Skip to comments.
Virginia's Mark Warner for President in 2008?
WMAL ^
| November 14
| AP
Posted on 11/14/2004 6:53:47 PM PST by Ligeia
Virginia's Mark Warner for President in 2008?
UNDATED (AP) - Some Democrats think their best choice to return to the White House doesn't live too far away from it.
The Washington Post reports, a growing underground and Internet movement is promoting Virginia Governor Mark Warner as a candidate for president in 2008. His name has been tossed around by major media outlets in their coverage of the just-completed election and the question of where the Democrats go from here.
Observers say Warner has succeeded in the South by supporting fiscal conservativism, gun rights, and some limits on abortion. At the same time, he convinced the state's Republican legislature to pass a one-point-five (b) billion dollar tax increase.
Warner's term expires in 2005. He says his sole responsibility right now is to Virginians.
TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: 2008; markwarner; warner2008
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 next last
Uh oh!
1
posted on
11/14/2004 6:53:48 PM PST
by
Ligeia
To: iceskater
Virginia ping!
Wouldn't it be something if the GOP nominee in 2008 is George Allen and the Dem nominee is Mark Warner??
2
posted on
11/14/2004 6:54:48 PM PST
by
Ligeia
(We showed 'em!)
To: Ligeia
He will need to get re-elected and do a good job the next 3 years and then he has a chance in the primaries.
3
posted on
11/14/2004 6:55:57 PM PST
by
nonkultur
To: Ligeia
To: Ligeia
It would make a lot of sense - so of course the 'Rats would never support him.
5
posted on
11/14/2004 6:57:39 PM PST
by
Ogie Oglethorpe
(The people have spoken...the b*stards!)
To: Ligeia
Warner was elected governor for two reasons:
1. Jim Gilmore was a very unpopular governor his last two years in office.
2. Mark Earley ran a terrible campaign, and many who are close to sensed that his heart wasn't really in it.
As far as the 'Rats go, Warner is way too moderate. The leftists in the party would never go for it.
6
posted on
11/14/2004 6:57:47 PM PST
by
wagglebee
(Memo to sKerry: the only think Bush F'ed up was your career)
To: sonsofliberty2000
He's not a Virginian. He's from Connecticut and became a multimillionaire during the telecom boom. We say he 'exaggerated' about a needing a tax increase last spring to close a budget gap and talked RINO's into going along with him.
Records now indicate a huge budget surplus.
7
posted on
11/14/2004 7:00:00 PM PST
by
Ligeia
(We showed 'em!)
To: wagglebee
It doesn't sound like Michael Moore would approve of Warner. The radicals who provide the juice for the Democrats are well past the point where they will back anyone close to the political center.
8
posted on
11/14/2004 7:01:12 PM PST
by
speedy
To: nonkultur
He is term limited to one term. Gets out of office in 2006.
9
posted on
11/14/2004 7:02:17 PM PST
by
kasparik
To: Ligeia
10
posted on
11/14/2004 7:02:19 PM PST
by
DarthVader
(Liberals = A pimple on the a$$hole of mankind!!)
To: sonsofliberty2000
Well.. I do know that he is one of the only southern governors other than the current governor of Alabama not to tick off the League of the South.
For example if (R)Sonny Perdue (ugh- gov/ Georgia) Were to run for president he would be flagged at every single freaking event he attended. Gy at least 15 people each time.
However working with the Leauge of the South, Warner has done some things to make the Leauge happy with holidays like confederate memorial day and calling for the state of illionis to return some captured confederate battle flags to Virginia (yes this is actually an issue).
So that being said he might actually have a chance of winning his home state, though I very well could be wrong however, because his abortion stance has not been very good.
11
posted on
11/14/2004 7:04:14 PM PST
by
DixieOklahoma
(Stop specter vision! Keep specter out! Just say NO to specter!)
To: kasparik
Thanks. Virginia has a one term limit?
To: nonkultur
He will need to get re-elected and do a good job the next 3 years and then he has a chance in the primaries. He certainly won't get reëlected. Virginia limits governors to one term. So next November, Virginia will elect a new governor and Warner will fade into obscurity.
13
posted on
11/14/2004 7:05:56 PM PST
by
Koblenz
(Holland: a very tolerant country. Until someone shoots you on a public street in broad daylight...)
To: nonkultur
He will need to get re-elected Then he's screwed.
14
posted on
11/14/2004 7:05:57 PM PST
by
JohnnyZ
("Thought I was having trouble with my adding. It's all right now." - Clint Eastwood)
To: kasparik
A one term governor for President? Not likely.
Besides, raising taxes will get him killed in primaries.
15
posted on
11/14/2004 7:06:06 PM PST
by
sinkspur
("It is a great day to be alive. I appreciate your gratitude." God Himself.)
To: DixieOklahoma
Interesting, thanks. I think for a Democrat to win the South is where the candidate, not the VP, must come from. My guess is that Warner has a shot.
http://www.patriot-paradox.com
To: sinkspur
Besides, raising taxes will get him killed in primaries.In the Democrat primaries? Wouldn't that be his badge of honor?
17
posted on
11/14/2004 7:07:04 PM PST
by
NeoCaveman
("I expressed myself rather forcefully, felt better after I had done it," -- VP Cheney)
To: speedy
Warner is pro death penalty. He is actually more fiscally conservative than his critics will admit. Yes he did raise taxes (though not as much as Gilmore had lowered them), but he also CUT government spending virtually across the board. And these were real cuts (as opposed to freezing budget increases), unnecessary people were laid off, road projects were shelved, DMV hours were cut back, etc. I'm no fan of Warner, but he had the guts to do stuff I've never seen Republicans do.
18
posted on
11/14/2004 7:07:35 PM PST
by
wagglebee
(Memo to sKerry: the only think Bush F'ed up was your career)
To: Ligeia
It's so obvious - there are bound to be
some successful Democratic governors in the South. That's the only kind of person the Democrats have elected to the WH since 1964, and I don't know why we would expect the field for the Democratic nomination to always be completely devoid of presidential timber - only one governor, and that a fringe candidate from Vermont - as it was this year.
The only question is whether the national Democratic Party is willing to settle for someone who isn't an obvious flaming lib like Kerry. And whether the junior senator from NY will prevent that. The Lieberman precedent doesn't augur well for an conservative contender for the Democratic nomination . . .
19
posted on
11/14/2004 7:09:42 PM PST
by
conservatism_IS_compassion
(The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
To: sinkspur
Jimmy Carter was a one-termer.
20
posted on
11/14/2004 7:09:48 PM PST
by
kasparik
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-67 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson