WP,pg1: A Triumph For Warner, And a Guide For His Party

A Triumph For Warner, And a Guide For His Party
By Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 9, 2005; Page A01


Virginia's quadrennial search for a governor featured neither charismatic personalities nor dominant policy initiatives. But Democrat Timothy M. Kaine's resounding victory over Republican Jerry W. Kilgore nonetheless provided important political lessons for the commonwealth, and maybe the country.

The outcome marked what feels like a dramatic strengthening of Democratic appeal in Northern Virginia, the state's richest and most populous region. It showed that Republicans can no longer depend simply on the power of their party to win statewide and demonstrated the dangers of a negative campaign. It presented an intriguing campaign model for Democrats, in which religious faith plays an important role. And most of all it demonstrated the appeal of Gov. Mark R. Warner (D), for whom this could become the first stop of a presidential campaign....

***

Although Warner has been careful not to criticize Bush directly -- for that matter, his instinctual nods to bipartisanship meant he made a point of not mentioning Kilgore by name -- he made the case all the same. "If we want to make it a comparison between how things are going in Virginia and how they are going in Washington, that's a comparison I will take any day of the week," he said while campaigning for Kaine this weekend....Kaine, who slipped into office four years ago with the scantest of margins, skillfully blunted Kilgore's attempts to portray him as too liberal for conservative Virginia. Kaine becomes the first candidate since the reinstatement of the death penalty to win the governorship of a Southern state despite his personal opposition, although he has said he will carry out executions.

Kaine defended himself against Kilgore's attack on the subject by saying that it is his beliefs as a deeply religious Catholic that lead him to oppose the death penalty and abortion. But he also said he would follow the law on capital punishment and advocate laws that protect the right to abortion....

***

"I think this is an interesting test case for Democrats to see if you can run a faith-based campaign focused on values and do so as a progressive candidate in a Southern state," (George Mason University professor Mark J. Rozell) said....


http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110802241.html

he will run for President.

He's young, he has time to run for President in future years. To be a serious Presidential candidate, he needs some national experience and some involvement in international issues as a Senator.

that they don't give a rat's ass about experience. We had Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan back to back and neither one of them had a lot of experience. Both had only be governors.

enough to make me worry about Warner's capabilities.

'Nuff said.

Mine is whoever wins in the primaries. But I will take Mark Warner until then.

He has a good business sense and excellent management capabilities. Before running for Governor, he made a startup cellular phone company into a profitable business. Perhaps you have heard of them, Nextel.

Virginia, like other states was damaged financially by the Bush administration's policies. Our economy was already damaged by the previous Republican Governor who ran on a platform of cutting the "car tax" and not replacing it with other income. As it is, Virginia has some of the lowest taxes in the nation according to my accountant husband. The Commonwealth keenly felt the implosion of the dot coms who had been a revenue source in the Northern Virginia region. As a consequence, we were feeling the pinch. If we had stayed the course I am certain Virginia would have been deeply in debt. The state colleges were at the point they could not tell prospective in-state students how much tuition would cost for the following year because state funding was drying up. Republicans have been bad for higher education in this state.

Mark Warner has turned this state around and we are now considered the best managed state in the nation. I am confident he could do the same for the nation. Someone has to help this nation recover from the Bush economic policies of borrowing, over-spending and giving to cronies. Bush has, in effect, plundered our treasury.

I admit I have not paid close attention to the state level politics in Richmond and I am sure there are others here who are much more informed than I, but Mark Warner is a good man and I would like to see how well he runs in the national primaries.

The governorship of Texas is the weakest of the nation, with the Lt. Governor actually wielding more authority in the state legislature. Don't ask me why and how -- I erased that kind of detail from my mind after I fled the state -- but Molly Ivins usually explains it pretty well.

too many votes that are easy to twist, for one thing. Also, being a Senator from Virginia won't do anything to boost exposure in the rest of the country. He'd be much better off spending the next few years in Iowa with a bunch of appearances as a talking head.

Let's hope that holds true for George Allen. The problem is, Allen keeps getting himself invited to the Sunday Morning talk shows and Tweety keeps having him on his Hardball show.

from which one can climb onto television. I think Warner can do that already, without stopping at "Senator." (and, hopefully, Allen will put his foot in his mouth on one of those shows).

How long has it been since a Senator won a presidential campaign? IIRC, governors have a much better chance at the White House. Maybe it's because citizens see them as being more "in touch" with the people and their everyday concerns?

don't make good presidential candidates. You should never run for Senate if you want to be President.

correct

I mean, because he's a very popular wartime President and stuff... oh, wait...

that can vote Democratic locally, but are hardcore Bush supporters and there is no sense in alienating them.

I just hope this doesn't signal his tactics for an 08 run, this not wanting to "alienate" Republicans. Yeah, reach for the moderates and undecideds, but no need to pull punches aimed at uh, your actual political enemies out to destroy you.

is misleading. California was not at all enthusiastic towards a *moderate* last night. And this says nothing to Warner's ability to raise cash. The money primary is where the press, and the political insiders are watching as the first primary. The one raking it in is the junior senator from New York.

big donors. I'm sure he'll be fine on the money front.

This is an excellent article, I wish I could quote the whole thing.
It does look like we will have a strong horse in the '08 race.

ready to be President and I think he appeal is localized. Not enough global experience and he is a little to much center for my liking. Bet he has a common ground pat answer for everything. No, IMO comparing him to John Kerry, I'll take Kerry any day. Oh, and by the way, Kerry did also help in the Va campaign a little too.It just wasn't all Warner. (Bush may have really helped too)

was the biggest factor in Kaine's win. His popularity made it possible for another Dem to win.

as a presidential candidate.

He took over from a tax and borrow governor and put the state on sound financial footing.

He worked with the Republican controlled legislature to do so. I think that people are getting tired of the split in this country along party lines and that independents especially will be happy to support a candidate who speaks for all of the people, not just his "base."

but he got Republicans to attack each other about the tax hike instead of him. That was an amazing feat.

"It presented an intriguing campaign model for Democrats, in which religious faith plays an important role."

I really do believe that's key. America is too deeply religious to just ignore the "faith" appeals. The only way to remove the theocratic-dominated Republican stranglehold on the country is to meet them on their own turf. We don't even need to talk God (although I think that liberals who're already "of faith" should feel more than free to use Scripture in their pull quotes and debates). Let's *talk* morality. Let's *talk* "good and evil." Because, while on the whole we're more equipped to look at shades of grey--and that is a *good* thing--there are, yes, some things that are just plain wrong. Lying to start an illegal war to benefit your plutocrat friends, for instance. Stealing from the poor, the sick, and the elderly to give to the super-rich. Is that What Jesus Would Do? Is that what a *moral* society would do? No.

Hypocrites, whited sepulchres, the lot of them; and good churchgoers damn well ought to understand that reference.