Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 1/14/2006 9:00:11 PM EDT
WILLIAMSBURG, Va. - Democrat Mark R. Warner concluded four years as governor Saturday with unprecedented public support and returned home to decide if he's ready for a 2008 run for president.

In a state that hasn't backed a Democrat for president in 42 years, Warner holds broad bipartisan appeal, and network pundits and national publications have been debating his potential as a centrist alternative to Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.

Warner, 51, has done plenty to encourage the speculation, though he isn't ready to say he's in.

Over the past six months, he has traveled extensively to major Democratic gatherings and visited the early nominating states of Iowa and New Hampshire. His federal political action committee took in $2.5 million in its first fundraiser last month.

"I want to be part of the debate, but there's still a long way to go from being part of the debate to taking the plunge," Warner said in an interview during his closing weeks in Richmond.

"There's serious family considerations with daughters 16, 14 and 11, and there's also, independent of family, a personal gut check to say `Are you ready to take on the challenge of running?'" Warner said.

In the final weeks before his term ended Saturday and fellow Democrat Timothy M. Kaine was sworn in to replace him, Warner gained wide attention by ordering DNA tests in old criminal cases, after five men were found to have been wrongfully convicted. In one case, DNA testing he ordered confirmed last week that a man who had insisted he was innocent right up to his execution in 1992, was guilty of rape and murder.

"The governor is to be commended for doing that," said University of Virginia criminal law professor Richard Bonnie. "In the past the tendency among governors and legislators has been basically to say this is a judicial responsibility. It really is everyone's responsibility."

Warner also commuted a death row inmate's sentence to life without parole because DNA evidence in his case was improperly destroyed.

"It seems to be increasingly clear that there really is no political risk to take these concerns about innocence seriously," Bonnie said.

If Virginia were not the only state to deny its governors consecutive terms, Warner said, he would have sought re-election rather than entertain thoughts of running for president. He is more forthcoming about his desire to run for governor again in 2009 than he is about when or whether he will declare himself a presidential candidate.

His reluctance is well-advised, said Larry J. Sabato, director of U.Va's Center for Politics. Enter the race early and Warner risks peaking too soon and making himself a target for Clinton and other rivals for the Democratic nomination. A poor showing in the presidential race could harm him if he runs for governor again, Sabato said.

"This is going to be a very difficult race just to get the nomination, not to mention winning the general election," Sabato said. "The alternative is that he could practically ask for the Virginia governorship in 2009 and have it — his for the asking if he doesn't have a loss on his record in 2008."

The irony is that Warner's popularity came largely from breaking a campaign promise not to raise taxes.

Stung by a $6 billion budget shortfall and with Wall Street threatening to downgrade the state's perfect bond rating for the first time, Warner campaigned statewide for the tax increases. The public support it yielded allowed him to push the plan through an anti-tax, GOP-dominated House of Delegates.

Statewide polls last summer and fall found that about three-fourths of those surveyed rated Warner's performance as good or excellent and believed Virginia was on the right track.

The only other former Virginia governor who even comes close to that level of job approval is George Allen, now a Republican U.S. senator with presidential aims of his own.



doubtful...what do yall think??
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 4:39:05 AM EDT
No thank you. He's mildly gun friendly, but blazingly liberal on several other issues.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 4:59:39 AM EDT
He's almost as scarey as Hillary.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 5:43:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bonk2029:
No thank you. He's mildly gun friendly, but blazingly liberal on several other issues.



+1

IMO the Republicans will have a hard time beating him b/c of his record on gun rights in Virginia. There's a fairly significant number of voters who are single-issue on gun rights, yet liberal on other issues. The recent Presidential elections have been pretty close, and if Warner can siphon off those votes then I could see him beating "Republicans" like Romney, Pataki, & McCain.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:25:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/15/2006 6:26:01 AM EDT by fiend]

Originally Posted By Bubbles:

Originally Posted By Bonk2029:
No thank you. He's mildly gun friendly, but blazingly liberal on several other issues.



+1

IMO the Republicans will have a hard time beating him b/c of his record on gun rights in Virginia. There's a fairly significant number of voters who are single-issue on gun rights, yet liberal on other issues. The recent Presidential elections have been pretty close, and if Warner can siphon off those votes then I could see him beating "Republicans" like Romney, Pataki, & McCain.



I'll take Warner over McCaine ANY day. Atleast with Warner we know what we have, unlike the RINO whore McCaine
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:30:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fiend:

Originally Posted By Bubbles:

Originally Posted By Bonk2029:
No thank you. He's mildly gun friendly, but blazingly liberal on several other issues.



+1

IMO the Republicans will have a hard time beating him b/c of his record on gun rights in Virginia. There's a fairly significant number of voters who are single-issue on gun rights, yet liberal on other issues. The recent Presidential elections have been pretty close, and if Warner can siphon off those votes then I could see him beating "Republicans" like Romney, Pataki, & McCain.



I'll take Warner over McCaine ANY day. Atleast with Warner we know what we have, unlike the RINO whore McCaine



True dat.

G
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:37:36 AM EDT
Warner vs. McCain? I will go with McCain. I don't know where Warner stands on Iraq or on other international policies. As it stands right now, I will never, ever vote for a Democrat.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:42:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Warner vs. McCain? I will go with McCain. I don't know where Warner stands on Iraq or on other international policies. As it stands right now, I will never, ever vote for a Democrat.



Buddy, voting for McCain is the same thing...

G
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:50:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By glock23carry:

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Warner vs. McCain? I will go with McCain. I don't know where Warner stands on Iraq or on other international policies. As it stands right now, I will never, ever vote for a Democrat.



Buddy, voting for McCain is the same thing...

G

McCain has always been right there with Bush with regards to Iraq and the war on terror (with exception of the torturing thing) Besides, what Republican is going to vote for McCain in the primary anyway.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:51:28 AM EDT
I saw some C-Sapn coverage after the last VA election where Warner was talking to a bunch of people, fundraising for the Democratic party.

The list of "groups" there was very telling:

Teamsters
Teacher's Union
American Trial Lawyer Associaton

Get the picture?
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 7:09:29 AM EDT
Well, either one would be a goat fuck of a president.

G
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 7:29:08 AM EDT
I highly doubt our next president will be Republican. That being said, I think so far Warner is our best bet. He better have a good game plan to deal with Hillary though.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 7:30:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Warner vs. McCain? I will go with McCain. I don't know where Warner stands on Iraq or on other international policies. As it stands right now, I will never, ever vote for a Democrat.



If you vote for french fry man, then you are voting Dem.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 9:19:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By long-rifle-tactical:

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Warner vs. McCain? I will go with McCain. I don't know where Warner stands on Iraq or on other international policies. As it stands right now, I will never, ever vote for a Democrat.



If you vote for french fry man, then you are voting Dem.

Either way it is a moot point McCain will never be nominated. If he gets 12% of the Republican vote I will be surprised. Right now I am hoping George Allen runs. I can't think of any viable Republican candidates that I want to see run. I would rather see Rudy stay in New York as a Senator. Too early to speculate though I really wonder about Warner, the latest news on him was about the Democratic meeting he had with John Edwards and about how the "new" platform of the Democratic party will be ending greed in the nation (which should scare everyone)
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 9:23:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Chimborazo:
I highly doubt our next president will be Republican. That being said, I think so far Warner is our best bet. He better have a good game plan to deal with Hillary though.

I would rather see Hillary run then Warner. Hillary will be trashed in a nation wide election. There is not a single red state that she will carry. What bothers me about Warner is he comes off as someone who is "mainstream" on social issue but liberal on other matters.

Warner would tax us and screw us every which way he could because he is a liberal. If it wasn't for the strongly conservative GA, he would have taxed us harder and probably would have been a completely different governor. I am not a single issue voter. While gun control is certainly one of my top issues, it isn't the only one. I will not be voting for Warner for president, no matter who he is running against.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 12:08:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/15/2006 12:08:26 PM EDT by varoadking]

He's almost as scarey as Hillary.


As John Wayne would say..."Not hardly."

I'd certainly vote for Warner if McCain was the Republican POTUS nominee...but we know that won't happen...McCain is certifiable...



Link Posted: 1/15/2006 12:13:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/15/2006 12:16:32 PM EDT by varoadking]

If it wasn't for the strongly conservative GA, he would have taxed us harder and probably would have been a completely different governor.


We've been down this road before. It was our beloved Republicans that saw to it our taxes were raised far more than even Warner wanted...

www.nationalreview.com/comment/keane200404201122.asp

For those of you who may not know...the National Review is a Conservative publication.

Link Posted: 1/15/2006 12:59:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By varoadking:

If it wasn't for the strongly conservative GA, he would have taxed us harder and probably would have been a completely different governor.


We've been down this road before. It was our beloved Republicans that saw to it our taxes were raised far more than even Warner wanted...

www.nationalreview.com/comment/keane200404201122.asp

For those of you who may not know...the National Review is a Conservative publication.


Oh yeah I know there were those "who crossed party lines" to vote for the tax increase. But if the democrats had control of the GA the taxes would have been raised far more.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 5:38:23 PM EDT
I've heard from MANY people who work in that infernal city to our east that a Clinton/Warner ticket would destroy anything we could put up against them short of Reagan himself.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 5:39:07 PM EDT
on the other hand, at least one of his daughters will no longer be jailbait by then!
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 5:41:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I've heard from MANY people who work in that infernal city to our east that a Clinton/Warner ticket would destroy anything we could put up against them short of Reagan himself.




/shiver
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:17:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I've heard from MANY people who work in that infernal city to our east that a Clinton/Warner ticket would destroy anything we could put up against them short of Reagan himself.



I'm sorry, but Christ himself couldn't win with the hildebeast on the same ticket.

Warner wants the big seat. He won't play 2nd fiddle.
Link Posted: 1/15/2006 6:25:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By bulldog1967:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I've heard from MANY people who work in that infernal city to our east that a Clinton/Warner ticket would destroy anything we could put up against them short of Reagan himself.



I'm sorry, but Christ himself couldn't win with the hildebeast on the same ticket.

Warner wants the big seat. He won't play 2nd fiddle.



and that's what will save us!!! (seriously)
Top Top