Vice President Warner?

May 25, 2008

Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (D) certainly looked like a top-tier presidential contender last year, and had begun taking steps towards throwing his hat in the ring. In the 11th hour, however, Warner backed off, ultimately deciding to run for Virginia’s open Senate seat.

Bu as it turns out, Warner still has a decent chance of making the Democratic ticket. Bob Novak reported today, “Former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, a strong favorite to be elected to the Senate this year, has told associates that he is being considered as Sen. Barack Obama’s vice presidential running mate. He did not indicate whether he would be receptive to such an offer.”

A Politico report on the Democratic talent in Virginia added:

Elected in 2001 with unusually high support for a Democrat in rural portions of the state, Warner left the governorship four years later with an 80 percent approval rating, making him one of the most popular governors in the commonwealth’s history.

“If the goal is to carry Virginia, the best pick would be Mark Warner,” said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

Warner’s moderate approach and unique entrepreneurial background — he earned tens of millions in the telecommunications industry — would likely appeal to swing voters and business-minded independents who have leaned Republican. And his NASCAR politics and proven ability to win rural votes could help offset Obama’s weaknesses among rural and small-town voters.

“Warner broke the code on electing a Democrat in Virginia,” said one state-based Democratic strategist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. This strategist, along with another veteran Virginia strategist who would talk only under the condition he was also not identified in the story, agreed that Warner was capable of turning Virginia for Obama.

I’ve generally been high on Warner. In fact, I lived in Virginia for several years, and saw that he was a good campaigner and a remarkably successful governor, turning around a state that had suffered after years of Republican mismanagement.

Warner wouldn’t be a perfect VP choice, but he certainly brings a lot to the table.

First, it would definitely put Virginia very much in play, and would probably make Obama the favorite in the state. Second, Warner would fit in with the whole post-partisan pitch — Warner never seemed to take ideology especially seriously, and was almost obsessed with competent, effective governing. He’s young (53), smart (Harvard Law School grad), was a huge success in government (wildly popular governor), a huge success in the private sector (helped create Nextel), and has a good balance of DC experience without being a DC insider (he used to be a staffer for Chris Dodd). All of this fits into the Obama narrative pretty well.

But there are some downsides. Warner’s background includes no experience in foreign policy or national security. The Politico added:

[A]n Obama-Warner combination would be quickly framed as the Harvard Law ticket — a pedigree that might not be an asset outside of Northern Virginia. And there’s another not insignificant problem: At the moment, Warner is running for — and is favored to win — the Senate seat to be vacated by John Warner (no relation).

“Does he solve some of Obama’s other problems? Not at all,” Sabato notes. “Warner has only had one term as governor. [Virginia is the only state that bans governors from serving two consecutive terms.] You can see it called one of the least experienced tickets of all time.”

From where I sit, neither the experience issue nor the “Harvard Law ticket” seem like too big a deal. The bigger concern for me is the fact that Warner is poised to cruise to an easy victory in Virginia’s open Senate race, turning a red seat blue. If Warner is on the Democratic ticket, there aren’t any high-profile Dems waiting in the wings to jump into a Senate campaign. As a result, the Dem goal of (perhaps) getting to 60 Senate seats would suffer a blow.

Nevertheless, given Warner’s success and popularity in Virginia, he’ll probably get serious consideration for the ticket. Something to keep an eye on.

I say “no” to the Warner VP pick just as I would to a Webb pick.

We need as many Dems in the Senate as possible. There are plenty of other good choices out there. Schweitzer of Montana would be one of my top picks, along with Wes Clark.

Also, IF Warner takes himself out of the running for VA Senator to run with Obama and the ticket goes down to defeat in November, we’ve lost a sure-bet Senator.

  • Considering the litany of knuckleheads populating the Bush administration that are Yale graduates, a Harvard-based administration would engender a sense of well-being in comparison.

    With the partisan logjam currently in the Senate, a Democratic Senator Warner from Virginia replacing the outgoing Republican Senator Warner could possibly be the better outcome for this nation than having a Vice-President Warner inheriting the man-sized safes of his predecessor.

  • Once again, Phoebes in Santa Fe, I find myself agreeing with you completely! Mark Warner needs to stay right where he is, and win that senate seat for us. His presence on the ticket will help Obama in Virginia anyway– Warner is popular enough to have “reverse coattails.”

    And, expanding on the two VP choices you mentioned (who are also my top two picks,) either one of them could help Obama in Virginia. Schweitzer is pro-gun, and knows how to talk to swing voters and get them to realize that voting Democratic is in their best interests. He is every bit as rousing an orator as Obama, but his style hews more toward no-nonsense bluntness than exaltation and uplift– or, to put it another way, Schweitzer has more of a Teddy Roosevelt style, while Obama is more of a Franklin Roosevelt.

    Clark could also help Obama in Virginia, since the state has a very large population of veterans, who would probably react favorably to a very intelligent, well-spoken military leader who never sounds as if he’s losing his marbles.

    Overall, the Obama ticket needs a VP who neutralizes one or more of McCain’s perceived advantages. Schweitzer neutralizes the “straight-talker” myth, and Clark neutralizes the military history. Either one of them would help the ticket immensely in Virginia and across the nation. Mark Warner doesn’t offer much to counter McCain’s strengths, so, send him to the senate this year.

  • Wes Clark. Lots of military and foreign policy experience. Wouldn’t it be fun to listen to his critique of McCain’s foreign policy?

  • Phoebes in Santa Fe, I find myself agreeing with you completely!

    Me too. I’m still pulling for Obama-Clark, and as much as I love Webb and Warner, I want them to lock down those Virginia Senate seats for the next few decades.

  • Any Senator or prospective Senator would be a lousy choice. Obama will need every vote there that he can get if he becomes President.

  • They’re going to hammer Obama for his lack of experience, especially in national security, and McCain has already brought up his lack of military service. So I continue to think that Wes Clark is the best VP choice.

    Chris Matthews presented his short list last week. I thought it was awful. And nobody mentioned Wes Clark. He’s not getting any media attention. Surprisingly, a couple of guest pundits on Hardball recommended Governer Sibelius of Kansas, I suppose mainly to placate the HIllary supporters. I think that would be a disaster. Nobody knows who she is, and I saw her speak once and she was blah and uninspiring. And it wouldn’t satisfy the Hillary supporters. It would further enrage them. It’s like a slap in the face.

    That said, I think Hillary herself would be a bad choice. She’s radioactive now. I don’t think her reputation can be salvaged.

    I could go for Biden or Dodd, too, mainly because they are just so strong.

    I’m not not persuaded by the usual reasons for choosing VPs. I don’t really think the conventional wisdom works, with the possible exception of Wes Clark, neutralizing McCain’s military advantage. Well, actually he towers over McCain in every way except for McCain’s POW history.

    I think you should choose a really strong campaigner, which is why I like Biden and Dodd.

  • Dodd should not be picked, since Connecticut has a Republican governor who would choose his replacement.

    Biden is a great campaigner, but he’s a bit too prone to “foot-in-mouth disease,” and he comes from a state that will already go our way anyway.

    So, I stand by my original statement (or, rather, Phoebes’ original statement, with which I concurred,) that Schweitzer (who is also one helluva campaigner) and Clark should be the top two finalists.

  • Hey, “Caped”, we Nice Jewish Girls have to stick together! Of course, I’m not in the least bit musical, and am, in fact, tone-deaf!

    And,”TR”, a head’s up to you, too.

  • I also still think Clark would be a great choice. He’s still popular with a broad slice of the public after his run in 2004. He’s got the military and foreign policy credentials that would be helpfull, his ties to the clinton campaign would salve some of that wound, he’d have appeal with rual white voters…and he’s smart.

  • I hear ya, Danp, @2; can’t find my cap lock key anyway 🙂

    But certainly, I’m with with CB and everyone else, beginning with phoebes; hands off Warner! If he’s seduced into the VP position, our (VA) chances of turning senatorial blue are dim; we just don’t have anyone of his caliber waiting in the wings. Creigh Deeds might have a chance, but we want him as the next Governor, when Tim Kaine has to step down in 2010 (our Governors get only one term, but it’s a 5yr term).

    We need to get as close as possible to 60 Senators as we can, for obvious reasons. And we need for both VA Senators to be “blue” for obvious reasons. But also, I think we need a second “blue” Senator for a less obvious reason: that Webb is a past Repub.

    That can be great fun, when Webb (verbally) smacks down Bush but much less so, when his authoritarian streak peeps out and he votes wrong on things like FISA “fix”. I’m hoping that, if he’s paired with the Dem Warner (Mark) instead of the Repub Warner (John), he’ll mellow out some. Especially since he’ll be the senior Senator (in both senses of the word) and being in leader/teacher position seems to bring out the best in him.

    So, please, please, don’t take our Warner (or our Webb) away.

  • Phoebes– speaking of that which pertains to “our tribe,” another advantage to having Clark on the ticket is, during his adult life, he discovered that he had some Jewish ancestry (hey, we knew he had to get that dark-haired, handsome look from somewhere! 😉 ). . . so he could help shore up credibility with, say, some of the senior citizens in South Florida who might otherwise worry about Obama’s semi-Arabic-sounding name.

  • Thisd is a bad idea. Warner in the Senate for however many years he wants to stay and helping create and maintain a filibuster-proof majorit is far better than Warner presiding over a closely-divided Senate for 4 or 8 years.

    Warner’s the best in Virginia for the Senate. Let him do what he’s excellent at, which is adding to a Senatorial super-majority.

  • I think the idea that you pick a VP candidate to fill in some perceived weakness (Clark for military experience for example) is a mistake: it is seen by the media and lazy pundits as an admission that you consider that to be a weakness as well. Instead, go for a reinforcing pick… someone who agreed on the number one issue: the authorization to invade Iraq.

  • I agree with those who say we need as many Dems in the Senate as possible. The McConnell tactics of the past two years have proven we need more than a simple majority (not that we have that now with LIEberman in our caucus).

    I’m not sure who I’d favor. We’ve all talked about Senator and Governors, and Wes Clark. Are there any US Representatives who would be a good choice?

    Speaking of McConnell, isn’t he up for re-election? Would love to see that guy OUT OF THERE. Along with John “Box Turtle” Cornyn (go Rick Noriega!). Their votes against the Webb GI bill will hurt them, big time I hope. Noriega (a veteran) has already made a strong statement criticizing Cornyn. Would love to see him in the Senate representing Texas.

  • Caped, Wes Clark’s father was Jewish. Evidently he died soon after Wes’s birth.

    And, hopefully our south Florida “Tribesmen” will realise that the best thing for Israel is America’s strength and standing in the world, which is minimal under George Bush and would further diminish under John McCain.

  • I am confused by the overwhelming Wes Clark support here. How many Generals have willing taken the number two spot to anyone with no military experience. The VP should help with the balance of the ticket for the general election but he or she also needs to have some ability in the legislature (since that is where the VP will be spending most of his or her time). Clinton chose Gore for his legislative experience and Washington savvy – Gore did nothing for claims that Clinton was young or had little foreign policy experience and really did nothing for geographic balance. The idea of needing geographic balance is not born out by election results or exit polling from the past several elections. Few voters ever shift from one candidate to another based on the VP choice.

  • If Barack picks Warner for Veep, Kaine (who has to step down in 2010 anyway) can run for Senate, and let Boucher be governor…. Warner will offer Barack a winning team–someone he likes working with, a very good debater and speaker, a good balance to the Obama ticket so they’ll win, a good possibilitity for President when Barack moves over to the Supreme Court (or whatever), and most important, someone who really knows how to get things done and how to run a govt. Barack has an in-depth interest and expertise in foreign policy if not extensive experience, and I’m sure Warner has been boning up in that area for his Senate race anyway…. I don’t think many people really think Barack unprepared for the presidency, 3 am, etc. I think the public will love a ticket with 5 beautiful little girls gracing it…. The wives would be great friends–both are remarkable women and good campaigners. Warner would help with Virginia and Indiana (his birthplace) and all Republicans, Independents and centrists/rural folk too. And Warner’s wife might help some with the mlitary (she’s a brat) and with Texas too, where she went to grad school (in Austin.) When voters get to know Warner–who has earned the great respect of all who know him–they’ll be thrilled with the ticket. Does anyone remember how much fun it was when young(ish) Bill and Al hit the campaign trial? If Barack believes in this centrist, I do too…. If he picks Mark Warner, then this ticket feels great to me….

    (Nancy Pace blogs on breaking news at http://www.epharmony.com.)

  • I don’t see why people casually dismiss the notion that Obama would help himself most by nominating a woman. At this point, failing to do so implies that he doesn’t think there are any women who are qualified to be president.

    Selecting a woman with strong feminist credentials acts as an insurance policy against backsliding. I don’t think Clinton would have signed the partial birth abortion ban or welfare reform if he’d had a vice president who was threatening to resign if he did so. And having a woman in the White House, even as vice president, greatly increases the odds that a woman will become president sooner rather than later. Even if Obama’s veep doesn’t get the nomination in 2016, people will have become more accustomed to the idea of having a woman as chief executive.

    And there are a lot of women who could do a lot to strengthen Obama’s candidacy. I think that Sebelius could help Obama, especially in states like Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. And Anna Eshoo would help shore up his lack of foreign policy and national security experience.

    There are a lot of good choices out there, and I think that Obama has to realize that he can’t afford to alienate progressive women. Nearly half of the Democratic party is still behind Clinton, and making them feel like the door is being slammed in their faces would be a huge mistake.

  • Before the idea of Obama running for the White House became a reality, I was a full on supporter of Mark Warner as the Dem’s candidate. When he annouced his decision not to run, I was crushed. That is, until Obama offically threw his hat in the ring at arounf the same time as Warner’s withdrawl, which actually got me more behind Obama from day one of his campaign. Then, Warner annouced his intent to run as a Senator, and that should be good news to everyone. Warner will EASILY beat ANY Republican candidate in VA, as his popularity in that state has never dissapeared. I live in MD, and even we love Mark Warner almost as much as Virginians.

    While the thought of Warner as VP has an extremely appealing quaility to me, I would have to agree with CB in this one; it is simply more imperitive for Warner to run for Senate. While he is very popular in the Mid-Atlantic region, I’m not sure how far that popularity stretches across the country. Though Warner as VP would definitely guarentee the Dem’s taking VA in November, Obama already has a pretty good shot of taking that state without Warner. Let Warner win the cruical VA Senate seat, and he will go on to serve for the next 30 years at least.

    • Comments are closed.