good reasons and all, but who would take his potential place in the Senate Race then? any names?

I'd say there are several possibilities (in no particular order):

*Don Beyer
*John Grisham
*Creigh Deeds
*Brian Moran
*Leslie Byrne
*Bobby Scott
*Andy Hurst
*Gerry Connolly
*Claudia Kennedy

and just for fun...

*Ingrid Morroy :)

really?  I had no idea.

but in the past he has said he's not interested. 

If Grisham decides to run for anything, PLEASE let it be Goode's seat here in the 5th!!!!!!!!!!!!

is the only one who would stand a chance. And I doubt he will run for Senate. He'll look to AG first.

Creigh Deeds certainly would be a great candidate, but some of the others I listed would definitely have a shot.  For instance, John Grisham vs. Jim Gilmore?  That would be fascinating!

in your original list. He would be interesting.

Moran would get crushed. completely crushed.

The match up of Dems from NoVa is way better for the Governors race then for the Senate.

disagree as well.  Don Beyer has a fundraising network like no other, is the most gifted out of the group listed on the stump and will work harder than anyone for the position.

That's all I need to say...

That and the man hasn't run for office in a decade.

And that means he will be fresh.  I don't know the last time you heard Don Beyer on the stump, but it is something amazing. 

But i do like Don Beyer btw his Dealership is the best place to buy a Volvo i just bought the Volvo SUV from thier... great deal...

Your joking right Gerry "I cut a deal with Tom Davis" Connolly, please he'd be lucky to win releelction... yes i am an ABCer... stay home or write-in myself or hold nosie and vote for whats that guys name the one who looks like the Federation Ambassador from Deep Space 9, in 2007 and vote for a good dem in 2011...

What about Doug Wilder running for Senate or senind Chuck Robb back to Washington. He was a good Senator...  Honestly i think Mary Sue Terry would be perfect in the Senate.  How cool would that be....

Terry in 2008!!!

Chuck Robb is 68 I believe.

is there something wrong with him being 68?  Sen. Byrd in WV is alot older then that and he surving the good people of WV.

Also FYI i heard that Bobby Kilgore is thinking of running too.

I think Mark Warner could do more for the Commonwealth, and for the state Democratic party as Governor than as Senator.  Moreover, I wonder whether Deeds or Moran could win a 3rd consecutive Democratic administration.  Only because after 8 years, I worry that Virginians might get restless with the same party in the Governor's mansion.  I don't know if my vague fears are baseless, but I have no doubt Warner would easily win.  Any thoughts on Deeds' or Moran's chances in 09?  Have there been polls?

...my guess is that either Creigh or Brian would have a pretty good shot, just not a sure thing like Mark Warner.

but I don't see Moran getting elected Governor. I wish Creigh would run for U.S. Senate, seems like a natural promotion for a State Senator. Then in 2009 Mark could run for Governor and maybe Brian Moran could ride his coattails as the nominee for Lt. Governor.

But the way things stand now, Mark HAS to run for Senate. Otherwise say hello to Senator Davis.

as key to ending this war.  We need a filibuster proof majority, even if we have a Democratic president.  Why?  Because this thing is going to get really rough, and a good majority in the Senate will make sure that the Democratic president can guide us out of the quagmire by preventing bad Republican bills and nudging that president to move on it.  If a Republican wins the presidency, then that same Senate can demand he go in that direction.  I thought Mark Warner was a good governor, but we need a D in the U.S. Senate in '08, and with the popular Mark Warner on the ticket, that is very likely with him.

 

...I disagree.  I believe that the WHITE HOUSE is the key to ending this war.  Why?  Because when it comes to war, the Executive always has a huge advantage over Congress.  Unless we win back the White House in 2008, we're screwed in many areas, including Iraq -- regardless of who controls the US Senate.

It came from pressure from the Congress, which forced Nixon to act.  Without that pressure, it will be easy to let it go on and on.  And let's be clear that there is no guarantee a Dem will win the WH, and who the VP is doesn't improve those odds by much.  There IS a better chance for Mark Warner to win a Senate seat.

You can read all about it here:

http://www.prospect....

The executive branch is not the be all end all of our government.  The legislative branch is a co-equal branch.  I would like to see the next president's powers weakened (D or R) so we can get back to that balance.

291-144 in 1974.  They controlled the Senate 61-37.  Unless you believe we're going to have majorities like that, I don't see Congress being able to overcome a Republican President.  That's why, first and foremost, we need the White House.

"I believe that the WHITE HOUSE is the key to ending this war."

YES YES YES YES YES YES!  Couldn't agree more.  You want to end the war?  We need to win the WH.

I do, pretty strongly.

1. Perhaps Mark Warner would be happier in an Executive position, but let's remember that prior to seeking any elected office at all Warner had extensive experience with both jobs as a Senate staffer for Dodd and campaign manager for Governor Wilder, and his first instinct was to run for the Senate.

2. Sure, he could get a lot accomplished, but so could any other Democratic governor under those circumstances. I can think of a couple of Dems who could take the Governor's race besides Mark Warner, I can't think of any who could conceivably take the Senate seat.

3. Sure, Warner at the top of the ticket in 2009 would be great downticket. But the same holds true for 2008. And actually, I would argue that the Virginia Democratic Party is doing a fine job of heading towards a good showing in 2009. Mark Warner at the top of the ticket would be a huge benefit downticket for the 10th and 11th Congressional Districts and it would help maintain a Democratic majority in the United States Senate. Think about what the 2009 election will like with popular Senators Webb and Warner traveling all over the state supporting Democrats.

4. And Mark Warner for Senate will help avoid a rough primary between Democrats in 2008. So what? We shouldn't be so afraid of primaries.

5. Really? You think there's someone else who could win Warner's seat who Republicans will be desperate to defend? Tell me who could fill those shoes other than Warner, becuase I can't think of one.

6. If Mark Warner gets picked for a running mate in 2008, it would make it pretty hard for him to run for Gov in 2009. What's he going to do, campaign for VP and then if he loses come back and step all over those Democrats who have been putting in so much work to run for Governor. Totally bad form. And if he gets picked as a running mate in 2008 and they win, well, he won't really be running for Governor will he? It virtually makes no difference, if he's picked for VP he can't run for either office.

7. Sure, but any Democrat as Governor would be nice when redistricting comes up in 2011.

Bottom line, I think the chances that a Democrat other than MW could more easily win for Governor than a Democrat other than MW could win the Senate. It does the state, and Democrats, more good if he runs for Senate.

I don't think there any sure things, just my gut feeling that Mark Warner for Governor is more important than Mark Warner for Senate.  As I said, I wish we could clone him. :)

It's actually a really good discussion to be having.

It's an interesting dilemma, I'm almost torn, but think that with the state trending like it a is, a big Warner victory in 2008 would be just the thing to lead the Dems into 2009.

Virginia Democrats have had momentum for most of this decade, and especially following Tim Kaine's victory in 2005. I think ensuring another important victory in 2008, for the other senate seat, which with Mark Warner, we'd have that. For the coattails effect, he would help out tremendously in VA-11, VA-10, VA-02, VA-04 and VA-05, and if there's anything VA Democrats have failed at lately, it's been electing House Democrats (even if it is heavily Gerrymandered). Warner in '08 would probably marginally help out the Presidential candidate (and IMO, if that candidate is Edwards, he'd win the state, providing an even greater victory).

Basically, I think Warner in '08 would add to the momentum of VA Dems going into '09.

I think only MW can win the senatorial race but there are quite a few that could possibly win the governorship. I mean, who are the rethugs going to put up for governor? Allan-??? how fun would THAT be?? Gilmore-everyone already hates him-Bolling-who?-
Let the games begin!

I don't think anyone except Mark Warner can beat Tom Davis. If that is the case having Warner run for governor instead of for Senate would then place the Senate leadership and all the committees back in the control of the Republicans (assuming Democrats don't gain a seat somewhere else). I think keeping Democrats in leadership in the Senate is far more important than having Mark Warner as governor.

I think Don Beyer can beat Tom Davis.  One of the biggest myths in Virginia is Tom Davis' base in Northern Virginia.  In addition, he hasn't been as moderate as some would hope and Northern Virginia is turning so blue, I think 2008 is the year that Virginia Democrats can beat anyone they want to put up.

Plus, having Mark Warner as Governor, controlling redistricting is more important than controlling the Senate. 

Regardless of what I think though, I'll support whatever decision he makes.

the support of RoVa to take the Senate in 2008. I don't think anyone from NoVa gets that done other than Mark Warner. Beyer won't get crushed like Moran would, but Creigh is the only one with a shot and I'm not even sure about that.

Remember, the fight for the 2008 is going to be a much tougher fight than the governor's race. The GOP is going to dump money into this fight to attempt to hang on to the seat. It's going to be gloves off, and you need a heavy-weight. That's much less true of the race for Gov. The national party and infrastructure won't be involved.

Mark Warner is the only one who can really take on the GOP machine that will descend upon VA in 2008.

VA gubernatorial races generally get a lot of national attention and a lot of national money because they only other thing going on is NJ and they're true blue.  The DNC dumped $5 million into Kaine's races in 2005 and viewed it as a critical must win heading into 2006.  With virtually no other competitive races going on around the country in 2009, you can bet the VA governor's race is going to be a top national target.

compared to what they will dump into the Senate race next year. The DCCC dumped 20 million into a congressional race in IL, just for a comparison on the kind of money that gets thrown around.

I wasn't suggesting the VA Gov race won't get national attention, but trust me, the Republicans are WAY more interested in hanging on to that Senate seat than they are about the VA GOvernor's race. It's not even close by a long shot.

And along with it being an off year, which garners more attention for the race, it actually makes it much harder for the national party to raise money that could be dumped into the race.

The Gov race will get attention. But the attention on the Senate race from the GOP will dwarf anything you can imagine.

If they really plan on dumping money into this race, which of the 12 other seats they are going to have to seriously defend are they going to take it away from?  And on top of that, their fundraising isnt what it use to be, so I'd really like to know where the money is coming from.

What Congressional race did the DCCC dump $20 million into?  Considering they only spent $140 million in the 06 cycle, I would have a hard time believing they dumped $20 million on any one race.

You're assuming Dems won't pick up any seats anywhere else?  Even after Larry Craig and David Vitter?  Even though most analysts think the Dems will pick up 3 or 4 seats?  Even though Dems are unlikely to lose any seats?  Given all that, why are you worried about the Senate?  You lost me here.

We need a *working* majority.  Dems currently have only the barest margin of error and can barely get anything passed. 

the Senate seat is what I base my preference. 

After the debacle of the past (soon to be past) eight years of Dubya, the Dems absolutely need to win another Senate seat - no matter who is in the White House.  As much as I'd like great leadership for Virginia I think we've got even bigger problems to fix nationally (not just the war) and we'll need as many seats as we can get.  It may be a situation where sacrificing a sure thing governorship for another Senate seat is what has to be done.

If the Dems had another very strong candidate to go up against Davis/Gilmore/Allen/Kilgore (I couldn't resist throwing in the other two) it *might* be ok for Warner to run for Gov.  But the way I see it, we've got to win that Senate seat more than the Governor's seat in order to make certain the nation, not just Virginia, moves in the right direction.

Your argument fails because you ignore the fact that we have no strong Dem. candidate for Senate who would gain full support of the Dem. faithful after a bloodbath primary even more damaging than Davis vs. Gilmore. And even worse, I think Davis would win the GOP primary and then who could beat his machine ? Remember how the Miller supporters, as well as Miller himself and Gerry and Dick Cranwell waited a very long time to give their obligatory but relatively meaningless "Webb is our candidate" public statements ? Neither ever really campigned for Jim, and the same could well happen in a knock-down-drag-out Dem. primary for the Senate seat. What would we accomplish but to follow the Va. GOP example and split the Dem. party for many years ?

Deeds could readily gain the full party support and could beat his GOP gubernatorial opponent. Don't forget that in 2005 Deeds lost his race by just a few hundred votes and not one potential GOP gubernatorial candidate has that kind of recent name recognition and voter support. Gilmore has made himself a bad joke, as has Allen, and there are nearly a million Va. voters now who don't even know who they are Gilmore's or Allen's or what they've done except that both caused the transportation and financial crisis we are facing now. Running on their records ? A voter's no-brainer easy decision.

One last comment/question: Why do you think Mark would rather be governor than work with Webb in the Senate ? What they could accomplish together is almost limitless; each man's weakneses are the other's stengths. And If Mark does what I expect and doesn't announce his decision until early Feb. when the Dem. Pres. nominee may have been determined and Mark knows if he's a VP choice, nothing is lost. Remember please that Jim Webb didn't announce until he caught the entire DPVA leadership by surprise and accepted the RK draft. Mark certainly won't announce any decision until well after the Nov. elections so he doesn't detract from those critical campaigns, and waiting until a month of so after the end-of-the-year holidays when everyone except Pres. campaigners are taking a holiday break won't affect his campaign strength for either the Senate or the VP option.

That's what I think and I await your response particulary to my point that you haven't said yet who you think could assure a Senate win.

In the spirit of the Honorable John Warner's 30 years of civility in the Senate, I respecfully submit my remarks for your consideration and comment.

  T.C.

*Don Beyer
*John Grisham
*Creigh Deeds
*Brian Moran
*Leslie Byrne
*Bobby Scott
*Andy Hurst
*Gerry Connolly
*Claudia Kennedy

No, none of them are sure things.  On the other hand, Creigh and Leslie both lost in 2005 by under 1 percentage point.  John Grisham would be a fascinating candidate.  Don Beyer was a very popular statewide candidate.  There are plenty of choices here, just not a sure thing like Mark Warner.

If that's your list of "strong" alternates, why is Beyer on the lists? :)

But seriously, why are we talking about Don Beyer for Senate?  The guy has been out of the public eye for a decade now.  If you're looking for a strong NoVA candidate, there are SO many stronger candidates.

n/t

anyways, I won't post it online.  if you don't remember it, shoot me an e-mail.

Hasn't he been pretty active behind the scenes?  And isn't he pretty good pals with Gov. Warner?  So ... he'd have more institutional support than Webb apparently did, right?  And - an amateur's observation - I know who Don Beyer is, as opposed to a few others on the list. 

Ben Affleck! 

Ha. :)

I personally would rather see Warner run for Senate.  It's easy to discount the importance of the U.S. Senate because it's been run into the ground by Republican clowns for so long, but it could do a great deal with the right leadership and a strong Democratic majority.

I am personally doubtful than any of the Democrats mentioned so far would be a particularly strong candidate for Senate.  Most of them, however, are well equipped to run for governor, based on their experience in state-level -- not national-level -- politics.  Warner is the only one with the stature and national reputation and experience to make the Senate race a likely (not just a possible) Democratic pickup.

Anyway, this is really just one of those "Tastes great" vs. "Less filling" types of arguments -- we'll all be happy to have him back in a position of leadership in Virginia, regardless of which position he chooses. 

it is MW's decision as to what is best for him and his family and what he wants to do with his life.
BTW I think Beyer is a very weak candidate for either office. Deeds and Byrne both lost-I'm not sure if either of them run again can they win anything. They just don't have the name regognition statewide. But then again, we have to have a democratic governor in office for redistricting.
So I have no clue what the answer is. We need him to get a veto proof senate but we need him as governor too.

And it is Lisa Collis.  She hated living in Richmond, does not want to move her girls again, and if Mark Warner is a senator, she will not have to move.

we need that senate seat, to break republican filibusters. those filibusters can be far more dangerous with regards to domestic policy such as national healthcare (assuming the president is a dem).

I want Warner to run for the US Senate. He is most needed there.

I don't see any other democrat winning this one.  I thought Grisham said he had no interest, too many people have forgotten about Beyer, and I don't see Byrne having much chance to capture the all-important rural vote.  Plus Warner-Webb is like a dream team.

too many people have forgotten about Don Beyer, its O.K.  I would venture to guess his statewide name recognition is near 35% right now.  And with the huge turnovers in population in NOVA, I figure that about right.  We don't need a candidate with universal name recognition.  We need a candidate who wants to run, who is going to put their full effort into it and do a damn good job - that man in my opinion, if Mark Warner doesnt run, is Don Beyer.

will be available every 4 years. If a Democrat is elected to the Senate next year, who knows when another Democrat will get a shot at a Senate seat?

I don't understand why we dismiss any Senate candidate who's not Mark Warner out of hand.  I agree with Lowell, Warner would be the easiest victory, but I don't know why we would write off everyone else! 

Have we learned nothing from last year?  Granted, Allen made it easier, but VA is trending blue, right?  And yes, 08 may be a golden opportunity, but not ONLY for Gov. Warner.  Whats to prevent another "people-powered" victory?  Stranger things have happened.

I blogged on this yesterday at my joint, but Warner has to go.  He is still young, and there are no guarantees he gets the VP nod this time around.  He is not the perfect ticket balancer for any of the top democratic nominee.

If he doesn't run, and the GOP holds the seat, it creates ill will for him as it did for Trible in 1988 when he bailed on his Senate seat rather than face Robb, then ran for the GOP nomination a year later.  Is it enough to hold him back in 2009?  Probably not, but it puts him in the light of being a calculating politico and not the selfless give it all for the party guy he is now.

Personally I think Warner would be happier as governor, but (to paraphrase Rummy) sometimes you have to run the race you have and not the race you want to run.