WHY is the Washington establishment so upset over Mark Warner's decision not to run for president? Not because he had showed up well in any polls - he hardly showed up at all.
No, it's just that the establishment really thinks it should pick our presidents and not risk leaving the matter to mere voters. After all that's what happened with Bill Clinton.
And Mark Warner was meant to be the Bill Clinton of 2008, someone who looks like a Democrat but frequently enough acts like a Republican in order, as the following sycophantic report says, "to provide solutions."
CHRIS CILLIZZA, WASHINGTON POST - Warner's anticipated campaign was to be built around the notion that in an age of polarized politics, many voters are eager for a leader focused on reaching across partisan barriers for solutions to big problems. . . On paper, Bayh most closely resembles Warner in both ideological profile and governing style. Both are former governors of Republican-leaning states who have spent much of their time in office working with members of the rival party to provide
solutions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/12/AR2006101201675.html
No comments:
Post a Comment