Mark Warner Redux | Ted's Take

In retrospect, Mark Warner should have been picked to be the VP candidate on the Democratic ticket alongside Obama. He was a very successful businessman. He is a centrist. He ran a state and made it the best managed state in the country and he knows how to reach across the aisle. He “gets” the big economic issues we face as a nation. He is both a leader and a manager and gets things done. He isn’t just a “big talker.” And he would have delivered Virginia for the Democrats and an easy win in the Electoral College for Obama.

Also, in retrospect, McCain should have picked Romney as his VP candidate. Romney is a great financial leader; a great businessman; and knows how to raise monies. And now McCain is being vastly outspent by Obama in the media.

Hindsight is 20/20 but both tickets would have been better served at this point in time with VP candidates who had a more impressive business, economic and governing backgrounds. And we as constituents would have been better served too!

0 thoughts on “Mark Warner Redux”

The primaries were conducted at a time when the war in Iraq was the #1 issue and framed the selection process. We now have two candidates who are basically clueless when it comes to the economy – now clearly the #1 issue. If this were the start of the primary season we might have seen Clinton vs Romney.

Ted, I agree and I would have actually loved to see a Warner-Obama ticket, followed by an Obama 2016 campaign, but I’m pretty sure Mark Warner was completely uninterested in the #2 spot.

Agree on both counts. I am disappointed this year in the quality of choices in candidates on both tickets this year, from top to bottom.

Obama is up by an average of 5 points in Virginia so he doesn’t need Warner to win Virginia. He’s up double digits across the country, so saying picking Biden was a mistake is foolish. Not to mention the fact that Warner is running for the US Senate which he is up by over 20 points. Warner said he didn’t want to be considered for the VP slot months ago.

I will however agree that with you that picking Romney might have been a better pick than Palin. Truth be told, anybody would have been better.

Steve F on October 10, 2008 at 1:51 AM said:

The primaries were conducted at a time when the war in Iraq was the #1 issue and framed the selection process. We now have two candidates who are basically clueless when it comes to the economy – now clearly the #1 issue. If this were the start of the primary season we might have seen Clinton vs Romney.
Evan on October 9, 2008 at 2:07 PM said:

Ted, I agree and I would have actually loved to see a Warner-Obama ticket, followed by an Obama 2016 campaign, but I’m pretty sure Mark Warner was completely uninterested in the #2 spot.
Phil on October 9, 2008 at 1:40 PM said:

Agree on both counts. I am disappointed this year in the quality of choices in candidates on both tickets this year, from top to bottom.
Steve on October 9, 2008 at 12:54 PM said:

Obama is up by an average of 5 points in Virginia so he doesn’t need Warner to win Virginia. He’s up double digits across the country, so saying picking Biden was a mistake is foolish. Not to mention the fact that Warner is running for the US Senate which he is up by over 20 points. Warner said he didn’t want to be considered for the VP slot months ago.

I will however agree that with you that picking Romney might have been a better pick than Palin. Truth be told, anybody would have been better.