Per CNN, Tom Vilsack is ending his campaign. 9:32amCT.

Will provide link when I find one.

Edit to add link:
http://cbs3.com/topstories/topstories_story_054103339.html

Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack To Drop 2008 Bid
Slideshow: 2008 Presidential Hopefuls

(AP) DES MOINES, Iowa Democrat Tom Vilsack is abandoning his bid for the presidency after struggling against better-known, better-financed rivals, a senior campaign official told The Associated Press on Friday.

Vilsack left office in January and traveled through states holding early tests of strength. He had faced a tough challenge from rivals such as New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and John Edwards, who have had more success raising money and attracting attention - even in Vilsack's home state of Iowa.

Vilsack was scheduled to make a formal announcement later in the day. The official spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting the Democrat's statement.

Vilsack was the first Democrat to formally enter the 2008 race when he announced his candidacy in November. He conceded at the time that he faced a difficult race.

more...

Conventional wisdom is his support will go to Clinton. But this election is far from conventional.

I'd be inclined to say that Edwards might benefit from it.

many contenders to begin with.
And there's always room for one more (Al Gore??!!).

These senators will not win in November. They never do.

Or don't. I'm just asking for clarification, not trying to annoy you.

Well, JE used to be a senator. Richardson is the last D governor in the race and he is as invisible as Vilsac was.

that's not as big a problem with somebody like Obama, who hasn't been there long.

I know he's a great orator and an inspiring figure. After 8 years of President Dumbass, people will be looking for objective qualifications. Why is Obama even running? He's not even half done with the his first Senate term.

guys like Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld officially, and even that blood-soaked war criminal Kissinger on an occasional advisory basis.

And what good have they done?

Contrary to what you say, I would argue that the Bush administration has shown us that experience dooesn't matter at all if one's heart isn't in the right place. As for why Obama's running, I'd say he's running because he's at least 35 years of age and a legal American citizen.

Experience is necessary, but insufficient by itself as your example indicates.

and if you meet'em and want to run for president, go for it! ;)

...who is old enough and born in this country. At least I hope they do. Of course, selecting someone randomly could hardly be worse than what we have.

Making any "Why is (candidate X) running?" question something of a moot point.

My concern, as it is every four years, is that we will nominate someone we like but who will not be acceptable to the country as a whole. I'm afraid that HRC is as popular as she ever will be and that Edwards and Obama are light-weights. Even if either of them win, they may be ineffective in governing and set us up for failure in the 2010 midterms. We really need a concensus candidate like Ohio's '06 gubernatorial candidate who was supported by essentially all the Ds and swing voters and by a significant minority of Rs. With Vilsack out, my own feeling is that leaves Richardson alone among declared candidates.

policy-wise, I don't know enough about the man yet to give an authoritative opinion, but I like what I've read so far.

As far as politics, though, a Hispanic on the ticket — especially one from the Southwest — is flippin' sweet. I've said before that I'd like to see what I call the "To Heck With Whitey" ticket — Obama/Richardson — because the two compliment each other incredibly well. As far as Edwards or Obama being a lightweight, I don't think that's too much of a problem, given their predecessor. Appearances mean more than reality in politics, and both of the candidates don't come across as lightweights (well, maybe Edwards does a teeny bit ... ). And regarding crossover appeal, I think all the candidates have problems. Hillary is positively loathed on the right, and Obama and Richardson don't exactly appeal to the current anti-immigrant strain running through the GOP. In that sense, Edwards may actually be the best shot at crossovers, lightweight or not. The populist rhetoric speaks to the downtrodden of all political stripes.

I'm okay with that, actually. I just want to make sure that we get all or at least most of the swing voters. One problem HRC has is that her support on the left is soft.

The rightwing hates anything named Clinton, but the left can't stand Hillary because of her stance on the war.

Meanwhile, the left sees McCain as a damnable Bush cheerleader, while the right still thinks he's a "maverick" and hates him for his occasionally less-than-obsequious statements in the past.

Makes one wonder why these are the frontrunners.

been a decent choice for moderates.Iowa, I believe would have been kinder to him further along in the election process. Either he wasn't able to raise the funds necessary to continue- which isn't good because it will also limit others and narrow our choice of candidates to choose from or perhaps he has been asked to step aside for another Governor- Gov. Richardson who has been polling a bit better and has some foreign policy experience. Any way, I think he is getting out too soon.

a few at a time. He died by the media no doubt it.

Not enough $$$ I assume.

That's what Bill Maher was saying when he interviewed Edwards. That's a sickening amount of moolah.

this news.

As early as a couple days ago in Carson City, Visack sounded pretty persuasive.

Surprising news.

I never did figure out her infatuation with Vilsack, but she was head over heels...

I never really had much chance to form an opinion of Vilsack, but guess he saw the writing on the wall...

I thought his voice was needed. To gain attention, beyond Hillary, Obama and Edwards, on the Media is a real challenge in today's RW Media. I thought he was a very uniteing speaker for the Democratic Party. He is a GOOD man!!!

Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack plans to withdraw from the 2008 presidential campaign today, Democratic sources in Iowa said.

Vilsack planned to hold a news conference at 11 a.m. to make what campaign "major campaign announcement," aides to the candidate said.

Vilsack had said he would win the leadoff Iowa caucuses. He had been trailing three better-known candidates in the state, according to early polls.

Vilsack had returned to Iowa Thursday after participating in a multi-candidate forum in Nevada. He had been campaigning in Iowa earlier in the week and had campaign events planned for Fairfield and Ottumwa this evening.


http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070223/NEWS/70223009

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/ap_on_el_pr/vilsack2008_3

I like Vilsack...I guess money was just too big a hurdle

DLC's CEO Al From listed "our candidates, Clinton Vilsack, Warner and Bayh" in an October 25th, 2005 Washington Journal appearance--and in that order.

The question is will Vilsack endorse his fellow DLCer Hillary Clinton or keep his power dry--like he did in the 2004 race.

In the Q&A in Nevada he said that he was not pleased with the way that NAFTA turned out and that in the future strong labor rights and environmental standards need to be included in any trade treaties. Maybe a few years as a governor of a border state gave him a different view of reality.

Not that it isn't usually, but I think Vilsack would have won Iowa, or at the very least been in the top three. This makes room for the other candidates to make a stronger showing there.

Edit: typo

to skip Iowa as unimportant - such as in 1992 when Harkin ran.

He might be good running-mate material - with whom I'm not sure.
As an Iowan, I wish he would run for senate against Chuck Grassley.
thx - cs

This is exactly why when folks start talking about Wes Clark
hurrying up to get into the race, I scratch my head.

Getting in early doesn't mean one will do any better than taking one's time.

Considering the media obsession with Hillary/Obama with a bit of Edwards thrown in, jumping into the frey for fear of being left behind is not how it will work. One has to have a compelling message, and be a compelling personality. whether one jumped in back in December or jumps in the first week of March makes no difference except for burning up a couple of million in the meantime.

Free publicity is the biggest commodity wanted by candidates. With the media giving the lyon's share of it to Obama/Hillary/Edwards, they are in essence fixing the race.

Plus Vilsack didn't want to lose in his home state...and 11 months of being ignored could have done it.

Too bad! I'd rather see more folks in it than less, truth be told!

If candidates still accepted federal matching funds, Clark would enter in October like all of the other candidates. But since Hillary, Edwards, and Obama will all forgo matching funds, Clark is going to have a hell of a time trying to catch up to their fundraising if he waits too long.

Plus if he choses to accept matching funds, the other candidates will attack him by saying that the party will have a disadvantage if they don't pick a nominee who didn't accept matching funds.

John Edwards 24%
Hillary Clinton 18%
Barack Obama 18%
Tom Vilsack 14%
Joe Biden 5%
Bill Richardson 3%
Wesley Clark 2%
Chris Dodd 1%
Dennis Kucinich 1%
Undecided 14%

http://strategicvision.biz/political/iowa_poll_022207.h...

Any candidate other than Vilsack could survive low Iowa polling numbers at this early stage, but Iowa voters certainly know their own ex-governor well enough to judge his candidacy, and if he's not polling better than fourth in his home state, he cannot hope to win.

end up the losers and those who have been written off make breathtaking come backs. Iowa and the country is just dating now. They have not decided to settle down yet.

Darn

He was at the forum on Wednesday, and just remodeled his website. I guess maybe he sat down with his staff, and realized he wasn't making any new ground. I honestly thought Vilsack was doing better then expected, and thought he'd at least make a serious bid for the nomination. Not necessarily be a top contender, but I thought by entering early he was going to stay in this thing till the bitter end.

I was wrong. Best of luck to Mr. Vilsack!!

Clinton/Edwards/Obama is too strong...the only guy that could get in and make a dent is Gore.

Richardson could make a big impact IMO. Just because Clinton/Obama/Edwards are the top contenders now, we still have a year to go. A year to stumble, and fumble. A year to rise, and make an impact.

the best Clark can hope for is a VP slot.

But if he gets into the race, he'd be a great voice to have in the debates.

Richardson is very impressive too.

We have to look at early support. He didn't have it, even in Iowa.

Vilsack has been running for President since right after John Kerry decided against him for his VP spot in 2004. Vilsack had private 'kitchen cabinet' meetings with close advisors during the entire 2006 cycle and formed the Heartland PAC to test his fundraising prowess (and he did well). Vilsack even held brief meetings with delegates to the state convention (those who would be most likely to attend the caucus 18 months later) to talk about his eight year record and hint about running for President. But then the actual presidential race began and he couldn't lock up his home state.

After his November 2006 announcement Vilsack rolled out his list of 1,100 supporters guaranteed to caucus for him, hired a large staff and opened seven campaign offices throughout Iowa surely attempting to ward off the competition and solidify his 'lead' in the state. However, he has never polled above third in any early contests (and I agree, early polling means nothing right now except for people raising money and running in thier home state). He could not be seen as a winner in Iowa. And if not here where he was considered the beloved Governor..where could he win?

Who else will able to compete with her? I learned something from the Bill Bradley campaign in 2000.