Mark Warner in 2008!

And so it ends.

2006-10-12T12:08:00.000-05:00

Mark Warner's bid for President in 2008, that is. Read his official statement here.

My thoughts:

* He's seen how daunting a run against Hillary has become. Also, with the recent decision by the Democratic Party to move the Nevada caucuses between Iowa and New Hampshire as well as moving up South Carolina's primary, the advantages become rather pronounced for the other prominent Southern "anti-Hillary", John Edwards. Edwards has strong union support, which could be decisive in Nevada, and he's an SC native and won the 2004 primary there. So in addition to the financial considerations, the primary calendar has become less friendly to the Governor.

* A run for an open Senate seat in 2008 looks a lot better these days, as John Warner is likely to retire.

* And there's always the possibility of becoming governor again in 2009, as Tim Kaine will have to step down thanks to Virginia's non-consecutive term limit.

I still think Warner would have made a great candidate in 2008, but he's a smart guy, and he could read the handwriting on the wall. And although the "spend more time with the family" consideration can't be discounted either, even though many a politician has used it as an excuse or a dodge. Nevertheless, either the Senate or Gubernatorial considerations above would position him to run in 2012 if Hillary or the Democratic candidate in 2008 were to go down to defeat.

As for this blog, it goes back into mothballs (where it's been for about a year anyway), and thanks again to all the readers, especially the few of you who may be checking out this post. 2006 is shaping up to be a nice year for the Democrats, and here's hoping 2008 does as well.

Blog on hiatus.

2006-02-21T18:29:00.000-05:00

I know I've been posting here with the frequency of Halley's Comet, but that's for several reasons:

1. I don't have too much to add at the moment other than to link to stories about Warner, something that anyone who clicks on the "Warner In The News" link over to the right can do for himself.

2. I'm kind of burned out on politics at the moment - I'm still following things, but I don't have the desire or energy at the moment to pontificate.

3. I've started up another blog, one more enjoyable to me right now, about independent power pop music titled Absolute Powerpop. It's been something of a hit in its first couple of weeks of existence, pulling in about 150-200 visits per day despite not showing up in Google until yesterday. I have no idea what the overlap between those reading this blog and those who have interest in power pop is beyond myself, but if you fall into this category, come on over and check it out. Believe it or not, I've been putting up 4-6 posts per day, complete with legal mp3 links and more, and I even helped "break" a band in the online power pop community.

I'm not giving up this blog for good; if something particularly newsworthy occurs regarding Gov. Warner, I might chime in, and there's a good chance I'll be active again when the primary (and pre-primary) season rolls around, assuming he officially declares (it'd be a real upset if he didn't).

I appreciate all of you who have read the blog, and are still checking it from time to time. Just under three more years to go, folks.

Warner Faces The Nation.

2005-11-13T20:35:00.000-05:00

The Governor was on CBS' Face The Nation today, and acquitted himself well. You can read a transcript of his session here (note that this is a PDF document), and see video excerpts from his appearance here (on the right of the page).

He did dodge the question of whether he would have voted for the Iraq war, a bit maddening but probably the right political move at the moment. He did make a point of advising Democrats not to re-fight why we got into the war but to instead press Bush on what he's going to do now. I don't necessarily agree with him on that point, but that is the "centrist" position. Otherwise, it was a recap of many things anyone reading this blog has likely heard before from him (the "Virginia miracle" - although he doesn't call it that, Democrats have to compete in more than 16 states, etc).

And so the grooming begins...

2005-11-10T23:31:00.000-05:00

Although the national media is paying greater attention to Warner's 2008 chances now, most of which is being reported is old hat to us Warner watchers. However, there are some interesting new bits of information coming out, and the most interesting one is this one from a Bloomberg News story (hat tip to The Note for pointing this out):

Warner has been trying to expand his network of Democratic Party and national heavyweights. In May, Democratic elder statesman Vernon Jordan took Warner to the annual Bilderberg Conference, which brings together some of Europe's and North America's leading bankers, economists and government officials. ``He did very well,'' Jordan said.

Fourteen years ago Jordan took another young southern governor to his first Bilderberg Conference. His name was Bill Clinton.

Very interesting.

Now as it turns out, this story was reported by the AP back in May when it occurred. And given the international political and economic elite that gathered, it caught the attention of those obsessed with the Free Masons, who apparently received "leaks" from the conference. Warner's name comes up here:

Jim Tucker said as much in his Bilderberg report in the American Free Press (May 23) when he wrote: "There was some informal discussion of timing for a vote in the United Nations on establishing a direct global tax by imposing a 10-cents-a-barrel levy on oil at the well-head. This is important to the Bilderberg goal of establishing the UN as a formal world government. Such a direct tax on individuals is symbolically important. Bilderberg's global tax proposal has been pending before the UN for three years but the issue has been blacked out by the Bilderberg-controlled US media."

Mark R. Warner, governor of Virginia and a first-time Bilderberg invitee, expressed concern about how much additional financial responsibility the United States would take on as a result. At this point, Jose M. Durao Barroso, president of the European Commission, expressed a view held by many within Bilderberg that the United States does not provide a fair share of economic aid to poor countries. My sources confirm Jim Tucker's report that "Kissinger and David Rockefeller, among other Americans, beamed and nodded approval."

I tell you, Googling Bilderberg takes you through the looking glass into paranoid politics on the Web - I guess it ranks up there with the dread Trilateral Commission. For what it's worth, if you want to buy into the conspiracies, perhaps this means Warner is the Chosen One.

Kaine proves Warner is able.

2005-11-09T15:42:00.000-05:00

Tim Kaine's convincing, resounding victory yesterday (do I dare say "landslide"? - after all, the Republicans were claiming Bush's 2-point win last November was a "clear mandate") has propelled the Warner-for-2008 talk into high gear. So much so that Kos' wife has come out for Warner. If you haven't read that Kos post (and the comments), make sure you do so. The comments are especially interesting, with most of the usual anti-Warner complaints (too DLC-ish, not "liberal" enough) being shot down fairly effectively. Warner will never appeal to the far left of the party, but yesterday's results have put him on the map as the clear #2 behind Hillary. Kos himself made the best point of the day:

In short, Warner gave the voters of his state a reason to vote Democratic, rather than vote against Republicans.

All of the things that we've touted about Warner are now reaching a wider (and now more receptive) audience. Warner's been on the radar of the Beltway class for quite a while now, but yesterday's vote has brought him onto the radar of rank-and-file Democrats. Let's not kid ourselves, though - he still has a long way to go to achieve the name recognition of Edwards, Clark, and others who have a national profile, but things could not be going any better for him at this moment.

ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE: I'm going to try and make an effort to start posting a bit more regularly (i.e., not every 5 months or so). However, since my last post I have a new addition to the family (a baby boy), to go with two brothers ages 6 and 3. So it's going to be hit-and-miss. But, to paraphase George H.W. Bush, Message: I'm Alive. And with the Kaine victory serving as rocket fuel to Warner's hopes, things are going to get interesting in the next couple of weeks, media and blogosphere-wise.

Amen.

2005-06-20T06:53:00.000-05:00

Every so often (for some of us more than others), we come across someone else who says something we were trying to say in a much better fashion. The point I was making in my last post (that Warner's recent comments re: the national party were disappointing, especially in a tactical sense) was made more thoughtfully in this contribution to the Draft Mark Warner mailing list by a poster named Debo, which I will reprint in full:

I'm not surprised at the reaction to MW on the MyDD posting. I myself was offended when I read his comments to the LA Times, it was poorly worded and he really shot himself in the foot with that kind of talk . He was right when he implied that you don't win over the center by being a lock step party loyalist, but I'll also add that you don't win your party's nomination by thumbing your nose at its core voters either. Remember John McCain in 2000?

Could it have been his lack of national experience or just a "tell it like it is" moment? In either case, I'd say it hurt more than it helped. Clinton supported the death penalty, welfare reform and a middle class tax cut while being pro-choice, sufficiently pro-gay rights and pro-affirmative action, a mix the party base could tolerate. He didn't even do the Sista Souljah thing until he'd wrapped up the party's nomination. The good thing for Warner is nobody is paying much attention now and maybe it will be forgotten by the fall of 2007, the bad thing his opponents in the 2008 primary will use it against him. Contrast Warner with another strong centrist like Evan Bayh, who in my view is our real opponent. Both are getting favorable press and have cross over appeal. However, Bayh who doesn't wear his "Look..I'm a Democrat too" label, hardly disses Dean or Move On either. He naturally criticizes Bush but at the same time offers friendly advice as to where his party needs to be in 2008. Will this absolutely pay off in the end? I don't know, but I'm not hearing any complaints.

Unlike the GOP, we don't hand over the nomination of our party to some establishment guy cos it happens to be his/her turn. You've got to earn it by fighting for it, something I hope is not lost on any aspiring nominee.

Debo

By the way, if you're interested in Warner's potential candidacy, and you haven't already, you should join this group on Yahoo. They're doing more to promote Warner's candidacy than this semi-regular (to put it very charitably) blog.

Oh yeah, he's running.

2005-06-10T11:29:00.000-05:00

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.

Handicapping from the Fuhrer Leader, er Union Leader

2005-06-05T20:32:00.000-05:00

New Hampshire's Union Leader has been one of the more famous (or infamous) right wing newspapers in the country, given its status as the leading newspaper in the most important primary state. Of course, its endorsements and pronouncements mean more on the Republican side, but it's always useful to see what they have to say about the Democrats as well, at least with respect to each other. The UL did some handicapping today, looking at who they think the top five are on each side. Our man made the cut, and here's what they had to say about him:

Limited to one four-year term as governor of Virginia, Warner has maintained his popularity despite running a solidly Republican state.

Strengths: Probably as close as Democrats come to having a NASCAR-dad candidate, a moderate-conservative who worked well with opposition Republicans.

Weaknesses: Limited experience and no background dealing with international affairs.

For those who don't want to read the whole article (or might feel slimy about visiting their site), Hilary, Edwards, Kerry and Evan Bayh were the other 4 Dems profiled. Allen, Frist, Giuliani, Romney and McCain were the Republican five.

ed.: Two posts in two days? Don't give these people false hope....Don't worry, after six months of inactivity, expectations have to be at a low ebb around here...ed.: This "editor" thing is just as cheesy as when Kaus does it.

Howie F speaks (and so does the author of this blog)

2005-06-03T21:55:00.000-05:00

That august keeper of the CW, and Hardball regular, Howard Fineman of Newsweek, has decided to anoint Warner as the guy to watch on the 2008 Democratic side.

Fineman sums up Warner's crossover appeal as such:

He has positioned himself as a centrist on social issues, which may be right where "country-club Republicans" are: wary of too much emphasis on gay rights or women's rights, but essentially tolerant people.

NOTE: Yes, this is the first post in 5 months or so on this blog. I reserve the right to post again in 5 months or so. Thanks to Bobby P for pointing out this article and actually giving me something to do here. There really hasn't been much to write about w/r/t Warner lately. The gubernatorial race in Virginia featuring Warner's Lt. Gov Tim Kaine this November will be an important touchstone for Warner in that a Kaine loss might be construed as a repudiation of Warner's policies and/or a lack of deep support for Warner personally. Whether this is fair or not is, of course, beside the point, but this is the closest thing to an electoral test that Warner will likely face between now and 2008, assuming he doesn't abandon a presidential bid and goes for Allen's Senate seat.

Merry Christmas!

2004-12-23T16:56:00.000-05:00

..and a Happy New Year to all of you reading this blog.

Even though Santa left coal in our stockings for another four years.

George Will touts Warner.

2004-12-19T17:04:00.000-05:00

I don't have much use for George Will, for obvious reasons, but he is a heavyweight among pundits and widely-read and syndicated. In fact, I saw this article on the op-ed page of my local paper, the St. Petersburg Times. In it, Will makes the case for Warner as someone the Democrats should look to in 2008:

An exhortation that echoed here 140 years ago -- "On to Richmond!" -- may soon be heard from Democrats wandering the country in search of a path out of the political wilderness. They will trek to Virginia's capital to take the measure of Mark Warner.

One interesting bit in the article is this critique of the Kerry campaign:

Concerning the Democrats' current fretfulness about cultural or "values" issues, Warner laments that Kerry "never broke from Democratic orthodoxy on any issue. Your base will always hold you to an orthodoxy standard."

Quite true. Kerry never did have a "Sister Souljah" moment in the campaign. It probably wouldn't have been enough anyway, but it couldn't have hurt.

"Why wait? Mark in 08!"

2004-12-09T13:03:00.000-05:00

Apologies for the lack of posting lately. Once again, I've been real busy at work, and to top things off, I just picked up an iPod, which I have been playing with (and playing) during most of my spare time.

Anyway, here's the best Warner08 article I've seen in a while, from (of all places) London's Times:

On the day before Thanksgiving a group of 70 or so unwontedly jovial and bibulous Democrats and their friends were taking part in what has become an annual event. The host was Mark Warner, the Governor of Virginia, a youthful looking 49-year-old with a smile as wide as the Potomac River. He and his friends have been gathering on this Wednesday for almost 20 years — since he started out as an entrepreneur in the cellular telephone business.

This year, for one very obvious reason, the crowd was bigger and livelier than ever before and the conversation was about only one topic. Warner is an emerging contender for the Democratic nomination in 2008. Shares in the telegenic governor were already riding high before November 2. But with Mr Kerry’s defeat, widely seen as another lesson in what happens if you nominate a northeastern liberal Democrat for the presidency, they soared.

His appeal is clear — he is a southern Democrat who holds high office, and an election winner in a part of the country that President Bush won easily last month. He has done his best to keep the lid on his supporters’ enthusiasm, but the buzz at the Palm that day was that Mr Warner is already up and running. The presence there of high-powered political operatives — including Joe Trippi, who masterminded Howard Dean’s meteor-like campaign this year — suggests that there will be no shortage of useful support if he begins a run for the White House when his governorship comes to an end in 2006. Mr Warner has money too — he is a self-made multimillionaire and is already eagerly fundraising among supporters.

Steve Brady, Mr Warner’s former business partner, captured the enthusiastic mood at the Thanksgiving party, giving a rousing speech which ended when he took off his jacket to reveal a T-shirt emblazoned: “Why Wait?” on the front and “Mark in 08” on the back.

The subhead on the article is titled "The Democrats already have a front-runner for their next attempt on the White House" and the article's emphasis on Warner implies that he's the man. While it's far too early to anoint Warner a front-runner (his national name recognition is still very low), there's no question that he's emerged as the new face to go with the usual suspects like Hillary, Wes Clark and John Edwards.

More media talk.

2004-11-29T13:08:00.001-05:00

Here's a blurb from the Washingtonian:

Until November 2, Virginia governor Mark Warner was hoping to challenge Virginia senator George Allen in 2006.

But friends of Warner’s are urging him to think bigger because of two political facts of life. The only two Democrats to win the White House since Lyndon Johnson have been Southern governors. And Warner is the only Southern governor thought to have the skills, smarts, and money to follow the Carter-Clinton model.

Don’t be surprised, Warner associates say, if Warner starts accepting early speaking engagements in Iowa and New Hampshire.

That would be a telltale sign of where he might be headed, so if any of you Virginians who see him on a daily basis get wind of such a trip, let us know!

Happy Thanksgiving.

2004-11-24T13:09:00.000-05:00

There wasn't a lot to be thankful for in this year's elections, but regardless of that outcome, most if not all of us have family and loved ones to be thankful for. And it's for them that we try to make the world a better place. And if we didn't do achive that goal at the ballot box this year, we'll damn sure do it in 2008. Happy Thanksgiving to all of you out there.

The marketplace speaks.

2004-11-23T19:48:00.000-05:00

Well, sort of. You can buy a Warner For President 2008 bumper sticker from the DemStore. As a measure of Warner's popularity, note that the only other prospective 2008 candidates for whom bumper stickers are available are Hillary, Edwards, and Wesley Clark. Here's a look at the bumper sticker:

There's also a button available, as well as a yard sign, although the example given looks like something left over from his gubernatorial run. Plus, it's a bit early to be putting up a yard sign.

Ask him to run.

2004-11-23T13:36:00.000-05:00

Chris K. had a good suggestion: those of us who want to see the Governor run in 2008 should contact him directly and urge him to do so, preferably via snail mail. Email is fine, but regular old-fashioned mail always carries more weight. Here is a letter that Chris sent, as an example:

Dear Governor Warner,

Shortly after John Kerry conceded the election, speculation began on who would succeed him as the 2008’s presidential nominee.

The Democratic name that pops up the most and the front-runner of the race is, of course, is Hillary Rodham Clinton. A Gallup poll conducted from November 7 - 10 showed that Hillary Clinton is leading the pack for the nomination, with a plurality – 25 percent - of the vote among Democrats, and if it came down to a contest between her and John Edwards, she would handily beat the North Carolina Senator 55-39%.

Nominating her in 2008 is a recipe for disaster. She's a Northeastern liberal Democratic who, just like Dukakis and Kerry, will get her ass handed to her in the general election.

First of all, a Hillary nomination would galvanize the Republican Party and bring them together like never before. Except maybe for her husband, there is no one Republicans loathe more. Her nomination would unite the party and inspire thousands of Republicans to sponsor voter-drives, organize, volunteer, and donate. They would fight like hell, orchestrating an all out right-wing offensive, doing whatever it takes to keep her out of the White House. Hillary can't win the 2008 Election.

But you can.

First of all, America has a strong record of electing governors. Four of the past five presidents all ran as successful governors, and both of the modern Democratic presidents - Clinton and Carter - were accomplished Southern governors, just like yourself. If you campaign on your centrist record of moderate policies that appeal to conservatives and liberals alike, fiscal conservatism, and your strong role as chairman of the National Governors' Association who balanced the state's books, and reached across party lines to work with the Republicans in clearing away the state's debt, you can win the Election.

You'll appeal to traditionally Democratic regions such as the Left Coast and the Northeast, as well as the moderate Midwest, and the more conservative South and Rocky regions. If you could win in a state as red as Virginia, you can win anywhere. By far, you're the most electable Democrat in the country.

I implore you to please run for the White House in 2008.

Something along these lines, perhaps also pledging support and asking the Governor to keep your name and contact information on file for future volunteer work should he decide to run would be a good idea. The Governor's contact information is:

Governor Mark R. Warner
State Capitol, 3rd Floor
Richmond, Virginia 23219

Phone: (804) 786-2211
Fax: (804) 371-6351

Let him know you have his support!

It's a sign!

2004-11-23T13:21:00.000-05:00

So here I am at lunch, making a grilled cheese sandwich, and what appears to me in the toast? I tell you, it's a sign he should run for president.

I wonder what I could get for this on eBay.

"Stay involved...stay engaged".

2004-11-21T01:26:00.000-05:00

These were Gov. Warner's words to the Virginia Democratic Party today, in a surprise visit to the state party's central committee on Saturday.

"We have to be proud; we have to be strong. . . . Never ever, ever give up," Warner said. "We do not have to take a back seat to anyone on the questions of values and faith," he added.

Amen.

#1 on Yahoo.

2004-11-21T01:07:00.000-05:00

This site is listed first if one searches "Warner for President 2008" or some variation thereof.

Unfortunately, a similar search on Google puts this site on Page 18, although the WaPo article that cited this blog is listed first.

Still, not bad for a blog that didn't exist 17 days ago. Thanks to everyone who's visited, commented and linked to this site. I hope to continue to keep this site worth visiting.

Tonight I'm Gonna Party...

2004-11-21T01:03:00.000-05:00

...like it's 1986.

Yes, it was the year we Floridians elected the legendary Bob Graham to the Senate, and it was my third year at the University of Florida College of Law, but it was also the last time the Florida Gator football team won at Doak Campbell Stadium in Tallahassee against the hated Seminoles.

Until tonight.

Only the guys at fireronzook.com wanted him gone more than me, but I'll give the man his due - tonight he did something Steve Spurrier could never do. Maybe it's not too late to register the domain name rehireronzook.com.

(Yes, this post has nothing to do with Mark Warner, but this football game tonight was the happiest I've been since the election.)

Draft Warner action on the Internet.

2004-11-19T11:17:00.000-05:00

The grassroots are growing:

* A draft Warner site has been started.

* A couple of Draft Warner groups have also started on Yahoo, for those who might be interested in joining.

If anyone has any more sightings of Warner sites or mailing lists, please let me know.

More handicapping from TNR.

2004-11-19T10:29:00.000-05:00

The New Republic today has a rundown of what they call the "second tier" of 2008 Democratic hopefuls. Warner is included in this batch, and here's what they (actually Reihan Salam) have to say:

The Virginia governor has hardly gone unnoticed (yes, we're cheating by including him on this list) but it's safe to say that he ought to be noticed more often. He's very clearly positioning himself for higher office--serving as chairman of the National Governors Association doesn't hurt--and while he's not yet in the first tier of would-be presidential candidates, he soon will be.

Best known for his rural appeal, partly a function of his willingness to conspicuously embrace conservative positions on gun rights and abortion, Warner is the first Democrat to be elected governor of Virginia since his mentor, L. Douglas Wilder, another moderate with national ambitions. After Wilder left office, his brief presidential run having fizzled, Republicans, including the very popular George Allen, dominated state politics for the next eight years.

Despite Warner's whisker-thin victory in 2001, Republicans continue to hold a firm grip on the legislature and the state's electoral votes, the increasingly leftward tilt of northern Virginia notwithstanding. Like Bredesen and Easley, Warner has been swimming against a Republican tide. Perhaps his major accomplishment was to split Virginia's Republicans down the middle, with zealous anti-tax rebels on one side, working against him, and pragmatists from infrastructure-hungry growing suburbs working with him, cooperating on various "pro-business" initiatives.

However promising Warner may seem, there are serious risks. He is, for one thing, a self-made multimillionaire with a degree from Harvard--shades of Bredesen. But when not combined with Bredesen's self-effacement, this isn't always political gold. Warner won the gubernatorial race by spending massive amounts of money against incumbent James Gilmore, who had grown catastrophically unpopular in his own party and endured a bitter Republican primary battle. Warner won with a margin far narrower than he had anticipated. This was partly attributable to the 9/11 attacks, which happened two months before the election, but also to the strength of the state GOP and Warner's own weaknesses. Just as Wesley Clark, a charismatically challenged cerebral type, was no plainspoken Eisenhower, Warner is not the second coming of Bill Clinton by a longshot. That said, he's won some tough battles and is worthy of consideration.

Overall Grade: B+
Things to Work On: *

The asterisk under things to work on correlates to a cutesy list of "areas for improvement"; in this case it means "Try growing a personality in the lab, with the aid of revolutionary advances in stem-cell research." Warner gets one of the highest grades of the group, but Salem is highest on Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen, who gets an A-, albeit with the same asterisk Warner received.

Some love from the Wall Street Journal.

2004-11-17T10:37:00.000-05:00

The Note, snarky as usual, includes the following tidbit today:

The Wall Street Journal's Gerald Seib endorses Gov. Mark Warner to lead the Democratic revival. How would one do that, you should ask?

"The first step, [Warner] says, is to get to the center on social issues — gun rights and abortion in particular — so they don't overshadow everything else."

If this isn't the high-water mark of Warner '08, we wonder what will eventually constitute that.

All I can say is stay tuned, Noters, stay tuned.

Another bleg: The WSJ online is a pay site, to which I don't have a subscription. If someone would be kind enough to Email me (flalaw@aol.com) a copy of the article, I'd like to quote from it more (I won't reprint it in full).

UPDATE: Apparently this article was WSJ's freebie of the day. The full article can be found here. It's a nice article (and it's nice to have the feature in one of top circulated papers in the country), but it doesn't tread much new ground.

Some inspirational words from Gov. Warner.

2004-11-16T18:42:00.000-05:00

From the 2003 Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Mississippi, via a post on Daily Kos:

And since then, a lot of them have asked me, Mark - Why exactly are you a Democrat?

And I just smile. Because if you have to ask, you wouldn't understand.

Amy Tuck clearly wouldn't understand.

I am a Democrat because since Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence - and since Jackson spoke for the common man - our party has never been the party of the status quo.

Instead, we have been the ones to see a challenge - and do something about it. Let's be honest - it hasn't always worked perfectly. Sometimes it has gotten us in trouble. Sometimes it has split us apart. But sometimes, those are the wages of progress.

And yet, I am a Democrat because the greatest and most noble political experiments of our time had their birth in our party.

I am a Democrat because the New Deal literally saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

I am a Democrat because a generation after a Democratic president started the Peace Corps, you can still find faded photographs of John F. Kennedy on the walls of homes from South Africa to South America.

I am a Democrat because fighting for working men and women is always the right fight.

I am a Democrat because our party led the struggle for civil rights - in the tough places like Virginia and Mississippi - and because we recognize that discrimination and bigotry are not dead - and that we must continue to seek equal opportunity for all.

I am a Democrat because despite our failures, our missteps, and our excesses - we know that waging a war on poverty does not mean fighting the individuals who are poor.

I am a Democrat because we know that today's battle is about the future versus the past - and it's time to put aside yesterday's battles of us versus them.

I am a Democrat because we know that criticizing success won't create a single job.

And most of all, I am a Democrat because when my three daughters go out into the world to make their lives, I want them to find a world where there's less hopelessness - less selfishness - and less violence.

I want them to find a world where there is more opportunity - more understanding - and more hope.

That is the mission of this party.

That is what we work for.

That is why we get up every morning.

That is why we're here tonight.

And our work is not done.

Please read the full post on Kos for more on this speech.

Go away for a few days, and you miss your 15 minutes of fame.

2004-11-16T15:37:00.000-05:00

What can I say? I've been extremely busy at work (I have my own law practice) and outside of work as well (I was away at a wedding most of this past weekend), so I haven't had time to do much with this blog in the last 5-6 days. So what do I miss? This blog being cited in a Washington Post article on Warner, and in the first graf no less:

Web surfers at a site called the Democratic Underground think Virginia Gov. Mark R. Warner should be their party's next presidential candidate. So does a guy named Steve, who has started a "Warner in 2008" Internet journal. And among political pundits and the soul-searching leadership of the Democratic Party, Warner's name keeps popping up.

This article, the best to date on Warner's prospects (and I don't say that just because I was cited), also adds this on the blog:

Another Web site, warner2008.blogspot.com, went up days after the election. The site's author, who identifies himself only as "Steve," writes enthusiastically about Warner, saying that he "sponsored a NASCAR vehicle, used a bluegrass song as his campaign theme, and managed to retain core Democratic values without alienating rural voters."

Guess I should have identified myself a little more explicitly on the site: "Florida attorney Steve Ferra" would have sounded a little more impressive than just "Steve", but nonetheless I'm flattered by the recognition. To paraphrase Lloyd Bridges in "Airplane!", it looks like I picked a bad week to start neglecting my blog.

P.S.: If anyone has a print copy of the WaPo article, please let me know - I'd love to get one. UPDATE: One's on the way. Thanks, Bob!

Ron Brownstein's on board.

2004-11-08T11:14:00.000-05:00

The LA Times' Ron Brownstein is one of the nation's foremost and influential political reporters, and in his where-do-the-Democrats-go-now column of yesterday gives our man a mention:

That imperative seems certain to raise the 2008 profile of Democrats who have won elections in regions the party needs to put back into play — such as governors Tom Vilsack of Iowa (the rural Midwest), Bill Richardson of New Mexico (the desert Southwest) and especially Mark R. Warner of Virginia (the South).(emphasis added)

Brownstein's mentioning of Warner was even noted in The Note, ABC News' uber-insider political daily. The mention of Warner by Brownstein and The Note will undoubtedly further raise his profile within what the Note likes to call the "Gang of 500", the political and journalistic elite who shape political news coverage.

They did all but mention Warner by name.

2004-11-05T13:49:00.000-05:00

John Judis and Ruy Teixiera, writing in The New Republic, had this to say in an election post-mortem:

Kerry, an aloof New Englander, operated at a distinct disadvantage among white, working-class voters. Unlike Bill Clinton, he had trouble convincing voters that he "felt their pain." In interviews conducted on the eve of the election, we asked white, working-class Bush supporters in Martinsburg, West Virginia, what they thought of Clinton. Even those who praised Bush for his "family values" said they had voted for Clinton and thought he was an "excellent president." But it wasn't Clinton's politics they preferred; it was Clinton himself, despite the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Gore had exactly the same problem with these voters in 2000. The Democrats need to find a candidate that can talk to both PhDs and tractor-trailer drivers.

If they do this, the Democrats will be able to win presidential elections. Kerry, after all, came very close to winning this time despite his inadequacy as a candidate. Democrats showed that they can hold their own in states like Colorado (where Democrat Ken Salazar was elected to the Senate), Arizona, Nevada, and Virginia. In many of these states, demography is on the Democrats' side. Colorado is going to become more like California and less like Utah or Montana, and Virginia is going to become more like New Jersey and less like South Carolina.

The Democrats need someone who "can talk to both PhDs and tractor-trailer drivers." Demography is on the Democrats' side in Virginia. Gee, I wonder who would fit the bill here?

A potentially more-appealing first lady.

2004-11-05T13:18:00.000-05:00

I don't think anyone who followed the campaign can disagree with the thought that Teresa Heinz Kerry was a net negative to the Kerry campaign. Whether it's fair or not, she was viewed as quirky, too outspoken, and exotic. She also didn't help matters either with her "real job" remarks about Laura Bush as well. It's very doubtful THK went over well in the red states or the redder swing states.

Lisa Collis, on the other hand, Gov. Warner's wife, seems to be the ideal first lady in terms of her background. She was born in Pensacola, Florida, grew up in a Navy family, went to college in Texas, and has done some impressive charitable work. She comes off as quite appealing, and would be a net plus to a Warner campaign.

Props from the Bull Moose.

2004-11-04T21:53:00.000-05:00

Marshall Wittman is one of the more respected political minds on both sides of the aisle. Wittman was former director of communications for John McCain, and worked in the Bush 41 administration, as well as for the Christian Coalition and the Heritage Foundation. But that was in a previous life. Wittman gradually became disillusioned with the right, and now has become a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute. His (relatively) new blog, The Bull Moose, has become a must read, given his perspective from both sides of the aisle. He made this reference to Warner:

As the Moose has mentioned, Democrats need a major overhaul. They cannot concede the south and expect to lay claim to the White House and Congress any time soon. Organization is fine - ideas and message are far superior. It also wouldn't hurt the donkey to get in touch with rural voters and the exurbs - Virginia Governor Mark Warner can be helpful with that.

Not quite a presidential endorsement, but an astute observation of one of Warner's strongest assets.

The Richmond Times-Dispatch weighs in.

2004-11-04T19:50:00.000-05:00

Good article here. The best quote:

Thomas J. Lehner, director of policy for the influential Business Roundtable, said Warner is among the "new faces" who could lead a Democratic comeback at the presidential level.

"When you look at the last three Democratic presidents - Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton - they were all Southerners. And Mark is in that mold: pro-death penalty, fiscal conservative, low tax, NASCAR, pro-gun ownership - the whole nine yards. In America in 2004, that's the kind of Democrat who's needed to win the red states," said Lehner, who served as chief of staff to former U.S. Sen. Charles S. Robb, D-Va.

The "pro-death penalty" part I could do without, but one has to be realistic. The perfect is the enemy of the good.

Why Warner is better than the other "usual suspects".

2004-11-04T19:07:00.000-05:00

There have already been a plethora of lists of potential 2008 Democratic candidates that have been bandied about. Here's my take on the "usual suspects":

1. Hillary Clinton. You think gay marriage mobilized the Republican base?

2. John Edwards. I like Edwards. I supported him for the nomination this year. He has the Southern appeal and is more of a gifted communicator than Warner. But he did come off as somewhat lightweight during the campaign. It seemed like the worm turned for me, at least in my perception of him, at the convention. His speech was disappointing, and his lack of experience and gravitas suddenly seemed cast into relief for me. He did nothing to make North Carolina close (Bush won by the same 56-43 margin), which tells me he'd have a hard time carrying his own state (and which also tells me he probably would have lost to Burr if he ran for re-election). And now his part on a losing ticket takes off some of the luster as well. Don't get me wrong - I probably think he's the best hope of the Democrats outside of Warner. But he's my second choice right now.

3. Barack Obama. Let's let him serve a term in the Senate first.

4. Bill Richardson. He's got the resume, and he's Hispanic, but he doesn't come across as real telegenic or appealing. He'd probably put New Mexico back in the Dem column, but it's only 4 EVs.

5. Howard Dean. Yeeeeaaaaaghhhhh! He'll make a great DNC chair. Except for Edwards, my rule of thumb here is that anyone who lost to Kerry this go-round shouldn't be nominated, so no Wesley Clark, etc.

6. Mike Easley. Dem governor of NC who won re-election this week. Easley has a similar (if not better) resume than Warner. But NC is a tougher state to flip, and Easley is pretty deficient in the charisma department.

7. Evan Bayh. I like Evan Bayh, and he holds some potential appeal. But he's a senator (I know, it shouldn't be fatal, but it is a strike against him), and Indiana is so red I wonder if he could really swing his own state. He'd solidify the midwest, but I wonder how he would play in the South. Still, I'd say he's my third choice.

I'm sure there are others...feel free to list them in the comments, so I can take a shot at shooting them down.

Welcome!

2004-11-04T11:03:00.000-05:00

This blog (the first of its kind?) is here to tout the potential 2008 presidential candidacy of Virgnia Governor Mark Warner. John Kerry put up an admirable fight this year, and he had my wholehearted support, financial and otherwise. This was not Dukakis in 1988 or Mondale in 1984. He gave as good as he got. But Kerry's problem was that he didn't have crossover appeal. He couldn't make inroads into the red states (New Hampshire really doesn't count). It was a cultural thing, and although he came close, he probably wrung out every electoral vote humanly possible for a liberal from Massachusetts.

It's no secret that the template for successful Democratic presidential candidates in the last 35+ years has been a simple one: Governor of a Southern state. Jimmy Carter did the trick in 1976, and Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996. The only route to the White House these days is either as a governor (Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush 43) or sitting VP (Bush 41) There hasn't been a senator elected since Kennedy in 1960.

And this is where Gov. Warner comes in. In 2001, Warner defied the odds in the traditional Republican stronghold of Virginia and won the governorship relatively handily. The most impressive statistic in his election is that he took 51% of the rural vote. Warner was a (very) successful venture capitalist before entering politics (a real business success, not a failed one), and he understood that he had to make a rural appeal to win. Warner sponsored a NASCAR vehicle, used a bluegrass song as his campaign theme, and managed to retain core Democratic values without alienating rural voters.

And Warner has remained very popular in Virginia, with a 61% approval rating. He even managed to win a $1.4 billion budget-balancing tax increase from a heavily Republican Legislature, which provided an unprecedented spending boost for public schools, long-deferred state employee pay raises and new money for law enforcement and colleges.

Virginia has a quirky law that prohibits a governor from running for consecutive terms, so Warner will be out of a job next year. There's a lot of talk he may run for George Allen's senate seat in 2006, but he might be better served by testing the waters for a presidential run. As long as he remains this popular, he should be able to swing Virginia's 13 electoral votes if he's nominated, there's no reason he would lose any blue states, and his rural appeal should put Iowa back in the Democrats' column as well. He also would run stronger in the South, and could potentially swing Florida, Arkansas or North Carolina.

What I hope to do in this blog is to follow any nascent Warner-For-President talk in the media and blogosphere at large, and create a place for others who might see the same potential in Warner to enjoy.