Mark Warner Hints That Hillary Can't Win

[Placebo]

Mark Warner, the former Virginia governor whom some Democrats are looking to boost as the Hillary Rodham Clinton alternative for president in 2008, last night suggested New York's senator would have trouble winning nationally.

...

"But I find all across the country there is a real sense that what we as Democrats have to do is not simply be competitive in 16 or 17 states, but actually have candidates that can win all across the country."

Hmm...

[safi0]

1. I've heard him

Use that line 100 times, he's more going after how the Democrats don't try to be a national party than any one person in particular.

[ShortnFiery]

3. Mark Warner's absolutely right!

Damn the Corporate Media for forcing her on US. :puke:

She makes a FINE Senator, but she can kiss us liberals' votes bye-bye-bye!

Mark Warner for President? Please! That's even more absurd.

[blm]

2. We DO have candidates who can win, and that's why BushInc has machines

that can be rigged.

Warner doesn't know that so he's already lost.

[Master Mahon]

4. I agree!

I think it's the Media that's trying their best to paint Hillary as the Democratic choice. They decide and bombard the public about who we're supposed to want as president and leave no room for anyone else.
The media should shut the F up and let the political process determine who the frontrunners will be. We DON'T want their opinions.

[leveymg]

5. Not entirely disinterested, but he's probably right about that.

He's also correct that we have to run a 50 state campaign, and develop a real alternative message, not just wait for frogwalks in DC and the GOP to collapse.

[brooklynite]

6. I was at this event...

...sponsored by Democratic Leadership for the 21st Century. Warner was energetic, engaging, funny when appropriate, and didn't come across as scripted (as Hillary frequently does). His comment was right on the mark, and can only be seen as an attack on Hillary (or any other candidate), if you believe the only way they can be elected is with a 50% +1 strategy, in which case perhaps you should ask why they can't do better.

His specific point (not mentioning any names), when asked how he does distinguish himself from other candidates, was that, as a limited term office-holder (VA has a single-term limit) he's better able to understand the electorate than folks who've spent year after year in Washington.

[snowbear]

14. Thanks for the info brooklynite! .. Nice to hear fm someone who attended!

And like I always say on here.. I'm one of the few that hasn't settled on a candidate yet.

It's just WAaAaaaaaAaaAaY to early at this point to know who will do good in the primary, who will knock em outta the ballpark during the debates, and who will gain national name recognition as the process goes on.

I watched a re-run of KOS on Meet the Press tonight and it was great! He reminded Russert that the -ONLY- reason that Hillary comes in tops in the media's polls (she never tops any... ANY... Democrat polls-- EVER) was because the people the media heads poll don't recognize most of the names they ask them about and they select 'Hillary' because she's a household word.

I still suspect that former VA Governor Mark Warner is going to do far better than the majority of DU'ers think at this point. KOS did a pretty good job of explaining to Russert while he feels this way too.

Although, KOS also mentioned that his readers also really like Russ Feingold and General Wes Clark ~

I hate to be optimistic (it's not necessarily the norm for this board ) but I feel good about 2008. I feel REALLLLLLY good about the 2008 Presidential election!

[FSogol]

7. Warner is correct. n/t

[aquart]

8. So? He thinks he can win.

Why would he tout someone else?

[wisteria]

9. I suppose he thinks he is the candidate we need. Well I live in one

of the 16 or 17 states that voted for Senator Kerry last time. And I can tell you, I am not at all thrilled about Warner.
So he thinks that all it will take to win is appeal to all of the 50 states? Wow, what a marvel idea. Now I would like for him to tell me how he plans on winning over all the states. A one term Gov. in a red state that won because the Republican had left the state in shambles is by no means a sure bet. Couple that with his inexperience in foreign relations and war issues and he seems to come up short in my opinion.

[election_2004]

10. and neither is....

A former First Lady with a "liberal" reputation who only won a U.S. Senate seat because she ran in a blue state while her husband was still in the White House.

[ruggerson]

13. I'm so interested to hear this point of view from you Wisteria

I never knew you felt that way. Maybe you can repeat it on every Warner thread for the next two years.

:eyes:

[election_2004]

11. Wow, who would have thunk it....???

A Democratic strategy involving targeting 30 or 40 states, as opposed to just "the blue Kerry states plus Ohio, New Mexico, and Colorado" (which appears to be the Hillaristas' 2008 "strategy").

[Tesha]

12. He's right. Neither the right nor the left will vote for her. (NT)

[MaineDem]

15. I can't say I disagree n/t

[Mass]

16. You mean a rag like the New York Post is trying to divide Dems.

What a surprise.

The only surprise is that somebody here would use the Post as a valid source of information. Remember: "Ghepardt VP Nominee".

[sendero]

17. I agree..

... neither can a warmed-over middle-of-the-road Dem like himself.