Mark Warner Is Out Of The Race
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Elections
And I certainly don’t blame him, especially since he’s not willing to make the necessary sacrifices that anybody who’s going to run for President need to make.
This past weekend, my family and I went to Connecticut to celebrate my Dad’s 81st birthday, and then we took my oldest daughter Madison to start looking at colleges.I know these moments are never going to come again. 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 take the plunge�at this point, I want to have a real life.
And while the chance may never come again, I shouldn’t move forward unless I’m willing to put everything else in my life on the back burner.
In my mind, Warner was the only serious contender who might have knocked Hillary off her game and captured the nomination. Now, it’s unclear who that dark horse may be.
Any thoughts? Obama possibly?
Some thoughts from analyst Larry Sabato, which mirror my own:
Professor Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia calls Warner … quote … “one of the strongest, if not the strongest, general election candidate for the Democrats in the field.”Sabato says Warner made a strong centrist candidate for Democrats in 2008, and says he would have been one of the main challengers to New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Sabato says Warner’s decision not to run leaves Democrats in a bind. He says that if they can’t find a more centrist nominee, “the country may well elect another Republican president.”
I’ve said it before, and maybe it doesn’t bear repeating, but I just don’t think Hillary is electable. Americans are tired of the political dynasties and they’re going to want new blood. That could come in the form of McCain or Giuliani on the Republican side, but who represents that on the Dem side? Richardson? Vilsack? Bayh? None of those candidates appear as if they could light a fire under the collective political imagination, but perhaps I’m wrong.
What do you think?
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 12th, 2006 and is filed under Elections. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 12th, 2006 at 12:56 pm
There’s still Wes Clark and of course, John Kerry or John Edwards. While I’m reluctant to support Kerry or Edwards, I certainly would. I like the prospect of a Clark ticket, strong military/foreign policy and he’s a beltway outsider. Doesn’t hurt that he’s a southern boy either.
October 12th, 2006 at 1:00 pm
Edwards seems to be the clear challenger to Hillary. Wes is a bit too unpolished for many Dems, but he could make a helluva VP candidate, considering the role that Cheney has played in the decisions to go to war.
October 12th, 2006 at 1:29 pm
Given Bill Clinton’s repeated references to Clark, don’t be surprised if you don’t see a Hillary and Clark ticket.
October 12th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
I’ll place a bet now that it will be a Clinton/Obama ticket in ‘08
October 12th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
Richardson may not have lit a fire yet, but he is running for re-election in NM. He can’t show his national desires too much or he could lose. (He won’t though. He’ll win with 65%)
Richardson is the best candidate on paper. Time in Congress, lots of international experience (UN ambassador), Energy Secretary and now successful governor. My money is on that dark horse.
October 12th, 2006 at 1:58 pm
How about an Al Sharpton/Ward Churchill ticket? That’s what the right wing bloggers think we all secretly want anyway.
October 12th, 2006 at 2:27 pm
One of the best things about Richardson I think is that he would be the best choice to woo hispanic voters back from the dark side…
October 12th, 2006 at 2:33 pm
Obama still strikes me as a tad too young, and I’m not sure he or the Dems are interested in anything more than a dry run this time around. With a few more years as a Senator under his belt, he could make a much stronger candidate in 2012 or 2016, but if he runs in 2008 he may risk poisoning the well for future runs.
I’m with Expat, Bill Richardson looks like the most intriguing candidate right now.
October 12th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
Warner is still viable as a VP selection. Still, this is a sad day. He had the greatest potential.
October 12th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
Richardson could make a run. So could Bob Kerrey, Tom Vilsack, Joe Biden, Evan Bayh and, of course, Clarke, Edwards, Kerry and even Al Gore.
And how about Phil Bredesen? He looks poised to win re-election as Tennessee’s governor. He could get in the mix.
Hillary may be the front-runner but I’ve heard so many say they’d rather have someone else that I wouldn’t be suprised if she ends up with a very serious challenger. Problem is, that challenger may have to run to Hillary’s left to gain traction. That would leave more moderate Dems in a quandry.
October 12th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
In recent history, neither Jimmy Carter nor Bill Clinton were nationally known until the primaries actually got underway. I don’t think that’s exactly possible to duplicate now, but it still points to the best policy for a Democratic candidate: don’t put himself (herself? any women but Hillary out there?) out as a “front-runner” until as late as possible. I like Richardson too, but I sure hope he stays off the radar for another year.
October 12th, 2006 at 7:59 pm
I have respect for Warner. He strikes me as a decent guy who always dreamed of being president since he was a kid. I bet he now realizes the world is too f*’d up to want to be president. Who in his right mind has the ambition to be the commander-in-chief during the apocalypse?
October 13th, 2006 at 1:32 am
Wow…Dhimmi actually realized that Bush has led us to the apocalypse! I’m stunned!