Rasmussen has a Virginia poll out later today (0.00 / 0)

Also Nevada. I'm expecting McCain to be narrowly ahead in both. I'm really hoping this doesn't come down to Colorado but I'm still confident it won't.

---

by: conspiracy @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 13:49:35 PM UTC

This was a bad choice (4.00 / 3)

I'm disappointed.  Warner isn't particularly progressive, he's fine for a Senator from Virginia, but this was a chance to create a new progressive star.

Also, I don't see how it will help Obama carry Virginia.  Even VP picks don't help much with carrying their home states, I doubt something like "Keynote speaker at the DNC" will move many voters.

I don't know how good a speaker he is, but I wrote about this topic in June, and my #1 criteria for keynote was that the person has to be outstanding.  So he'd better be damn good or this will be a total waste.

---

by: Daniel De Groot @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:02:20 PM UTC

Imagine that it is now (4.00 / 2)

2002.  The DLC guesses wrong on Iraq.  But, no matter, for it will reclaim the party anyway.  Two Clintons and Warner.

Obama, who is relatively centrist, will be the most "left" voice at this Convention.

Reclaim the Party?  

Obama is better than McCain, just as Kerry was better than Bush, but it seems those who seek a progressive populist party have a lot of work to do.  We aren't even represented among the speakers.  Oh, I guess Hillary has complet4ed her transformation into populist, right?  No way.  

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:10:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

One big difference between the right (4.00 / 3)

and the left is that politicians on the right tend to think that people farther to the right are better conservatives. They look to them for inspiration. They themselves might have to make pragmatic compromises, but inside they feel that the true wingnuts are really carrying the torch.

On the other hand, most politicians an inch left of center tend to feel that she or he describes the outermost marker of  rational leftism. They think that people further to the left are embarrassing moonbats, and instead of being drawn to them, they recoil.

Didn't Obama vote to sanction MoveOn? That's the dynamic.

---

by: Joel @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:45:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Quite Right (4.00 / 1)

This is a direct consequence of that hegemony thingie I keep writing about.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 15:57:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Great article. (4.00 / 1)

I miss most of the weekend stuff.

---

by: Joel @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 17:23:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He didn't (4.00 / 2)

He refused to vote in protest.

---

by: illissius @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 17:08:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Difference? (4.00 / 1)

What difference?  Both sides agree, the further to the right the better you are.

---

by: Mark Matson @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 17:33:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah, (4.00 / 2)

Make no mistake: Warner is a corporatist centrist. Unless there's a surprising VP pick, then the Democratic Establishment and its corporate backers will be thrilled with this convention.

And Al From--he'll be beside himself with joy.

DLCers are like the neocons, they keep winning by losing.

---

by: david mizner @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:47:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I, Too, Am Underwhelmed (4.00 / 4)

But, at this point, not the least bit surprised.

but this was a chance to create a new progressive star.

Why in the world would Obama do that?  He seems to have totally swallowed the kool aid on the idea that "bipartisanship" means Dems move right under virtually all circumstances.

I was formerly of the opinion that proposed VP candidates like Sebelius and Schweitzer were strategically bad choices, way oversold, and that someone like Clark (now that Edwards is out of the picture) would be far superior.  But the idea of Obama actually having the cojones or the will to make such a move now seems positively silly to me.

Of course, Obama has done plenty of silly things before.  Just usually not in a good way.  Democrats as soooo good at squandering their gifts.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:48:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Warner is an excellent choice (0.00 / 0)

he's a very good speaker who presents many of the same ideas (this is about the future vs. the past.etc) that Obama does.

---

by: ArkansasLiberal @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:13:36 PM UTC

But -Obama- is a very good speaker who (4.00 / 4)

presents many of the same ideas as Obama!

This could've been a huge campaign platform for Merkley, Allen, Noriega, Hagen, Begich ...

---

by: Joel @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:38:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Or even a real longshot like Kleeb. (4.00 / 3)

That would've been cool--risky and smart at the same time.

---

by: Joel @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:40:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And It Would Have Sent A GREAT Message (4.00 / 3)

Talk about the heartland.  Everyone knows about Obama's Kansas connection.  Going next door says something broader.  That it's not just a fluke of personal history.  That Democrats are rising up from places where Republicans have dominated, and that they have faith in their own future.

Besides, my sister was born in Nebraska.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:54:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It feels like that slot is completely wasted now since (4.00 / 1)

Warner will be elected anyways. There are so many tight campaigns in the Senate, and especially more longshot canditated like Noriega or even Rice should be given the keynote.

---

by: Spongebob1976 @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 16:35:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was hoping for one of our second-tier (4.00 / 3)

Senatorial candidates. Tom Allen, for example. Obama's blowing out McCain, but Allen's trailing Collins: seems like exactly the kinda candidate who might get a huge bounce from that sorta spotlight, from being linked so closely to Obama.

On the other hand, I'm not sure about Allen's electrifying stage presence. But I'd rather have a better shot at the Senate seat than all the oohing and ahhing over a great speech.

Warner. A cautious choice. Not surprised.

---

by: Joel @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:36:03 PM UTC

Allen Would Have Been A Very Smart Strategic Choice (4.00 / 2)

I agree completely.  There are a few different rationales that all make sense to me, and this is definitely one of them.

Warner is not.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:56:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Warner's Speechifying Skills (0.00 / 0)

Mark Warner gave the commencement address at my (late) college graduation in 2002.  He had just been elected Governor of Virginia (in 2001 - Virginia has off-year gubernatorial elections and term-limits governors to one four-year term).  Here is the text of that speech

Overall, I was impressed with the content of his speech, but not with his oratorical skills.  He is a very smart guy but is not a compelling orator.  I see the logic in this choice and agree that he is certainly a strong possibility for nominee in 2016 if all goes well with Obama winning two terms, but he is not in the same class with the superstar keynote speakers of the past like Obama and Cuomo.

Then again, there's probably a certain logic in not looking for a supreme orator given that our nominee fills that bill more than readily enough.  

The campaign is putting a ton of chips in Virginia, which is great - my mother is volunteering at an Obama office in northern Virginia and says the enthusiasm is extremely high.  

---

by: STLEdge @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 14:50:42 PM UTC

Vote (0.00 / 0)

Re-reading the text of the speech, I remember being very turned off by his asking us to vote for a referendum in November; I was moving out of the state to go to law school, but I thought it was wildly inappropriate at the time.  I see the point now, and I don't begrudge him, but it showed a little tone deafness I think.

---

by: STLEdge @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 15:08:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm Glad That A Lot Of Effort Is Being Put Into Virginia (4.00 / 1)

But I just don't see keynote speaker being a big help in that effort (meaning any votes at all, really).  It'd be different if Warner himself needed a boost, and if giving him a boost would give Obama a boost.  I could get behind that.  But that's clearly not the case.

As for the idea that we're fine with just one great orator--that seems downright strange to me.  For folks who aren't political junkies or policy wonks, why else would they pay attention?  We should want to have every speakers be a great orator.

Of course, that's not realistic.  But, like winning every game in a 162-game season, it's a great goal anyway.  And we can at least ensure that the keynote speaker is one such orator.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 15:20:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

it's possible (0.00 / 0)

if Warner says "Obama" enough times in his speech (he better at least do that) that a small number of fence-sitting white voters in Virginia will decide that Obama is okay.  Even a tenth or two of a percent might make a difference in a close election. Yes, I am trying hard to see something positive.

---

by: tremayne @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 15:31:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But Isn't He Already Doing That In Virginia? (0.00 / 0)

I'm not tuned into the campaign there, local media markets, etc.  But I sort of just assumed that he was already pushing Obama, and that there would probably be robo-calls aplenty from him, too.

20-30 years ago, with fewer forms of political communication, the keynote speech might have had more effect in this regard, I think.  But now, I just don't think that it's likely to have much punch in that regard.  This is an example where I think that Obama is not being sensitive to how the game has changed.  The keynote speech has actually grown in potential salience as coverage has shrunk, but that salience has to be used in a manner that plays upon its uniqueness, rather than competing with, or merely duplicating other means of reaching people.

That said, I really, really, really hope I'm wrong.  I hope that Obama and Warner have some grand plan to use the keynote speech in a unique way, and make me look like a foolish and pedestrian hack for raising these complaints.  After all, I still want to see Obama win in a blowout.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 15:54:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yum-Yum (0.00 / 0)

That cookie tastes good!

Seriously, I think it's a good choice. We just heard from Raising Kaine about how Warner governed as a real progressive, while Kaine has been a disappointment.  Looking over the top Senate challengers this year, Warner just seems like the cream of the crop, ala Obama in 2004. And let's not forget that Warner threw a mighty bash for the netroots at Yearly Kos in Vegas, so he's not dodging us like some so-called leaders.

So yeah, put me in the category of thinking this is a great decision. Now let's hope that Obama picks someone other than Bayh as his VP. Biden is my choice.

---

by: existenz @ Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 17:00:46 PM UTC

Great! A Gay-baiter (0.00 / 0)

as the Dems keynoter. Warner is rabidly anti-gay. What does this say about Obama and his choices? Progressive? Hardly.

Here we have one more pander to the right-wing evangelicals. This just doesn't cut it. Obama is selling off the Democratic Party in pieces just to get votes. What about principles? How soon do ya think it will be before he starts selling out health care? Social Security? Environment? Trade? I guess GLBTQs are expendable. Putting Warner front and center before millions of viewers --- many of them the same racist bigots who won't support O because he's black, but might vote for him because Warner's a gay-baiting asshole --- really sends a terrific message, don't ya think?

---

by: mabelle55 @ Thu Aug 14, 2008 at 01:11:55 AM UTC