. This is really shallow but
I thought Warner had a whiny voice, and that it would lose him a lot of votes.
Just look at Bush getting in there- people are swayed by the most shallow of reasons.
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 Tue Sep 16th 2014, 04:45 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