Mark Warner Becomes Top 2008 Democratic Candidate for Vice-President
At his PAC website and in a letter to supporters, Warner cited the standard "non-reason" reasons of family.
Warner also wrote: "This is not a choice that was made based on whether I would win or lose. I can say with complete conviction that—15 months out from the first nomination contests—I feel we would have had as good a shot to be successful as any potential candidate in the field."
I'm not surprised, though, by Mark Warner's decision, but respectfully disagree with his sentiments that he had "as good a shot" as any candidate in the field, for these reasons:
-- Mark Warner is a relative unknown nationally in a growing field of extremely well-known candidates. And he lacks the personal charisma required to overcome his national obscurity for a viable 2008 run for the White House.
-- He has no foreign policy experience in a time when our nation desperately needs a leader deeply experienced in foreign affairs.
-- Warner has long supported the Iraq War, and even recently, refused to speak out clearly about his stance on withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. As a presidential candidate, this would undoubtedly haunt his campaign and impede his electability in 2008.
In a nutshell, this is a smart decision by a very smart guy. Mark Warner is a highly experienced political operative, and likely made this decision based on hard-and-cold facts, not the usual pol's ego.
And by dropping out early from the 2008 presidential race, Warner will say nary a negative word about other 2008 Democratic candidates for the presidency... which will land him on just about everybody's vice-presidential short list.
Mark my words: with his decision today to remove himself from the 2008 presidential race, Mark Warner made himself one of two leading candidates for the 2008 Democratic vice-presidential nomination.... along with retired Army General Wesley Clark.
Related Reading
Inside Profile of Mark Warner, Former Virginia Governor
Profile of Retired Army General Wesley Clark
Democratic Leaders Give Unprecedented Funds, Support to House & Senate Candidates
Comments
Deborah:
As you know, I always felt that Warner was the likeliest Democratic nominee in 2008.
I felt that had he selected Clark as his VP candidate, Warner would have negated concerns over his lack of foreign policy experience.
Warner had all the attributes that recent successful Democratic candidates for president have had: experience as a governor and a reputation for moderate views from a Southern state (Think Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.) Indeed, Dems have been winning with governors for a long time. (Think Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt, in addition to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.) People put a lot of stock in executive experience and Americans have rarely voted someone into the White House directly from the US Senate.
As to Warner not being well-known, neither were Carter or Clinton at this point in the cycles before their election to the presidency.
As I indicated in comments on my own blog, I think that the most effective ticket the Dems could nominate now is Bayh/Clark. http://markdaniels.blogspot.com/2006/10/more-on-warner-withdrawal-and-say.html
Good post, Deborah!
Mark
Thanks for your thoughts, Mark. I always welcome your insight. I need to learn more about Sen. Evan Bayh. A Bayh/clark ticket sounds promising.
(And folks… Mark Daniels writes one of my favorite blogs. Make the time to read it.)
I just read that Mark Warner was being considered as Obama’s VP and looked for any information about this possibility. I am going to be voting for Obama in Virginia this fall and I do love the idea of a Virginian on the ticket but I must say that Warner having been for the war cools me off on him quite a bit. I’d really like a VP candidate who was as solidly against Iraq as Obama.