Schweitzer / Warner 2008?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hey, why one red state governor, when you can have two?

How would this ticket do?

Or switch the order, it doesn't matter that much.

One pro would be no Senate records to over analyize and Senate seats to defend.

[Frodo]

it may look good on the surface, but both would be basically one-term governors (unless Schweitzer desists from running for another four years, and instead runs for another term as Montana governor -and maybe more, if they don't have term limits).  it is hardly enough executive experience to run a country.  even someone as inexperienced as then-Texas Governor George W. Bush was in 1999 to 2000 when he ran for presidency, he had just won a second term as Texas governor in 1998. 

i suggest waiting until 2012, then we can start out with Brian Schweitzer of Montana and Tim Kaine of Virginia (if he wins this year), who has more executive experience in government than Mark Warner does.  he would have been out of office three years by then, and Schweitzer will have completed his second term. 

Warner, as i have said before and i say again, should set his sights on running for George Allen's Senate seat while his star still shines.

and in 2016, i'm gunning for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama!  he will have served two full terms in the Senate by then, plenty of experience under his belt.   

[Moooooo]

I agree with Frodo.  Schweitzer has to develop some.  By 2008 he wouldnt have served a full term in office yet.  So far I am very impressed with him and will definitley be keeping an eye out.

[AuH2O]

Schweitzer has no Presidential future. The Dkos and Atrios types are violently denouncing JOE BIDEN because he made ONE VOTE they disagree with. That crowd won't tolerate a Schweitzer, who is overrated anyway just because he's a Democrat in Montana. He couldn't even beat Conrad Burns.

Someone that moderate can't win a nomination. It's that simple. Warner can't either. If he runs against Allen it will be a moot point because that would end his career.

[Moooooo]

Schweitzer has no Presidential future. The Dkos and Atrios types are violently denouncing JOE BIDEN because he made ONE VOTE they disagree with. That crowd won't tolerate a Schweitzer, who is overrated anyway just because he's a Democrat in Montana. He couldn't even beat Conrad Burns.

Someone that moderate can't win a nomination. It's that simple. Warner can't either. If he runs against Allen it will be a moot point because that would end his career.

Well, Im a member at alot of Democratic boards and from what I can see and hear the far left loves Schweitzer.  They like how he is standing up to Bush on Social Security and the need for the Montana Guard to return home for the wildfire season.  Theres no need to knock Schweitzer because he didnt beat Burns.  Conrad Burns is a pretty popular guy in Montana and for Schweitzer to come within 2% points of beating him was a hell of a feat.  Schweitzer is a good man and is going to be a fine Governor.  But I can see where you are comming from because he would be a nightmare for the GOP in a presidential election.  The American people voted for a fake cowboy from Connecticut.  Why wouldnt they vote for a real cowboy from Montana?

[AuH2O]

That's the way the left is-- they love someone one second, then hate them the next. I've literally seen people on DKos go from saying someone was the best Senator to saying they wanted to "make an example" of them in a primary-- in the space of a few days!!! Stephanie Herseth (a Rep.) is basically case-in-point... she was one of DKos' big races, and now has about a 1% approval rating among members.

The problem isn't that Schweitzer sucks... my Montana connections tell me he's fairly tolerable even for many Republicans, even if they don't vote for him. The problem is that, if you actually look at his run for Governor, those issues are not the same issues that come up in a Presidential race.

That's not really a problem for a guy like Sanford, who is in a state that agrees with him ideologically. It's a HUGE problem for guys like Schweitzer and Henry-- the GOP was able to paint a Massachussetts leftist as a flip-flopper... imagine a Montana Democrat. The issue is not whether Schweitzer, in some dream world, would be a good general election candidate. The issue is: can he win the nomination?

Bottom line: no, there is no realistic scenario where he specifically wins the 2008 nomination. None. Maybe 2012. At some point you're going to have to get over the fact Democrats are basically screwed in 2008 because of Hillary. Hope the GOP screws up.

[Moooooo]

The base of the Democratic party is overrated.  They havent got their ideal candidate in god knows how long.  If they had their way in 1992 Paul Tsongas or Jerry Brown would have received the nomination, instead they got Bill Clinton.  In 2000 they would have prefered Bradley, but instead they got Al Gore.  In 2004 they wanted Howard Dean, but they were stuck with John Kerry.

Do I think Schweitzer will even be a candidate in 2008? No. 

Is Hillary a lock for the 2008 nomination?  I dont think so.  She is of course the frontrunner, but so is  Bill Frist for the Republican nomination.  But as we all know frontrunner status kills and I dont see Hillary as an exception to this rule. 

[Democratic Hawk]

Schweitzer has no Presidential future. The Dkos and Atrios types are violently denouncing JOE BIDEN because he made ONE VOTE they disagree with. That crowd won't tolerate a Schweitzer, who is overrated anyway just because he's a Democrat in Montana. He couldn't even beat Conrad Burns.

Someone that moderate can't win a nomination. It's that simple. Warner can't either. If he runs against Allen it will be a moot point because that would end his career.

Well, Im a member at alot of Democratic boards and from what I can see and hear the far left loves Schweitzer.  They like how he is standing up to Bush on Social Security and the need for the Montana Guard to return home for the wildfire season.  Theres no need to knock Schweitzer because he didnt beat Burns.  Conrad Burns is a pretty popular guy in Montana and for Schweitzer to come within 2% points of beating him was a hell of a feat.  Schweitzer is a good man and is going to be a fine Governor.  But I can see where you are comming from because he would be a nightmare for the GOP in a presidential election.  The American people voted for a fake cowboy from Connecticut.  Why wouldnt they vote for a real cowboy from Montana?

Fair comment. It comes as no surprise to see Republicans diminising the possibility that a moderate Democrat could get the presidential nomination. Perhaps, they are the candidates they fear. After all, the selection of a moderate Democratic is less likely to polarise the election and give the Democrats a realistic chance of defeating a conservative Republican. Ideologically polarised elections favour the GOP, which is why the selection of a liberal candidate would suit them in 2008. It is something Democrats need to be aware of

I, too, certainly don't think that Hillary has a lock on the nomination. Frankly, I think that she, Kerry and Edwards are only leading the field as of now because of the "familiarity effect"/name recognition. It is very early days

Dave

[AuH2O]

No one seriously believes Frist is the "front runner" and certainly polls do not indicate that.

Hillary can possibly be stopped, but shes 50/50 at worst, which is a very high chance this far out.

I think the political environment has really changed since, say, 1992, in some ways we understand and in others we don't. But while the alleged polarization of the electorate is overstated, the reality is that the internet has ushered in a new age of politics. Running a two-faced operation (or multi-faced) is now much, much more difficult as print and TV media becomes less and less relevant.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Schweitzer for President!

[TheresNoMoney]

Hillary is tough to read. Many people don't like her, yet she's leading in all the polls by a wide margin.

Is it all name recognition or do people truly want her as president? If she did get the nomination we could have an even nastier election than we just had. The Republicans are already slinging mad at her from all directions.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Schweitzer has no Presidential future. The Dkos and Atrios types are violently denouncing JOE BIDEN because he made ONE VOTE they disagree with. That crowd won't tolerate a Schweitzer, who is overrated anyway just because he's a Democrat in Montana. He couldn't even beat Conrad Burns.

Someone that moderate can't win a nomination. It's that simple. Warner can't either. If he runs against Allen it will be a moot point because that would end his career.

There is definitely more than one vote that people are unhappy with Biden about. Anyways, Montana is generally pretty Republican, so I wouldn't hold the fact that he narrowly lost that Senate race too much against him.

I think moderates like Schweitzer, Warner, and Bayh do have a chance at the nomination if they make it clear that they have a spine and principles, know how to frame an issue (see Lakoff's books), and are not Republican-lite.

[Rob]

The far left would vote for Nader (or one of his ilk) if a moderate was nominated by the Democrats. That's a huge advantage the GOP has- party loyalty. The Democratic base is a bunch of whiny liberals who freak out when a candidate doesn't agree with them 100 percent of the time.

[South Park Republican]

Schweitzer for President!

He ran he would be like Bruce Babbit in 1988.  He would be an also-ran and nothing more.  You guys want a moderate than you need another Bill Clinton.  Someone who can appeal to both left-liberals and moderates no matter how much he flip flops on the issues.

[WalterMitty]

Schweitzer for President!

He ran he would be like Bruce Babbit in 1988.  He would be an also-ran and nothing more.  You guys want a moderate than you need another Bill Clinton.  Someone who can appeal to both left-liberals and moderates no matter how much he flip flops on the issues.

bruce babbit is light years smarter than the montana populist.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

He's an interesting character.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?display=rednews/2005/03/12/build/state/48-gov-bar.inc

If this guy runs for President, will the Republican trot out their tired old "he wants to take away your guns" line?

[Moooooo]

Schweitzer is awesome, but that picture isnt very presidential and could easily be spun in a bad direction.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Schweitzer is awesome, but that picture isnt very presidential and could easily be spun in a bad direction.

Kerry looked much more Presidential than Bush, and look how far that got him.

[Moooooo]

Kerry looked much more Presidential than Bush, and look how far that got him.

Yeah, but you know what I mean.  Public officials dont normally throw back a couple shots in public.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Kerry looked much more Presidential than Bush, and look how far that got him.

Yeah, but you know what I mean.  Public officials dont normally throw back a couple shots in public.

He may come across as more geniune. Unlike certain politicians who pretend to be a cowboy, he knows how to ride a horse.

[Rob]

The left would hate him, so he can't get the nomination in the first place.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The left would hate him, so he can't get the nomination in the first place.

So basically you're saying I'm not a liberal?
Read here, and you'll see that he is not hated.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/3/14/145914/805

[Moooooo]

He may come across as more geniune. Unlike certain politicians who pretend to be a cowboy, he knows how to ride a horse.

No doubt about it.  I wish he was my governor.

[Rob]

The left would hate him, so he can't get the nomination in the first place.

So basically you're saying I'm not a liberal?

You are, but you're also a party hack, so you're not an accurate bellwether for the left.

[Moooooo]

The left would hate him, so he can't get the nomination in the first place.

Why?