MSNBC says Mark Warner will announce that he is NOT running

[karynnj]

for President. He seemed to have little support so I don't see that this changes much. (I hope it doen't help Edwards as the only Southern - unless I'm forgetting someone. (maybe Bayh - Indiana is more southern than it's geography.)

[blm]

1. I believe he's stepping aside for Hillary.

In exchange for short-list status.

[beachmom]

2. Wow -- I'm really surprised. Oh, bother --

Why the hell didn't he run for Senate? We'd have Virginia in the bag. Darn, darn, darn.

If anyone gets an article on this, please post.

[fedupinBushcountry]

3. here it is

By BOB LEWIS, Associated Press Writer
10 minutes ago

RICHMOND, Va. - Democrat Mark R. Warner, the former governor of Virginia, has decided not to run for president in 2008, Democratic officials said Thursday.

Warner scheduled a late morning news conference in Richmond to make the announcement, according to two Democratic officials who refused to be identified because they did not want to upstage Warner's announcement.

Since Warner left the governor's office in January, he has busily toured key states in the Democratic nomination process, particularly New Hampshire and Iowa. His political action committee, Alexandria-based Forward Together, has raised money for Warner's exploratory effort and for other Democratic candidates in this year's midterm elections.

The reason for Warner's announcement was not immediately known.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061012/ap_on_el_pr/warner_...

[beachmom]

4. Thanks. Lowell at Raising Kaine says "Oh my God"

http://www.raisingkaine.com

Heck, this puts these people back into play. I always assumed this was going to be a pro-Warner blog come the primaries. Now what is he going to do? Will he remember Kerry endorsing Webb before the primary?

Other possibility: run for governor in 2009. I guess that's his fall back.

[beachmom]

5. Um, Fedup -- do you have a login at Raising Kaine?

I'm being clobbered by a conservative (why the heck is HE posting there?) and a Democrat. I outed my Kerry '08 preference. Nobody in Virginia local blogs had heard that before. Your voice chiming in would help out a lot. Thanks.

P.S. -- if you don't have a login it's pretty easy. He e-mails you your password, and I believe you can comment immediately.

[fedupinBushcountry]

6. I don't have a login

and do you have a link?

[beachmom]

7. Yes, in my reply #4

it's on the front page. It's just like the old dailykos.

I do think we need to get support for Kerry on LOCAL BLOGS (which are the growth blogs these days). Thanks.

[fedupinBushcountry]

8. I'm there as Fedup

think that the playing field has been evened out. I rec'd yours.

[beachmom]

13. Thanks, Fedup!

Here is how the race is swinging out on RK:

Edwards, Clark, and Gore (but no one thinks he's going to run).

Many are depressed that Warner isn't running -- they feel now it will be Hillary.

Unfortunately, you and I were the only Kerry supporters there.

I check into RK from time to time, and I'll post here if Kerry needs defending. But it's now back to '06 where it should be. Frankly, I think Warner should have waited until AFTER the election to announce this.

[fedupinBushcountry]

17. Speaking of '06

Did you see this http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=112146&ran=207724

They are going down in the polls, so its time to attack. I have been getting Drake lying flyers in the mail paid for by the RNCC. I was thinking of mailing them back, with "we are tired of your lying smear and fear games, this family prefers truth, please take us off your mailing list immediately, we are a family of morals".

[beachmom]

24. I have received those smears in the mail, too

I also received a robo-call containing the same "raise gas taxes" smear. I think Phil Kellam has a very good shot; I'm going to volunteer for him again next week. That's all I can do, and hope that the people in our city understand they're just trying to bamboozle them.

[Democrafty]

15. I have been asking the same thing for like, a year.

I think it would have been the best thing in the world for the party, and he'd be almost a shoe-in for the Presidency if he got foreign relations experience.

But whatever.

[ProSense]

9. His statement is posted here:

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/10/warners_stateme.html#more

[whometense]

10. Atrios has a post up on this story,

here: http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_10_08_atrios_archive.html#116066288930136667

and there are some WONDERFUL comments there about Kerry:

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=atrios&comment=116066288930136667#8694221

I'm still standing by John Kerry, myself. He'd be a good match against McCain, they've thrown their worst at him, he's got deep experience, knows where bodies lie and I think has a managerial style that can get large egos in exec departments to work together. Plus I think he's a good leadership model in his deportment, and we need a bit of grace and poise for a change.
cs art is bread | 10.12.06 - 10:47 am | #

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=atrios&comment=116066288930136667#8694250

Well, a McCain v Kerry race would be interesting just for how it impacts the Swift Boat assholes alone.

McCain would be in a VERY touchy position on that score.

Personaly. I'd go for McCain's jugular and point out that McCain would't even satnd up to george W. Bush when he went after McCain's wife and child.
John Solomon | 10.12.06 - 10:51 am | #

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.php?user=atrios&comment=116066288930136667#8694310

Yep. If I were Kerry, I'd gut McCain.

Well, Kerry definitely wouldn't do that. But he'd find little openings to allow voters to see and reflect on the hypocricy. Whenever he can he does what has to be done with a smoothe, generous touch.

I think the man has world stage stature, and god does the world need that from us.
.
cs art is bread | 10.12.06 - 11:00 am | #

Well, Kerry definitely wouldn't do that. But he'd find little openings to allow voters to see and reflect on the hypocricy.

Which they'd promptly ignore in favor of slavering over Republican stand-ins who call Kerry a GAY FAGGORT (tm The Poor Man).

Don't get me wrong, he's still my boyfriend.

So Huckabee's a creep. Gotcha. What other governors out there do we have to worry about? Pataki's a joke.

A.
Athenae | Homepage | 10.12.06 - 11:06 am | #

I've been waiting for Athenae to come back to the light. If she's referring to Kerry as her boyfriend again, that's great news.

Tena -- My view on that is different. Kerry has played a different role in Congress, emphasis on investigative committees -- just what this one has lacked -- rather than legislative wheelin' and dealin'. Plus he has a strong prosecutorial background from Mass.

The crowds that turned out for him here in Ohio were amazing. Though the press didn't give him the fair coverage he deserved, his issues were all forward looking -- especially on environment, which thanks to Gore has finally begun to get the attention it deserves.

Plus, I think he can come out of the box in the primaries building on the disgraces of the 2004 campaign -- swiftboaters, vote fraud, etc., -- and all that has gone on since.

I'd like to see the man in full in a race.
cs art is bread | 10.12.06 - 11:10 am | #

Is anyone here cs art is bread?

[ProSense]

11. Cool! Thanks! n/t

[karynnj]

12. wow I stopped even looking at atrios because

they were so mean. So many comments you posted sound like we view him.

[Democrafty]

14. When JK came out it support of Lamont,

he started getting serious Atrios love, at least in the comments.

[Mass]

16. Interesting development, and fairly unexpected.

This certainly tells us what we need to know about the relative importance of blogs and columns like the Fix on Washington Post. There is a real world outside and people should remember that.

The Fix had Warner as 2nd last week, and sites like kos were seeing them as their favorite.

It will be interesting to see to whom it benefits.

[beachmom]

18. Speaking of Kos, he continues his crapola ways with this post

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/12/105511/30

He doesn't even MENTION Kerry in his post.

Here is a sub thread where somebody supports Kerry, and where I reply that Kos is immature for not mentioning Kerry in his post. Help if you can:

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/10/12/105511/30/60#c60

Another pro-Kerry thread (better than starting a new one, since it means more people will read it):

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/10/12/105511/30/332#c332

Pile on, por favor (but maybe be more polite than me)

[wisteria]

21. When things don't work the way Kos wants he starts with his crape. n/y

[WildEyedLiberal]

37. The idiot in that first subthread needs trollrated

Seriously, that one comment reads like Free Republic.

I can't troll rate, or else I would.

[beachmom]

19. ha! Sully mentions Kerry as one of the "Big Guns" of '08

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/10/warner.html

Re: Warner dropping out

I can't say I'm surprised he has dropped out. His inexperience in foreign affairs made his candidacy a non-starter, to my mind. So now we have the big guns: Gore, Clinton, Edwards, Kerry.



Hmmm . . .no mention of Clark. Is that fair or not? I really don't know.

[TayTay]

20. Kerry has money, supporters and a real will to run

That makes him a 'contendah'.

[beachmom]

22. I know! But why does a conservative like Andrew understand this

but Markos not? It's not that I want Kos to support Kerry (I actually don't), but it's just ridiculous the way he goes out of his way to ignore a MAJOR contender (or contendah, as you say). Seriously, I don't get it.

[TayTay]

25. Kos hates Kerry

Always has, always will. He tolerates Kerry when KErry does what Kos likes. But that is not support, it is mere toleration. He would not write anything positive about a Kerry '08 chance ever.

[beachmom]

28. I know, but I thought that his #1 concern would be to keep his site at #1

That means being a pundit for everyone logging on there. I guess I am expecting a certain amount of professionalism from him, but I suspect my expectations are too high.

The hatred: about Kerry pulling the link to his site after the "Screw them" remark or is it just because Kerry defeated Dean?

Weird.

[WildEyedLiberal]

38. Kos is a Republican in Democrat's clothing

And his stupid mindless neofreeper dittoheads are too dumb to realize that they jump through hoops for a Reagan Republican. Kos is a mirror image of Bush - stupid, arrogant, full of fake machismo and vapid slogans. His mind-numbing hypocrisy and abject lack of any defining principles or ideology make him no better than a Republican. You notice that he is ready and willing to throw any liberal cause under the bus so he can support any candidate that bellows the kind of ugly "fuck everyone who disagrees with me, I'm a REAL Democrat" rhetoric he so loves.

[karynnj]

23. Strange

He says Warner is out for no foreign policy experience, yet he keeps Edwards. His 1 term in the Senate clears doesn't give him experience. Clark - there seems to be some question of whether he'll run. Why, I don't know - he's been in Iowa and NH.

[beachmom]

26. I agree that Clinton, Gore and Kerry are the only ones with real

foreign policy experience. Clark is the opposite in that he has FP cred but never held political office.

On Edwards, I think Andrew is just pointing out that he did have quite a bit of support in '04, and he still has had more FP experience than Warner.

Does anybody know whether Gore is running? I have heard NOTHING to convince me he is. How long can he wait before he decides to plunge in?

[Mass]

27. Biden and Dodd do as well, as well as Richardson.

They may have other issues, but they have a lot more experience in FP than Hillary.

[beachmom]

29. I'm assuming that Hillary was involved with Bill in the WH

in matters of national security and diplomacy. If so, then she has a lot of FP experience.

Biden and Dodd don't seem to have broad appeal, or am I wrong there?

[Mass]

31. I dont think they have a broad appeal, I agree.

For Hillary, let's just say that, when a woman makes it to the WH, it will be on her qualities and not because of her husband.

I have no idea of what foreign policy experience she had previous to coming to the Senate. She may have worked on issues (in which case it was not publicized), but, if not, it does not make more sense to say that she has relevant experience than to say that Laura Bush or Nancy Reagan have experience. Yes, they have gone abroad representing their country and have made speech, but that is about all.

Obviously, Hillary is a smart woman and she has probably been more involved during her 8 years as first lady than any of the two other ones, but is it really enough. My understanding was that she was more involved in domestic affairs, but I may be wrong.

[TayTay]

30. Richardson????

I don't get the apeal of Richardson at all.

[Mass]

32. Me neither. My point is that he has experience in FP.

I really see no appeeal in him. I expect that he will end his candidacy the same way Warner did.

[blm]

33. I do - appeal for the Clintons if Hillary doesn't run - BR doesn't mind

covering up for the big guys if he has to.

Look at how he treated the 2004 election fraud issue.

[wisteria]

36. I haven't forgotten! n/t

[wisteria]

35. LOL, me either! n/t

[paulk]

39. Richardson's appeal is more about where he's from

than his positions on the issues.

There's a school of thought among certain Dem. strategists that looks toward the west (rather than the south) as the place to put the party over the top in a national election. Richardson fits this strategy quite well, if not as presidential material, then as VP. Not to mention that he's Hispanic, and would get out the Hispanic vote, not just in the west, but in other areas (Florida, for instance).

one article, among several on the topic -

http://www.westerndemocrat.com/2004/11/let_us_look_wes.html


Keep an eye on the 2006 elections - if the west continues to turn blue, then expect Richardsons's stock to go up.

[Mass]

43. The notion that you can win in the West, tough sometimes dismissed by

some, is appealing, if anything because some of the supporters of the Southern strategy think that Democrats have to stop being Democrats in order to win the South.

[wisteria]

34. I was thinking the same thing. n/t

[Mass]

40. If the reason Warner left the race was his family, he should be

congratulated for not submitting his three teen-aged kids to seeing their father only a few days a months for the next two years.

I do not know the status of the other candidates.

Obviously, Kerry and Clinton have grown-up children, as do Biden (and Gore).

Dodd has small kids, so does Edwards. Do the other candidate have kids?

[JI7]

42. Bayh has twin boys about 11 years old

i think that's kind of similar to Chelsea's age when Clinton ran.

[JI7]

41. the fact is that Warner did not come off well in his campaigning

or whatever he was doing after he left the Governor's office.

i think the reception he was getting and the people who vote in primaries he was encountering were the type that he felt he wouldn't be able to appeal to. his whole thing was that Kerry lost and therefore we need a conservative southern governor.

he didn't seem to be able to appeal to them.

another problem is that the Republicans are having an open primary for 2008 also so it limits the number of people who will cross over.

what sucks most about this is that he may have been able to beat Allen with a far better chance than Webb or anyone else. and this even without the macaca stuff. after macaca i think Warner would have been an easy win.

hopefully he runs when John Warner retires. he will get some moron votes also since they will think he is john warner or related to him.

[demdiva]

44. Has anyone successfully run for President while not in office?

I honestly can't think of one at the top of my head. I mean Edwards quit to run ...but he was in the Senate right before. And actually he wasn't "successful" anyway ....

I understand why someone would want to leave office if they are running ....obviously it would be a challenge to keep your focus on your current job, but I think it's probably harder to get your message/platform out ...

[beachmom]

45. Based on what Tay hinted at . . .

Hillary may be the only contender who still keeps her day job on the Democratic side. We shall see, though.

[Mass]

46. I am not sure - There are advantages and disadvantages being in office

while running for president.

The advantages are obvious: a platform to speak, the ability to cast votes or propose bills that reflect what you want, the fact to have Sen. or Gov. in front of your name (though Dean kept that for most of his campaign).

However, particularly for a congressman or a senator, there are also disadvantages. They are linked to the Senate or the House agenda, have to answer to questions they are not necessarily interested in, and have sometimes to make compromises with their party leaders even if they disagree or appear as a total maverick that cares more about his own agenda than the party agenda. For example, while Clark and Kerry's position on the IWR was fairly similar, it was a much easier position for Clark (or Dean for the matter) who did not have to cast a vote than for Kerry who did.

So, it is a hard choice, and, given that the person who runs has enough experience (not the case of Warner), I do not think it is an advantage or a disadvantage in itself.

[TayTay]

47. I actually don't think that Sen. Kerry will resign his seat

as a Senator now. I had heard rumors from the usual idiots, but they were counter-rumored by not-so-much idiots, and so I recant. I think that Kerry will keep that seat and not decide to run or not run again for the Senate for a year or so now. (Whew! This is better. )

[beachmom]

49. I guess the point is you can't do both in 2008

When does he have to decide legally? January 2008? Before or after the primaries?

[TayTay]

50. We shall see. No way of knowing that for a while.

Legally, the good Senator does not have to 'pull papers' in Mass until May of '08. Realistically, hmmmmm, don't know. I would expect that he could hold off on any announcement until Sept or Oct of next year. There will be a lot of pressure on him from Mass Dems who want that Senate seat to declare one way or the other. But, I'm now guessing that won't come for a while. Course, I could be wrong and usually am.

[beachmom]

53. It all comes down to how much he loves his Senate job

I know that public service is his life long passion, but I just don't see him wanting to stay in the Senate (PURE speculation on my part). I suppose it would be better if it were under Democratic control, but for the reasons Mass gives, I just think he's outgrown the job and can't show the kind of leadership he possesses there with all the "politics within the politics". What kind of growth in his career could he expect in the Senate with so many others in the higher ranking committee spots? I don't think he minds it if it is in the context of a larger vision for the country in the executive branch, but just the Senate? I don't think so.

Sept. '07 is kinda early (wasn't it not until Dec. '03 that things started moving in his direction?), but it's the decent thing to do to whoever would want to fill that seat. My prediction (for which I will probably be wrong) is that if he has ANY decent chance for '08, he will quit the Senate (provided there's a Dem gov. which it appears there will be) well ahead of the time that he must make that decision. And, if he loses, he's got a million options that probably will be more fun and fulfilling than dealing with Harry Reid and his ilk. Also, he might be offered a job in the new administration if a Dem wins in '08.

I just remember that evening in June when he had the colloquy with Warner, and you could hear his frustration -- he had passion for his cause, but it just seemed like getting stabbed in the back by Reid repeatedly is not the nicest way to live. With no presidential prospects, would staying in the Senate make sense?

[Mass]

51. i think the date is around May, but he will be pressured to decide

much earlier. There are plenty of people who want to run.

Anyway, while I was not suggesting Kerry will quit his day job in January (I think TayTay is right. He will probably decide later).

I am more ambiguous on whether he should. I think next year in the Senate will be a hard one for Democratic nominees given the number of those who want to run (Clinton, Kerry, Biden, Bayh, Dodd, Feingold, Obama). Everybody will be trying to position himself or herself as a leader in the Senate and Kerry, as the chair of the SBC does not have a natural position like Biden -SFRC -, Clinton, or Feingold as deputy whip, to get out of the flock. We know from the last two years that the Senate leadership is not very keen in giving Kerry visibility.

So I am wondering whether, tactically, he would not be better served outside of the Senate, even if I would loathe to see him quit his seat. This is probably true for Dodd as well.

[TayTay]

52. I was thinking about that too

but there are quite a few Senators who would be itching to take a whack at the Bush Admin and all it's blunders in that next session, if the Senate turns over. Byron Dorgan would have a field day and would enlist everyone, and most definitely the heavy hitters to go after the Bushies. The advantage of having Kerry do this is because he just does it so well. (For some people, it's more an artform than avocation. I think it would be a command performance to see Kerry questioning Bushies, espeically if the committee has subpoena power. Oh, yummy, just yummy. I would pay good money to see that.)

So much depends on whether or not the Senate turns over. If it does, there are a lot of reasons to stay. If it doesn't, well, then it is harder.

[beachmom]

54. Oh yeah -- I forgot about that factor

that changes my speculation above. But law of averages says the Republicans will retain their majority in the Senate -- we have to be perfect in EVERY race, and I will be very surprised if that happens.

[TayTay]

55. That is very, very true.

It would have to be a hell of a landslide for the Senate to turn over. Still, The Dems have not really had real investigative power since 1994. (They oh so briefly had the majority in 2001-2002, but they didn't rock the boat and the Bush Admin was just beginning to really lie about everything. There is just so much more to go after now.)

I am torn over this. I remember the Hector Barreto hearings in SBA from last fall. Sen. Kerry basically just picked the guy apart, limb from limb, and had him just basically agreeing with every instance Kerry cited of SBA incompetence. It was a really, really beautiful thing to watch. (Honest to God. I still have that soundbite from one pissed off Senator in which he said that the Bush Admin is basically screwing over the American people. On the record.) I would love to see that in a SFRC or even a Finance Committee hearing on something big. Can you even imagine having Condi there without the majority status to protect her. It would be one for the ages, I think. Kerry would make mincemeat of some of these morons in the Bush Admin. (Okay, I really want to see this. The more I write about it, the more I start to salivate. Not good, might not happen. But oh my Lord, that would be great....)

So much depends on what happens this fall. It is so, so critical. I do think this is Sen. Kerry's last term as Sen from MA. I see the Presidency as switching over in '08, so there could be a cabinet post in his future, if not much higher :) .

[karynnj]

48. Nixon did

though he had been vp and Presidential nominee 8 years before. This is obviously more parallel to Gore. It's far more significant than a 1 term senator