I’m a Democrat and I want a Democrat to be President. Hillary Clinton is, in my opinion, unelectable in the general election. Warner was my hope to have an electable candidate. Now that he’s out, who has a chance to beat her?
Not to hijack, but —
Does it seem to anyone else that Mark Warner’s stock as a VP candidate just went up about 1000%. I will be shocked shocked I tell you if the Democratic nominee in 2008 doesn’t grab Warner as their running mate.
Cite that Mark Warner isn’t running.
If you thought Mark Warner could stop Hillary, I don’t see why you don’t think another candidate like Bill Richardson or Evan Bayh could also do it. She still has obstacles to overcome in the primaries, including her reputation and voting record.
Link? There are plenty of electable Democrats. Warner could be a very good one, but why is he the only one? Are there no other governors or senators who were once governors of moderate states left? I agree that if the Dems select another “Northeast Liberal”, then they’re probably doomed.
According to Dems4Pres.com, the rankings (including Warner) went like this:
Warner (17 share)
Russ Feingold (17 share)
John Edwards (12 share)
HRClinton (11 share)
Al Gore (8 share)
Wesley Clarke (8 share)
Barack Obama (7share)
Evan Bayh (7 share)
John Kerry (5 share)
Personally, I think that if Obama wanted to run, he’d be the leading candidate for President (from either party). But he hasn’t indicated that he wants to run. Yet.
Do you really believe this? Because I hear it said all the time, and I’m not sure I buy it. And I’m not attacking you for feeling that way - I happen to like Obama a lot myself.
But, despite the media-frenzy over him, he is a first term senator. I can see an Obama candidacy generating a Kennedy-like hype, but I can’t see him actually being able to beat (or even lead) a McCain or Guiliani ticket.
I’m for re-electing Al Gore. Gore more years!
It’s 2006. Where was Bill Clinton in 1990?
Edwards is charismatic and has little if any political baggage. I think it would be hard to “swiftboat” him and this would force the other team to run on the issues instead of the slime.
I agree. HRC has a better chance of winning in the general than does Obama. He might make an excellent VP candidate, but a one-term Senator isn’t going to cut it.
Another thing I wanted to say about Warner —
I think it’s a withdrawal that (as I already mentioned) positioned him as a strong VP candidate. But, realistically, he was going to have a tough time getting through the primary for three reasons:
(1) Hillary is just a strong candidate - and she’s going to run a strong primary campaign. Lots of money, lots of energy, and lots of media exposure.
(2) The general rule in a primary is “appeal to the base.” Warner was going to have a tough time exciting those granola-crunching sandal-wearing lefties in the Democratic party. 
Especially since he’s basically a triangulating moderate. Although it’s arguable whether or not appealing to the base is the right strategy given the current political climate, at the very least it’s a stigma that Warner (as well as Richardson and Bayh) will have to overcome.
(3) The media had already positioned him badly (Howard Dean, anyone?) It was depressing to see the media blow up the Dean-balloon and then gleefully pop it. They were already working on blowing up the Warner-balloon. Basically, the bar was set ridiculously high for Warner going into the primary - anything short of total domination would have been perceived (and spun) as failure.
I think that strategically, it might have been better for Warner to get out of the way, and start figuring out which star to hitch his wagon to. Gore-Warner? Kerry-Warner? Edwards-Warner? Clinton-Warner? Richardson-Warner? Bayh-Warner? Feingold-Warner? Clarke-Warner?
I like some of those tickets.
He was charismatic two years ago, but he ended up looking like a lightweight without much real experience (one Senate term). He doesn’t have any more experience now than he did two years ago, so I’m not sure his weaknesses aren’t already out there.
I agree. I really liked Edwards last time around, but the way everything turned out didn’t help his chances for 2008.
For one, now he’s an “also ran.” I think that if the Democrats offer up the same ol’ thing that lost the last time around versus a “new” Republican ticket — someone like Guiliani, that the Democrats will lose. People will want “change” - and they’ll see that in a Republican ticket that doesn’t use the word Bush - not in a Democratic ticket that says either Kerry or Edwards (and to some extent, Gore - although I have a slightly different opinion there). I also think that the country has a feeling of having moved forward from the 2004 election and Edwards will not be able to overcome that feeling. He’s outdated - like a hair metal band, or leg stockings. Like Travolta in Saturday Night Fever.
For two, he’s a former trial lawyer - and he got outdebated by Dick Cheney. Well, honestly, I would have called it a draw/wash but I was expecting SO much more from him. I think it exposed Edwards as being, as Marley23 stated, a political “lightweight.”
Finally, I just don’t think the voters will buy that he’s the answer. To me, at least, he appears to just reflexively denounce anything done by the administration. (And that’s not all bad!) But it doesn’t make him seem as though he has any sort of alternative to offer. I guess I just feel like he lacks the experience and the creativity to (a) excite the voters and (b) make a difference if he gets elected.
Maybe this is the election where a third party candidate will finally have a decent chance at the presidency.
Thanks folks! I’ll be here all week! Try the fish.
I do think that. And this last sentence is why.
Obama doesn’t have a record yet. As a politician, every time you take a side on an issue, you align yourself with half the voters, and you cause a rift with the other half. The longer you’re in politics, the more reasons you give people to not vote for you.
Obama is a blank slate. He can decide to define his own stances on issues, rather than have his record define those issues for him. I think that’s a huge part of why governors seem to make such good Presidential candidates: they’ve been out of the national eye, so people don’t really know their stance on issues.
Personally, I don’t see there being a McCain or Giuliani ticket. Maybe Giuliani, especially as a VP, but Presidential candidates are selected by the harder-core elements of the party. And Giuliani is gonig to be hurt by the fact that he’s socially liberal (e.g., pro-choice, pro-gay marriage). I doubt McCain is ever going to win the party’s nomination, since he seems to stake out the middle on most issues, and thus isn’t as appealing to harder core Republicans who tend to want their candidates to be Reagan reincarnated.
I met the man and heard him speak just before election day 2004. He’s quite the powerful communicator. He ain’t Bill Clinton but hell, who is?
I’d be tempted by an Edwards-Warner ticket except that it would be geographically unbalanced. Though if their combination of Virginia/North Carolina could deliver both states that electoral calculus would look pretty good.
As a Republican, I would put the following into my “MWA HA HA” evil laugh category:
Russ Feingold
John Edwards
HRClinton
Wesley Clarke
These go into my “Shhhhh…” category:
Barack Obama
Evan Bayh
Any non-sleazy politician? Any politician that doesn’t womanize? Any politician that actually gives speeches with content?
I agree. Feingold is too far left. Edwards I think suffers a lot of problems with lack of political experience and hasn’t really defined himself in any way, he is also someone who’s already lost as a member of one presidential ticket and I don’t think that helps things.
I think Clark was a viable candidate before his horrible performance in 2004. I think Clinton will be a very strong candidate in the primaries and a very weak candidate in the general election.
I sort of agree with this. Obama and Warner were the only two Democrats that were in the field that I would vote for, as a Republican who does vote Democratic from time to time.
I don’t have that much faith in America, though. I think there’s enough bigots left that Obama’s skin is going to be a major impediment to him being elected President.
I’d love to see Feingold run.