Friday, June 10, 2005

Oh yeah, he's running.

The recent days have seen sort of a Warner boomlet in the media. First, we had his appearance in California before the LA Times editorial board, in which he attempted to stake out a position as the "conservative Democratic" candidate:
Warner — who is thought to have presidential potential because of his bipartisan accomplishments as a governor in the South — said that his party's positioning on social issues had left rural and small-town voters with a "sense of some Democrats' belittling their lives, their culture and their values."

He said he experienced that sentiment during a trip to California, where he felt that some people were condescending because he came from Virginia.

" 'You little Virginia Democrat, how can you understand the great opportunities we have?' " Warner said in characterizing the attitude he encountered. "I came out saying, 'That's why America hates Democrats.' "
Warner also criticized congressional Democrats for not proposing alternatives to Bush's Social Security and Medicare proposals. On Medicare, he said
"We ought to be more about offering some solutions," he said. "We can't just say 'no.' I don't want cuts, but I do know we've got to change the way we deliver healthcare."
On Social Security, the Times noted:
Still, he said that Democrats sometimes were too wedded to defending the New Deal-era retirement program without considering how it might be improved for current conditions. "The program itself becomes sacrosanct, rather than what the goal ought to be — how do we protect folks in their senior years," he said.

Meanwhile, a story in today's Washington Post reports the following:
Virginia Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) is forming a federal political action committee and has hired a former top aide to Vice President Al Gore to advise him on national politics, the governor's top political aide in Virginia said.

The new PAC, which has not been named, will allow Warner to begin raising money for a possible run at the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 while he finishes out his term in Virginia. The PAC will be announced formally in July or August, said Mary A. "Mame" Reiley, the director of Warner's One Virginia PAC.
It's pretty obvious he's going to run.

As for the LA Times comments re: Social Security & Medicare, I'm not sure I completely agree with them. In fact, they sound dangerously close to parroting Republican talking points on the issue with respect to the "where's their plan?" criticism. What needs to be kept in mind here is that Bush has yet to propose a specific plan of his own; he's only talked in vague generalities about what he wants to do. So why should the Democrats negotiate against themselves here, especially as the issue has become a big loser for Bush.

There's a fine line between being a "New Democrat", one willing to seek progressive solutions in innovative ways and not being beholden to traditional Democratic sub-groups on the one hand, and being a Joe Lieberman crypto-Republican on the other. Warner's been dancing on that line a bit too much lately, especially with those they-made-fun-of-me-because-I'm-from-Virginia comments. And if he becomes perceived among Democrats as a Southern Lieberman, his candidacy is going to be over before it starts, because he's not going to win any primaries. I wonder if all of this is an attempt to "out-moderate" Hillary, given her recent nods to the center and the poll last week which showed her running well nationally in mock general election matchups. It's one thing to bash Kerry for not "deviating from the party orthodoxy", but it's another to badmouth Democrats in general.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I still like Warner. I'm the one who posted on the 'Fuhrer Leader' post, and although I'm still worried, his record in Virginia shows he's still a Dem on the inside. He doesn't need to outmoderate Hillary; no matter how far she swings to the center the Reps will still hate her. Warner IS a southern Lieberman, but I'm from CT and I like Lieberman. No matter what he said to the LA Times, Warner's blue on the inside. He's not a Zell Miller, and so I'm still OK w/ putting him in office.

10:58 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

I guess my point was a bit muddled in the talk of ideology, but my concern is more tactical than ideological. I know "centrism" is Warner's calling card, but he's going to have to appeal to the party's liberal base as well if he wants to win some primaries.

I realize it may be too early to worry about this, but this media rollout of the last week will be many Democrats' first impression of Warner, and if he's perceived to be too far to the right, he'll be in trouble. On the other hand, he does have to stake out a raison d'etre for his candidacy. I just wish he'd temper it with some positive words for current Democrats.

12:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think the media coverage hurt his image among Dems. As long as he makes the right stands on the issues, he'll take the primaries. Plus, if his strategy in the primaries is to sweep the South, holding the middle ground can't hurt. And once the primaries are down, the general election will be easier, becuase he won't have to preach to the choir. Liberals might not be too happy with him, but after 2000 NOBODY is voting Nader for a while.

3:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aren't Lieberman and Warner both members of the Democratic Leadership Council?

3:08 AM  
Anonymous mjhillman said...

I think everything Warner said was right on. Sure, it's going to tick off the left wing, but that's good, because he's right and they're wrong. I'm nice and liberal myself, but that doesn't mean I don't think Democrats are perceived as condescending elitists who offer no alternatives to the Republicans' miserable plans. We need to embrace the cultures and values of rural and small-town voters and explain how they are in line with our own cultures and values. We need to offer positive plans for Social Security and health care, not just criticize Bush's. I thought Warner was a politically wise choice before I read this post, but now I think he is absolutely the right man for the job.

2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Warners got a solid record to run on, along with an appealing resume. Its much better start in his position than to have the lightning rod name of Clinton.

I could see Hillary taking such a beating in the media, and from her opponents, during 07 that Warner sneaks in with first place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The same thing occured in 1987 with Al Gore pulling out all the stops against Gephardt in Iowa, then Dukakis pulled away. In the last election Dean was the recipient of heavy negative ads from Gephardt in Iowa, then Kerry became the "come back Kerry".

Hillary is the front runner, and one immense target for just about everyone.

1:58 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home