It's official. The former Governor of Virginia, Mark Warner, also rumored as a possible vice presidential candidate, for John Warner's Senate seat. That means Clinton, Obama or Edwards had better consider someone else as their running mate. Most importantly, it means Democrats will have a great opportunity to pick up yet another Senate seat:
Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner intends to run for the Senate next year, Democratic officials saidWednesday, assuring his party a competitive race for a seat long inRepublican hands.
Warner scheduled an e-mail announcement of his plans for Thursday. The seat is currently held by Republican Sen. John Warner, who recently said he will retire at the end of his current term after 30 years in office.
The officials who discussed former Gov. Warner's intentions did soon condition of anonymity, saying they did not want to pre-empt hisannouncement.
Virginia has recently produced a number of strong Democrats, including Jim Webb and Tim Kaine.
Republicans who might run for the seat include Jim Gilmore and Tom Davis. According to a recent , Mark Warner leads both Republicans:
Former Democratic Gov. Mark Warner leads former Republican Gov. JimGilmore (54% to 34%) and leads Republican Rep. Tom Davis (57% to 30%)in hypothetical general election match-ups for U.S. Senate.
Conservative columnist that Republicans could lose between 5 and 8 Senate seats in 2008. Imagine a Democratic presidency, and a Senate in which Democrats hold 58 seats. That means Democrats would need just two Republican votes to force cloture on anything they wanted. So much could get done!
Longtime Senator John Warner (R-VA) in the first quarter of 2007:
U.S. Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) reported Thursday that he has raisedonly $500 in campaign contributions during the first three months ofthe year, fueling speculation that he may not seek a sixth term nextyear.
It is impossible to overstate what great news this is for the Democrats. If John Warner does not run, Virginia will be wide open. Usually at this time each party is busy recruiting new candidates. This non-decision by Warner means that if he eventually does back out, the GOP will be far behind in their effort to find the best Virginia Republican to run.
There is a that former Virginia Democratic governor Mark Warner (not to be confused with John Warner) will run. He had an at one point. He is still well-liked among many Republican circles in his state. If Mark Warner ran, the Democrats might win easily.
In adding to their majority, Democrats could then afford to put Joe Lieberman on mute, even if he threatens to leave the party.
Former Virginia Governor Mark Warner announced today that he :
"I want to have a real life," he said.
Warner scheduled a late morning news conference in Richmond to makethe announcement. In a written statement, he said he made the decisionafter celebrating his father's 81st birthday and taking his oldestdaughter, Madison, on a college tour.
"I know these moments are never going to come again," Warner said."This weekend made clear what I'd been thinking about for many weeks —that while politically this appears to be the right time for me to takethe plunge, at this point I want to have a real life.
"And while the chance may never come again, I shouldn't move forwardunless I'm willing to put everything else in my life on the backburner," he said.
Since Warner left the governor's office in January, he has busilytoured key states in the Democratic nomination process, including NewHampshire and Iowa. His political action committee, Alexandria-basedForward Together, has raised money for Warner's exploratory effort andfor other Democratic candidates in this year's midterm elections.
"This is not a choice that was made based on whether I would win orlose," Warner said in his statement. "I can say with completeconviction that 15 months out from the first nomination contests, Ifeel we would have had as good a shot to be successful as any potentialcandidate in the field."
He is quite right -- he would have had a great shot at winning the Democratic nomination. Many strategists were saying that Warner could out-duel John Edwards and fulfill the role as the anti-Clinton candidate. Others thought that Hillary Clinton and Mark Warner would split the moderate vote, allowing a more progressive candidate like Russ Feingold to get traction.
In my view, I really like Mark Warner. He is presidential material. He was among my favorites who were thinking of running. As I wrote last spring, Mark Warner might stand the best shot at beating John McCain or Rudy Giuliani -- predicting that one of the two will become the Republican nominee. So it's really disappointing to hear this. I don't think John Edwards is electable because he is too scripted and Clay Aiken-like, although a very positive individual. Hillary Clinton could win, but barely, and the nation would be divided about her for eight years. Russ Feingold is just out there sometimes. Evan Bayh doesn't excite people. Tom Vilsack is Bush-lite. Not Chris Dodd. Maybe Bill Richardson. Maybe you all know where I'm going with this.
The Democratic nomination is 's to take, if he wants it.
Last weekend I promised not to waste anymore posts before this November on the 2008 Democratic Party primaries. After all, the Iowa Caucus is a full 16 months away. Sorry, but I'm going to break that promise. The latest mischaracterization by some about Mark Warner's statements regarding tax cuts for the wealthy really needs to be set straight.
In the recent days, former Virginia Governor and likely presidential candidate about John Kerry's 2004 proposal to repeal the tax cuts on the wealthy, and many progressives immediately flipped out:
"I think the Kerry campaign missed something," Warner, who is weighinga 2008 presidential campaign, told about 50 local business leaders.
"Eventhough the Bush tax cuts only applied to the top 2 percent ofAmericans, what I think the Kerry campaign missed was that the other 98percent of Americans still aspired to get to the point in their lifewhere they could qualify for the tax cuts."
Many well-intended progressive bloggers interpreted this quote as Mark Warner being opposed to repealing the Bush tax cuts on the wealthiest 2%. Though, all you have to do is read the quote again carefully and objectively and you will find that Warner never said that. Instead, Warner was simply highlighting that John Kerry did a poor job in 2004 of explaining his proposal -- that's all!
According to many pollsters that regularly conduct focus groups, when Democrats say that they want to eliminate the tax cuts on the rich, many people all over the economic map have a negative response because one day they too want to be among the richest 2%. All Warner was doing was clarifying the opinion most progressives agree with -- that the Democrats should be winning this debate. They need to explain to taxpayers the social responsibility of contributing to the same governmental structure that keeps us safe and protects our freedoms. Also, we sometimes fail to stress hard enough that repealing the tax cuts on the wealthiest Americans will go towards balancing the budget -- leading to lower long-term interest rates and a better currency value.
Yesterday, to his critics:
"My comment was, we shouldn't [begrudge] folks' aspirations to besuccessful, but with success comes responsibility, and we've got tohave a tax code that's fair." More Warner: "The Kerry position wasright but [the] concern is, how do you make the case to the Americanpeople?" Sometimes, said Warner, Democrats "appear as anti'people-being-successful.' But with that success comes a sense ofresponsibility and fairness."
Now honestly, what was wrong with that? In my view, for once we have a Democrat who thinks with his head about how to effectively promote our progressive values to the American people and win over new voters. When I speak to my conservative friends about taxes, they say that I am promoting tax warfare. Warner realizes how Democrats come across sometimes, and wants to change that perception. That's all. If he had really said that it would be wrong to repeal the tax cuts on the top-2%, then you bet I'd raise a fuss. But he didn't say that.
And no, I am not endorsing Warner for President -- at least not as of this moment. I just get a little annoyed sometimes when some well-intended progressives have a knee-jerk reaction whenever a Democrat speaks like a centrist in front of certain audiences. This anger has got to stop in time for 2008. Remember, this is about what candidate would hold up the best in the general election, someone that knows how to talk to independents and moderate conservatives. We can't keep putting Dukakis and Kerry types out there who act like they drag around a podium with them everywhere they go. Americans don't want to be lectured to -- they want a conversation about the future, and what values are going to get us there. Barack Obama is someone else that communicates well, as does John Edwards. Warner is the new guy on the block. Like with any new guy, he's being unfairly picked on.
The latest news about Al Gore in Sunday's Washington Post was enough to make me write a roundup of the most recent buzz pertaining to the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, which is now less than 15 months away (can you believe it?):
An article in suggests that Al Gore's presidential ambitions will become clearer after the release of his new book: The Assault on Reason. Don't go nuts -- the book won't be released until next May. The columnists wrote for today that "both the subject matter and the timing of the release have an unmistakable subtext." They added, "If the book strikes a chord, it will produce new momentum for Gore tomake another bid for the White House, presumably fueled in large partby anti-Iraq-war Democrats."
On Wednesday night, "Draft Warner" supporters met in Boston to drum up support for Mark Warner's likely bid for the White House in 2008. The turnout of supporters was .
Both Democratic and Republican presidential nominees are expected to turn down all public funding in 2008. that by the time November of 2008 rolls around, each candidate will have spent $500 million.
Earlier this summer, John Edwards actually led Hillary Clinton in a poll taken of Iowa voters. Iowa and South Carolina are thought of as his two strongest states. Now, Edwards is focusing his attention on Florida. He spent some time down there yesterday -- part of an effort to get close to the big names so they will be there for him should he decide to run. Both John Kerry and Hillary Clinton are also scheduling fundraisers with the Davis Campaign.
Just in case Hillary Clinton decides not to run, Evan Bayh is setting himself up to be the perfect centrist candidate among the Democratic field in 2008. On Friday, to not be a "bunch of wimps" on security issues. By that comment, Bayh did not mean the Democrats needed to be more hawkish -- instead, he just wanted the party to spend more time touting its security credentials.
There is obviously a lot going on right now with regard to this year's midterm elections, causing me to limit the blogging that I do about my favorite political event: presidential primaries. But because it's a Saturday and the news is a lot calmer than earlier this week when , I give you the latest news from the Road to the 2008 Democratic Nomination:
has a well-written section that ranks each potential 2008 White House candidate for both parties. At the moment, Hillary Clinton leads all Democrats, followed by John Edwards, Mark Warner, Evan Bayh, and then Barack Obama in fifth. According to the online magazine's latest installment, Mark Warner will likely announce his bid for president as early as this November. This early start would allow him to get a leg up on all the other possible Democratic hopefuls. What he needs to do is establish himself as the alternative to Hillary Clinton before John Edwards can. Speaking of the New York Senator, Hillary Clinton will likely make her announcement to run in June of 2007. Bill Clinton announced his bid in August of 1991. Again, this is all speculation from The National Journal online magazine.
In the latest edition of the Washington Post Blog , columnist Chris Cillizza went into detail about Mark Warner's strange virtual interview this week. "In what was -- without question -- the strangest 'event' of the 2008presidential race to date, Warner participated in a simulated interviewat -- a Web site that offers participants the chance to wander around in a simulated world and interact with one another.Warner created an -- a 'virtual' representation of himself -- to appear in the interview.He went with a tall white man dressed in a suit, not a far stretch fromhis typical off-line wear." Interesting!
Barack Obama is understanding quite well that if he were to run for president in 2008, he will need to work on his security credentials. So it comes as no surprise that he has spent the last two weeks strengthening those credentials with trips to and, within the last day, to a .
In her that aired on Thursday, Hillary Clinton said enough to raise a few eyebrows. She said that it was about time that the U.S. had a female president, but did not say whether that would be her. When asked on the spot about her presidential ambitions, she said, "Stay tuned." Stay tuned to what?
Now that the Democratic Party has chosen Nevada to join Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina among the list of early 2008 primary destinations, potential 2008 candidates and their staffs are already schmoozing with local candidates in that state. As explains, within the last month and a half there has been a flurry of preparation among the 2008 Democratic contenders to familiarize themselves with the political terrain:
We can't find this online, but... '08 Dem hopefuls "are scrambling" toschedule appearances in NV and the NV Dem party is "hitting the gas" inan attempt to keep up with the "fast-track campaigning" of possiblecontenders. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), Ex-Sen. John Edwards (D-NC), Gov. Bill Richardson(D-NM) and Ex-VA Gov. Mark Warner are among those planning trips.Warner staff Jonathan Epstein "has already made the rounds here" andSen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) "has a trioi of staffers" working for NV candidates in the fall. Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) knows of at least "three other paid staff" in the state. Clark Co. Commission Chair Rory Reid has been contacted by Warner and Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE). Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman "has received a host of phone calls." And Dem GOV candidate Dina Titus has spoken with several candidates, including Sen. Hillary Clinton. Longtime Dem political consultant Don Hart"has been contacted by Biden and Warner."
Hotline blog adds that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) believes Nevada is a much better place to have an early primary because it is a ideal representation of mainstream America in comparison to Iowa and New Hampshire:
Reid "is not " concilliatorytoward NH. Reid: "Why should this country's future be determined by astate like Iowa where there is no diversity and a state like NewHampshire where there is no diversity and no people?"
I have never been to New Hampshire or Iowa, so I can only go on statistics. I have, however, gone to Nevada on almost a dozen occasions. Harry Reid represents a very diverse state as far as income and ethnicity. Right now, Nevada is one of the fastest growing states in the country. Keep in mind that in 2004 in the country. Nevada, therefore, might be a great place to have an early primary.
Remember back to 2004. President Bush and Dick Cheney that the Democrats favored a pre-9/11 mindset. In other words, the perception was that the Democrats were the party of the past, and the Republicans were the party embracing the 21st century security climate.
Possible 2008 Democratic hopeful Mark Warner is completely turning the tables. During , he classified the Bush doctrine of first-strike without diplomacy as a "19th century mindset":
In Sioux City, Monday night, the democrat told members of the Truman Club politics is about the future versus the past.
On the subject of Iraq, Warner says the Bush administration's"19th-century mindset" lets the U-S military act any way it wants to.But, Warner says he'd rather "unite our friends... and divide ourenemies" around the world. "I look to Washington and I don't see thosekinds of results," said Mark Warner, (D) Former Virginia Governor. "Ifwe're gonna get our country back on the right track it's gonna takeengaging all Americans... regardless of party. We're in a world atinternet speed... and I don't think we have politicians who understandthat."
I like the 19th century analogy because it relates to how the English overextended their empire, which led to a steady decline in both economic and geopolitical power.
Once every few weeks I will run through the most note-worthy political news regarding the 2008 race. With the midterms just more than two months away, we have every reason to be almost entirely focused on the fate of the Legislative Branch. But every now and then, I will preview the 2008 Democratic primary race, which is still wide open.
Here is the latest from the campaign trail:
One year ago, Senator Joe Biden (D-Delaware) said that he would test the waters to for a possible presidential run. As of this moment, it appears as though he will definitely run. He spent the last couple of weeks in Iowa. This weekend he is in South Carolina, a state where John Edwards is favored. In an that covered Biden's South Carolina trip, the Senator from Delaware was quoted saying that Edwards is a goner if he doesn't win that state. "If John loses South Carolina, he's done," Biden said. However, Biden was not trash-talking. In fact, he has a great deal of respect for Edwards. Biden said that "John is a real player" and he does "take John real seriously." According to a different article one week ago, that he and his family had a talk around Christmas of 2004, and they all signed on to the commitment. The last time Joe Biden ran for president was in 1988.
Mark Warner getting an early start on the campaigning. Yesterday that trip paid off as , a Virginia newspaper, touted his pledge to campaign in New Hampshire if the state decides to defy the DNC and move its primary to an earlier date.
Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, a Republican, is considering the idea of running for president in 2008. But an finds that Arkansans would favor both Hillary Clinton and Wesley Clark over Huckabee. Clinton got the better of Huckabee by a 49% to 36% margin. Wesley Clark received even better numbers, beating Huckabee 51% to 37%.
Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold is scheduled to .
, a Kenyan newspaper, is fantasizing about Hillary Clinton possibly choosing Barack Obama as her running mate.
According to , Evan Bayh is strengthening ties with New Hampshire Governor John Lynch and Iowa Gubernatorial candidate Chet Culver. "Bayh's fundraising gambit is the latest evidence of his innovativeapproach to courting the activists essential to the 2008 nominatingprocess," the newspaper wrote for Sunday.
More 2008 campaign news in a few weeks, or when a major story breaks.
---------------------------------------------
Other sites blogging about 2008: , , , , , The , , , , , , .
I have really been hesitating to write about this issue as of late, especially with the 2006 race coming up in the next few months. But since you are all probably getting sick and tired of reading blogs that only cover three or four issues, I like to broaden things a bit and zoom out some. I still find the 2008 race interesting. Why? It is wide open. Here is the latest buzz:
GOP strategist that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg could win in 2008 if he runs as an Independent. Then again, this story was from the sometimes erroneous site Newsmax. So read at your own risk. Still though: could you imagine a New Yorker like Bloomberg winning Ohio? I think not.
I would not be surprised if Joe Biden announces soon that he will not run for president after all. He has raised only so far, which is behind just about any other '08 Democratic potential. Plus, I don't think that he can keep up with the star power of Hillary, Warner, Edwards, Kerry, Bayh, and potentially Obama.
Mark Warner is currently sitting in a great position. He has after starting his Forward Together PAC just this year. Still, he has been one of the most generous '08 hopefuls when it comes to .
Hillary Clinton's $5.7 million that she raised in the second quarter of this year brings her . She plans to spend less than half of that on her Senate reelection bid.
Recent Comments