Question from people from VA

[Mass]

Is Warner so lightwave than supporting him justify thrashing Kerry and saying he is at best a mediocre senator? (for clarification, Warner did not say so. Somebody in GDP did).

I am very disappointed as I was getting to warm up to him.

[beachmom]

1. Do you by any chance have a link to Warner's statement?

The only veiled criticism I have heard Warner make of Kerry (and he did not use his name) was talking about connecting with rural voters and not being a "phony". But the way he said it was in reference more to himself (I can connect to rural voters, I'm not a phony), so I thought it was alright, since he never named Kerry. This is what distinguished him from Kaine who criticized Kerry about windsurfing. Warner is a better pol than that. However, I didn't hear what he said, so if you have the details, I am curious as to what the quote was.

[Mass]

2. It is not Warner. It is a Warner's supporter on GDP

I dont think Warner said anything like that.

[beachmom]

3. Hey Mass, I found the thread you were referring to

Was that Warner supporter the one who got several of his messages deleted down thread? If so, that is very unfortunate if he got abusive to any of you here.

I think what he was doing, at least originally, was trying to set Warner up as "most electable" for '08, but knew that this will not go down well in DU, because everyone refers to Kerry as "most electable" for '04, and then he lost. The problem was he descended into criticizing Kerry's Senate record and concluding that Kerry was not most electable after all. I was somebody more on the outside in the '04 primaries (I didn't even vote in the primaries), and I can tell you that there were MAJOR problems with the others (Dean being one of the most flawed candidates), and Kerry was easily the best of the lot. I'm not going to deny that electability isn't a factor when people vote in a primary. But I think all that really means is that you look at a candidate as a whole, and may not agree with them on every issue, but you think they will overall be the best candidate. Kerry was the best candidate. Being a great president also means that you have what it takes to get elected. If you can't get elected, then you can't be a good or great president. True, there are some like * who are good at getting elected but lousy at governing. But overall, Kerry is a good campaigner and a fabulous Senator.

It's funny but of the 114 posts in the Warner forum, one of them is mine when I posted a courtesy bulletin about Warner being on Road to the White House. I told the guy that I'm a Kerry gal, and he said to come back any time. I will continue to try to keep things friendly and see if I can rise above the fray. He is a little obsessive, saying Warner is the greatest governor Va. has ever had. That's fine. But he should learn a little internet human relations, that to get people on board with his guy, he needs to avoid putting down other Dems.

[beachmom]

4. Warner related: Kos criticizes his Iraq position

Warner is ever so slightly to the right of Kerry on Iraq. He says there should be no timeline for withdrawal, and said it should be based on milestones. Kerry says about the same, but then does push the envelope, suggesting most troops out by the end of 2006. He also, of course, has tons of details -- a how to get out of Iraq, if you will -- whereas Warner has no specifics. Kos now has a post out saying Warner's position is out of date.

[Mass]

5. Well, I would disagree - Kerry presented a thoughtful plan

that planned to have the troops out in one year and explained how. Warner basically lets all that to Bush to decide what and when in function of Bush's goals.

"This Democrat doesn't think we need to re-fight how we got into (the Iraq war). I think we need to focus more on how to finish it," Warner said.

"To set an arbitrary deadline or specific date is not appropriate," he said. "... It is incumbent on the president to set milestones for what he believes will be the conclusion."

I dont care what kos is thinking, and this proves how light he is (Warner's position was not unknown when he basically endorsed him a few weeks ago), but Warner is largely showing his inexperience about these subjects.

[fedupinBushcountry]

6. I agree, Mass

Warner to me plays to the Republicans. He is a business man, who became Governor, and his biggest accomplishment was the budget, which Gilmore and Allen made a mess of.

I am not interested in Warner as a candidate for president, he should do the right thing and run against Allen, he would have a very good chance of winning. I think his jump after being a one term Gov. to running for Pres. is not the right move.

[beachmom]

11. This goes back to the whole "pieces do not equal the sum" argument

Both * (the Pentagon) and Warner have stolen aspects of Kerry's plan, but a piece here and a piece there do not equal the comprehensive, well thought out plan Kerry has put out. Nevertheless, they did steal from him. They even used similar language. However, where I think we can both agree is that even if * completely plagiarized Kerry's plan, he would fuck it up in the execution of it. And with his lack of credibility in the world, some of it he simply could not do. Only Kerry could.

On the pre-war stuff, I completely agree. Warner is handing the argument over to * without a fight. Since he didn't have to vote on the IWR, I suppose he thinks he can get away with overlooking the criminally misleading actions of the administration prior to the war. I don't agree with him on that.

As I said on KG's blog, I like Gov. Warner a lot here in Virginia (hey what's wrong with him being a businessman? Kerry once was, too.), but I simply think that John Kerry is a much better candidate for president. I disagree with Warner on some issues, but I'm not going to trash him to prop up Kerry. Yes, he would have made a fine senator but he was already in a Senate race and lost against John Warner so I understand if he doesn't want to go through that again. I guess I'm trying to do a Golden Rule thing here. Do unto their candidate as they would do unto ours . . .

If this pisses any of you off, please forgive me!!

[Mass]

12. I am not sure why this would piss me off.

If we cant state our opinion here, where can we? (and I did not think I was thrashing Warner. Sorry if you think I was).

And I have nothing against Warner being a business man.

[beachmom]

14. No, you're right. You just had a problem with that Warner supporter

Which I think was justified because he was kind of being a jerk. As far as trashing Warner, I guess I was referring to the whole forum, that we should rise above the food fight. It's early in the game. In fact, a good way to argue with Warner supporters civilally is to say, yes he was a good governor, but where is his foreign policy experience? That is his big weakness.

Anyway, maybe I'm reading too much into everything. In short, I guess I think we should keep things as positive as possible (except re: The Republicans and *). That's it.

[TayTay]

13. I liked Warner. I just wish he was running for the Senate

Cuz I think he could knock off Allen. But someone else wrote that he lost a prior Senate race and may not really want a legislative role, as he prefers an executive role. Okay.

My real critique of Warner is that he was only a Gov. for 4 years. To tell you the truth, I don't want any Govs. I don't want anymore 'on-the-job' foreign policy training. I really don't think we can afford it in '08. This is not really anything against Gov. Warner, it's just a personal preference based on how I see things right now. As far as I am concerned Warner is a good Dem and I wish him well.

[beachmom]

15. Totally agree with you, Tay Tay -- And that goes for both sides

I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY want a Senator vs. Senator presidential race next time. Yes, governors have executive experience, but obviously that does nothing to protect us from incompetence. In fact, has anyone really researched *'s years as governor in Texas? At least what the media was drumming over and over was that he was a good and popular governor of Texas. Is there evidence of incompetence back then? I'm not talking ideology -- obviously we disagree with him on almost everything. But I'm just talking not doing the job very well? Or, now that I think about it, he was governor during the go go 90s when it was easier to govern and cover up fundamental problems. Is Texas in a big mess now? Just curious.

[TayTay]

16. Oh gawd yes. The Texas progressives did.

But Bush got a pass from so much of the media in the 2000 race. Molly Ivins wrote a short book about Bush's short career in Texas and this is worth a check-out from the library. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0375757147/102-8704225-1768159?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v=glance

It's sad to read this now. This guy was never qualified to be Pres.

[beachmom]

17. Thanks for the recommendation, Tay Tay!

I think it's pretty simple that you should judge a candidate by their past ACTIONS. Maybe that's why I defend Warner, because he did some tough stuff that was responsible in the area of fiscal responsibility and kids' health care. Obviously, Kerry has mounds and mounds of actions taken "for the people". Anyway, back to the book, I will check it out!

[TayTay]

18. I have a crush on the Texas progressives

They have endured so much. I mean, they had Bush there as Gov from 1994 to 2000, so they have had to put up with him for so much longer than the rest of us.

The environmental damage done to Texas under Bush is heart-breaking. So are the many scandals that were swept under the rugs. Sigh!

[karynnj]

19. The book is wickedly funny too

and as Tay Tay said there's no way if anyone looked at Bush's Texas experience he should have been considered.

Texas law includes a very weak Governor - the LT Governor actually has some powers.

[Mass]

7. I finished reading the kos thread.

These threads are funny when they do not relate to Kerry. These people are so infantile. If they could not guess where Warner would fall on these issues, I dont know how they choose who they are going to support (where he lives?).

[LittleClarkie]

8. Did Kos ever even acknowledge the Kerry plan

and if he did, did he manage a kind word. (yeah, right.)

[Mass]

9. Who? Kerry? Who is that?

[LittleClarkie]

10. Don't you remember Kos? He's that assclown who thinks he's a leader

on the Iraq issue. The one who glommed onto Schweitzer in Montana so as to bask in his political glory. The Man Who is Not Dean. That guy.