Mark Warner jumping back into 2008 Presidential Election

[Chris B]

This news item apeared yesterday in regards to this:

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/12/what_if_warners.html

Later on this appeared, suggesting this may be true:

http://politicalinsider.com/2006/12/more_on_warner.html

I'll support Mark Warner if he changes his mind and does run for President in '08. One has to wonder as to how much changing his mind would effect his chances of winning the nomination and possibly the general election?

 

[Warhammer]

Good.
I like Warner.
A good governor of my state, he was.

 

[Spider-Bite]

This sounds good to me. I hoep he runs, although I think at this stage in the game it's probably pointless for anybody besides Obama, Gore, Edwards, Clinton, to even bother trying to win the nomination.

 

[Chris B]

This sounds good to me. I hoep he runs, although I think at this stage in the game it's probably pointless for anybody besides Obama, Gore, Edwards, Clinton, to even bother trying to win the nomination.

I think the main thing that would hurt Warner, if he jumps back in, is the fact that it wouldn't be that hard for the other candidates to say that he is indecisive. If he does get back in, he'll need to explain what exactly propelled him to change his mind. Still, he follows the southern Governor strategy in the mold of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, where the Democrats have had the most success in the last 30 years.

 

[blind_fury]

My top candidates:

1. Clinton
2. Vilsack
3. Warner
4. Obama (2012)

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Pfft...Obama pretty much made him irrelevant.

 

[Matt]

Pfft...Obama pretty much made him irrelevant.

This is what annoys me about Obama. He has done nothing and yet he has this massive following. He is charming, handsome, and funny and suddenly everyone says he should be president despite the fact that he has done nothing in Senate so far. Come 2012, 2016, he might be a great choice...but right now he has no record to judge him on, unlike Warner who practically turned Virginia around. I am 100 % behind Warner.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

This is what annoys me about Obama. He has done nothing and yet he has this massive following. He is charming, handsome, and funny and suddenly everyone says he should be president despite the fact that he has done nothing in Senate so far. Come 2012, 2016, he might be a great choice...but right now he has no record to judge him on, unlike Warner who practically turned Virginia around. I am 100 % behind Warner.

He has actually accomplished some things. But all Presidents must ride their waves of popularity. You would have said the extact same things about FDR and Kennedy, who were both seen as underexperienced. But if Obama waits until 2012, 2016 for all we know he could be (and quiet possibly will be) yesterdays news...someone else who is new and young and a gogetter will have taken is spot of posterboy and he'll be relegated to his Senate seat for his entire career.

 

[blind_fury]

This is what annoys me about Obama. He has done nothing and yet he has this massive following. He is charming, handsome, and funny and suddenly everyone says he should be president despite the fact that he has done nothing in Senate so far. Come 2012, 2016, he might be a great choice...but right now he has no record to judge him on, unlike Warner who practically turned Virginia around. I am 100 % behind Warner.

If Bush can become president simply for being related to Bush Sr., then the inspirational Obama can be president as well.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

If Bush can become president simply for being related to Bush Sr., then the inspirational Obama can be president as well.

Well Bush was Governor of Texas and involved in several *failed* businesses...so he did have actual management experience...we thought.

 

[jaguarr]

Bush has run every single business venture he's ever been involved in straight into the ground...including America. I like Warner a lot and if it came down to him or Obama I'd be hard pressed to decide but Warner's got the experience. Maybe a Warner/Obama ticket with Obama on as VP would be a good bet? That'd set the stage for Obama to get some experience under his belt and move into the prime spot when Warner was done. Hmmm... At any rate, keep Hillary out of there. I don't like her politics and she's a fake.

jag

 

[Chris B]

He has actually accomplished some things. But all Presidents must ride their waves of popularity. You would have said the extact same things about FDR and Kennedy, who were both seen as underexperienced. But if Obama waits until 2012, 2016 for all we know he could be (and quiet possibly will be) yesterdays news...someone else who is new and young and a gogetter will have taken is spot of posterboy and he'll be relegated to his Senate seat for his entire career.

I don't think the FDR or JFK comparisons are really accurate. Roosevelt had served in the New York state legislature, was an Undersecretary of the Navy, and the Governor of New York for four years. Kennedy had served in Congress for 14 years. I think they were better positioned to become President then Obama currently is.

 

[jaguarr]

Bush has run every single business venture he's ever been involved in straight into the ground...including America. I like Warner a lot and if it came down to him or Obama I'd be hard pressed to decide but Warner's got the experience. Maybe a Warner/Obama ticket with Obama on as VP would be a good bet? That'd set the stage for Obama to get some experience under his belt and move into the prime spot when Warner was done. Hmmm... At any rate, keep Hillary out of there. I don't like her politics and she's a fake.

jag

I'm still liking the idea of a Warner/Obama ticket.

jag

 

[Chris B]

I'm still liking the idea of a Warner/Obama ticket.

jag

If Warner does get back in, that would be a pretty good ticket.

Personaly, I would prefer a Warner/Bayh ticket myself. Two moderate Democrats, which I feel would have the Clinton/Gore affect of '92.

 

[Spider-Bite]

If Obama waits too long, any longer than 2012 he'd have a record to defend against attacks. Kerry served 16 years in the senate and it hurt him. Times change and flexible politicains or flip floppers have to change to keep up with the times, and because of that they end up defending positions from 10 years ago that make them look bad today.

A big part of Obama's appeal is he's fresh, new, an outsider to washingtion, rather than stale, old, and boring. If he waits too long that will all change. People want change in american government, and they don't want the old experienced who have been doing things the way they have been doing. Basically in the minds of many, the old and experienced means more of the same, and they are willing to take a chance on anybody who is different from that. Obama would be wise to play up the idealist card, and talk about hope. He should be positive, and talk about the future in a good way. Usually going negative works, but in Obama's case he really should go positive, and his personality will only amplify the hopeful emotions of voters.

Obama has a lot going for him. I'm still undecided on who I want to nominate, but Obama is a serious contender, and I hope he runs. Untill a month ago I lost hope for a democrat white house in 2008, and once again Obama has inspired hope.

 

[Honey Vibe]

What is all this talk about Obama? Has it been announced he would run for president??

 

[Erundur]

^^No he hasn't.

As for warner, I liked what he did here in VA and I'd support him, I'm glad that he's back on the presidential election

 

[Chris B]

If Obama waits too long, any longer than 2012 he'd have a record to defend against attacks. Kerry served 16 years in the senate and it hurt him. Times change and flexible politicains or flip floppers have to change to keep up with the times, and because of that they end up defending positions from 10 years ago that make them look bad today.

A big part of Obama's appeal is he's fresh, new, an outsider to washingtion, rather than stale, old, and boring. If he waits too long that will all change. People want change in american government, and they don't want the old experienced who have been doing things the way they have been doing. Basically in the minds of many, the old and experienced means more of the same, and they are willing to take a chance on anybody who is different from that. Obama would be wise to play up the idealist card, and talk about hope. He should be positive, and talk about the future in a good way. Usually going negative works, but in Obama's case he really should go positive, and his personality will only amplify the hopeful emotions of voters.

Obama has a lot going for him. I'm still undecided on who I want to nominate, but Obama is a serious contender, and I hope he runs. Untill a month ago I lost hope for a democrat white house in 2008, and once again Obama has inspired hope.

The problem with Barack Obama is that he doesn't really stand for anything. He has never come out and say how exactly he would deal with the problems facing the US right now. This is something that he needs to overcome or else he is going to get killed in the primaries. Besides, I think the Democrats' chances of winning the White House in 2008 are pretty good, with or with out Barack Obama.