Virginia could produce two presidential hopefuls in 2008

[Moooooo]

One is a tough-talking ideologue who favors cowboy boots and chews tobacco. The other is a straight-laced businessman who is more policy wonk than cowboy.

But Republican George Allen and Democrat Mark Warner share this much in common: Both have been governor, and both are being touted as potential presidential candidates.

As political strategists from both major parties begin to mull their options for 2008, they are keeping an eye trained on Virginia in a wide-open search for White House prospects.

Republicans see Allen, a former governor and current U.S. senator, as an energetic and articulate crusader for conservative causes. He won national attention last year as chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, leading the GOP to a gain of four seats in the Senate and the ouster of Senate Democratic Leader Thomas Daschle.

Democrats, eager to redefine their party after two narrow presidential losses, see Warner as a successful centrist Democrat from a conservative "red" state who might make their party competitive again in the Republican-dominated South.

His chairmanship this year of the National Governors Association served to elevate his national profile.
----
Allen, while a formidable campaigner, is just one of many white male conservative lawmakers who would be seeking the GOP nomination in a crowded field. Still unclear is whether his hard-charging style that served him well in Virginia would backfire on the national stage and whether his staunchly conservative voting record in the Senate would alienate moderate independent voters in swing states.

On the Democratic side, analysts say, Warner stands out more partly because the bench of players is smaller. But some observers question whether Warner has the required charisma to be president and whether his legacy of a tax increase would hurt the party's image.

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-80954sy0mar13,0,359396.story?coll=dp-headlines-topnews

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Warner would easily beat Allen.

[AuH2O]

Doubtful. More doubtful is that two Virginians would be nominated... Allen has a solid shot at the nomination but Warner doesn't on his side.

[Moooooo]

Doubtful. More doubtful is that two Virginians would be nominated... Allen has a solid shot at the nomination but Warner doesn't on his side.

Put your partisan side, aside.  Who wins if for some odd reason they both get their parties nomination?

[Rob]

I like Warner. I wish the Democrats would nominate him.

[Moooooo]

I like Warner. I wish the Democrats would nominate him.

You and me both.  I have been reading up on him a lot lately.  The more I read the more I like.  He is in my top 3 for 2008.

[Moooooo]

I like Warner. I wish the Democrats would nominate him.

Warner and Sanford in 2008?!?!?! OMG, who does Bob vote for?

[Rob]

I like Warner. I wish the Democrats would nominate him.

Warner and Sanford in 2008?!?!?! OMG, who does Bob vote for?

LOL I have no idea. Too bad it won't happen

[Ebowed]

I think John Breaux versus Sanford would be the hardest scenario for me to decide.

I don't know much about Warner but what I've heard sounds good.  But if Bob likes him, there's a good chance he's someone I'd like

[Moooooo]

These look nice.

[A18]

Why do you like Warner? All he'll do is raise taxes, dismantle Social Security reform, etc. I guess we might get a balanced budget.

[MHS2002]

A shot in the dark, but here goes...

Some points:

1. Warner would help out in the South, but IMO the swing would not be enough for most states. Virginia would probably go for the Republican if the home state factor is taken out.

2. How many liberal Democrats would vote for the Green or other parties? (I would think after 8 years of Bush not many).

3. Warner would help out most in populist states, such as New Mexico and West Virginia.

4. The biggest key for Warner is to get a united base and to emerge from the primary relatively unscathed. Any sort of break within the party seriously hurts his chances.   

5. As far as who would Virginia? I would say Allen by a couple percentage points.

[AuH2O]

Personality is just huge in a Presidential election. Warner is hugely deficient there. His views seem good in theory for election purposes, but in reality he has a three way clash between his 2001 platform, his record as Governor, and the views he would adopt to run for President as a Democrat.

So I would say Allen wins that matchup. There is a serious chance a 3rd party would run to the left of Warner in that scenario, and of course that would doom him, but even heads up Allen is a better candidate.

[Moooooo]

Personality is just huge in a Presidential election. Warner is hugely deficient there. His views seem good in theory for election purposes, but in reality he has a three way clash between his 2001 platform, his record as Governor, and the views he would adopt to run for President as a Democrat.

So I would say Allen wins that matchup. There is a serious chance a 3rd party would run to the left of Warner in that scenario, and of course that would doom him, but even heads up Allen is a better candidate.

What do you mean when you say "personality?"  If your referring to "chrisma", Allen isnt exactly JFK.  Hes actually a pretty boring guy if you ask me.  Everytime I hear the man speak he reminds me of Forrest Gump.  On the hand, Warner comes off as a fairly telegenic guy.

[A18]

Again, why does anyone like Warner?

[2952-0-0]

Again, why does anyone like Warner?

Again, why does anyone like you?

[A18]

Again, why don't I go to hell?

Oh, don't worry. You will soon enough.

[2952-0-0]

Again, why don't I go to hell?

Oh, don't worry. You will soon enough.

You have the maturity of a five your old. You post too much and you're leeching on your parents.

[A18]

cool

[CARLHAYDEN]

A very well thought out post.

There are two major differences between the two candidates:

First, the probability of either receiving the nomination.  Allen has at least as good a chance as any other candidate to receive the Republican nomination whereas Warner would have to overcome the lefties who dominate the process on the Democrat side.

Second, Warner has only served as a Govenor, whereas Allen has served both as Govenor and Senator.

[Moooooo]

Again, why does anyone like Warner?

I dont personally know the guy so I can only judge based upon what I have read and heard about him...

Obviously, I like the fact that he has a proven ability to win in a state that most Democrats would struggle in.  I think Mark Warner is a very telegenic man and comes across as very honest and sincere.

I was impressed by his "Why I am Democrat speech"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/8/03116/3996

I was also impressed by his State of the Common Wealth address...
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/StateoftheCommonwealth05

Mark Warner is more inline with my social views than most democrats.

-Supports the death penalty.
-Supports the second amendment.
-Tough on crime.
-Wont be a UN whore like most democrats.
-Supports welfare reform.

On Economic issues he is a little too center and pro-big business for my taste, but I can deal with that.

Yes he increased taxes, Philip, but its called fiscal responsibility.  Something that the current Republican party knows nothing about.  Sometimes it is necessary to raise taxes.  Let me ask you something.  If the tax increase wasnt needed.  How did it get through a Republican dominated state legislature?

Here are some of his achievements I was impressed by...

-"Navigated Virginia through a $6 billion revenue shortfall, and making choices and investments in education from pre-school to graduate school to create a Commonwealth of opportunity for all."
-"Education for a Lifetime." The pre-school through grad school and beyond into workforce training measures are designed to move students another rung up the ladder of educational achievement, demonstrating the linkage between degrees and other markers of academic achievement and economic prosperity. The Governor also committed to fully funding the $525 million needed to re-benchmark the Standards of Quality for K-12 education, as established by the State Board of Education."
-"Governor Warner has also brought common sense business principles to the way the state purchases goods and services, manages its vehicle fleet and real estate holdings, and maintains information technology functions, with an appropriate emphasis on including those who own small, women- and minority-owned businesses."
-"Governor Warner is working hard to build a foundation to bring economic prosperity to all corners of Virginia. Economic development and job creation are top priorities for Governor Warner. Since January 2002, during difficult economic times, he has helped recruit more than 100,000 jobs and $9.5 billion in new investment in every region of Virginia."
-"He helped found the Virginia Health Care Foundation, which has provided health care to more than 476,000 underserved Virginians in rural and urban areas."
-" In 1997, he developed the Virginia High-Tech Partnership, which helps students from Virginia's five Historically Black Colleges and Universities pursue technology careers through a summer internship and job placement program."
-"Provided the largest increase in education funding in Virginia history."
-"Increased the personal income tax exemption and standard deduction enabling 140,000 to no longer have to file any state income tax, and will cut the food tax from 4% to 2.5 %
in July, 2005."

Read more about your wonderful governor here:  http://www.governor.virginia.gov/Governor/GovBioHome.html
http://www.draftmarkwarner.com/Warner2008.pdf

[A18]

Tax increases are okay if they're necessary and if they're placed equally on everybody's shoulders. But that would certainly not be the case at the national level.

You realize the same Republicans in Congress now passed the Balanced Budget Act of the 1990s, right?

[Moooooo]

You realize the same Republicans in Congress now passed the Balanced Budget Act of the 1990s, right?

Well what is the Republican congress waiting for now?  Who signed that bill?

[A18]

They're probably waiting for some RINOs in the Senate to stop striking down Medicaid cuts and other frivolous spending.

Clinton signed it, interestingly enough. Too bad he also vetoed welfare reform twice and crusaded against the 1996 budget.

[MHS2002]

Nick, in regards to the tax increase:

It was pushed through the legislature because most people were under the impression that a tax increase was needed in order to balance the Virginia budget. As it turns out, Virginia ended up running a surplus (the state made $1.2 billion more revenue than was initially anticipated, the tax increases were designed to generate close to $1.5 billion).