General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
John Warner isn't running for re-election, so Mark has a guaranteed Senate seat in '08. Since he's out of a job right now, there's practically no incentive to go after the big one in a crowded field. 'Specially if all these Obama '08 rumors bear out... He's also setting himself up to be everyone's first Veep pick.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
Basically, Warner's problem is that his constituency is split between Edwards and Richardson, and he's out of oxygen between the two. Theoretically, Bayh also takes away some of Warner's constituency, but I'm betting that he'll have the same problem - getting crowded out by Edwards and Richardson, gaining little traction. 'Course, if the 800 pould gorilla weren't in the field, Warner might be viable; but she is, and therefore he isn't.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
Originally posted by Ramo
I thought he was pretty anti-labor as Mayor of Phillyr... Don't know; I'll check that out. But given the nature of unions in Philly, I could see that not necessarily being a problem. Philly was in much better shape after Rendell left office; PA has improved under his governorship. So he's a proven effective leader of a large battleground state with regular-guy charisma; plus, he's untainted by Washingtonian compromises with the Bushies. The Dems could do a lot worse, and could hardly do better. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
Originally posted by Ramo
John Warner isn't running for re-election, so Mark has a guaranteed Senate seat in '08. Since he's out of a job right now, there's practically no incentive to go after the big one in a crowded field. 'Specially if all these Obama '08 rumors bear out... He's also setting himself up to be everyone's first Veep pick. You live in a fantasy world if you think a black man or even a half black man is going to get nominated for President by a party which is desperate to pick up southern states. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
There is also the issue that he is inexperienced, doesn't have the financing & fund raising machine which a big campaign would require, and that he is a Senator who therefor voted and revoted on virually every issue and thus can easily be painted as a flip flopper. It's best to get someone like a governor who has never been in Congress.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
There is also the issue that he is inexperienced, doesn't have the financing & fund raising machine which a big campaign would require, and that he is a Senator who therefor voted and revoted on virually every issue and thus can easily be painted as a flip flopper. It's best to get someone like a governor who has never been in Congress.
The biggest problem is that he's inexperienced. But it's precisely this lack of experience in Congress - that he has only been in the Senate for two years so doesn't have problems wrt his voting record. And OTOH, he can speak articulately about any number of issues. And he's the biggest fund-raising draw in the party (perhaps second only to Bill), so will not have a cash problem. |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
Originally posted by Winston
You know, Zkribbler, of those you mentioned, only Carter is eligible to run again next time around, and in some spooky way I think that serves to underline my point quite nicely. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
Originally posted by Winston
Yes. Since this is the upcoming next presidential election I'm talking about, and how the Democrats potentially in the running seem less intent on "fighting to make the world a safer place" than they do on talking about it. BS. How do you know that of most of these people? Especially the ones from outside DC? |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|