Today's DC Examiner profiles Mark Warner and analyzes his presidential prospects, while RealClearPolitics points to this New York Observer piece about Warner's recent visit to New York City to woo Democratic donors in Hillary Clinton's "home" state. In my view, Warner is the most electable Democrat in 2008, and perhaps even the only electable one. Hillary Clinton may be the Democratic frontrunner, but she still faces a huge likeability problem and the major handicap of being a senator rather than an executive of some capacity. By contrast, Warner comes across as likeable and reasonable, and was the popular governor of a red state as well as a successful business executive. Whereas Clinton has had to repeatedly defend her support for the Iraq War, angering many anti-war leftists in the process, Warner has been able to quietly oppose withdrawal while still remaining generally popular even among the anti-war left. The big problem for Warner is his lack of national security credentials. I see this hurting him less in the Democratic primary, which will ultimately be more about "Who can beat the Republican?" then, "Who will be the best wartime commander-in-chief?" In the general election, the Republican nominee will determine how much of a problem his lack of national security credentials will be. If McCain or Giuliani are nominated, I think national security will hurt Warner, if Romney were the Republican nominee, I think the national security credibility issue becomes more neutralized.
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article