Mark Warner Wants to Spend Time With His Family.

Yeah, right.

Either that's standard chintzy cover for an under-the-table deal with Hillary (a deal cozy?), or it's true and therefore he's the man we would have wanted for president: the man sane enough not to want to run for president. The Great American Catch-22.

I have never shared other centrists' enthusiasm for Warner. He may have been a pragmatic and effective governor, but in his utterances he seemed to me the bland and cautious, "trimming" kind of centrist. I share many people's nostalgia for Bobby Kennedy, but looking like a bad cartoon of him (the hair, the teeth) does not alone make a man presidential. I think he would have made a weak candidate, unelectable for different reasons than Hillary. So I don't agree with those who think the Dems' shot at the White House in '08 has just been set back.

So now what? *Shrug.* As a nonpartisan, my only dog in this fight is the hope of a fair and vigorous contest and at least one good choice. Among the remaining Dems, I have been most impressed by Wes Clark, though it's painful to me to watch him doing the obligatory shilling for the likes of Ned Lamont. I know those are the dues that have to be paid to play in the big sandbox, but it's yucky.

Of course I'm an Obama "fan," and of course the less he pleases the blogo-mandarins of the left, the more he appeals to me:

[Obama had said:]

One good test as to whether folks are doing interesting work is, Can they surprise me? . . . And increasingly, when I read Daily Kos, it doesn't surprise me. It's all just exactly what I would expect.

[Talk Left remarks:] [T]hat centrist credential burnishing has been going on for some time. [ ... ] Obama's statement is pretty consistent with his disdain for the base of the Democratic Party and of a piece with his flirting with the DC Beltway mentality. You can be sure that David Broder loves this kind of stuff from Obama. I do not.

But, to say it yet again, it's too early for him. Obama could be wasted in this contest. He's not going to beat McCain or Giuliani. Sure, you can lose the presidency and win it again later (see Nixon, Richard), but why would Dems want to risk their rising star becoming that kind of damaged goods? Let him keep his virginity a while longer.

Which means, I hope the Repubs nominate somebody I can vote for. Good riddance, George Allen. Mitt Romney I don't know nearly enough about. Even before 9/11, Rudy was the kind of mayor who would be a good president. I'd vote for McCain, though a number of people I respect think he's either a calculating grandstander or nuts.

Comments

[Ruth Anne]

I was channel-surfing and landed on the last 30 minutes of Mitt Romney at someone's pumpkin patch in Iowa.

He never used a note, barely made a "word whisker", told a great story, laid out his policy in 5 points, engaged the crowd, entertained questions and was really, quite substantial.

He feels like a presidential candidate who just might make it. I still have major heartburn with his religion, but I might be convinced.

My brother used to work for a major newspaper in Arizona. The inside word on McCain is "he's tetched." Fruit-cake is less nutty than he is. Remember the Admiral who was a POW and Ross Perot's running mate? That'll be McCain in a few more years. Run away!

Guiliani has a lot of personal baggage. Reagan did, too [that first divorce from Jane Wyman] and he was good enough a candidate to overlook it. It did matter back then, if I recall. Perhaps Rudy can overcome that, too.

[amba]

As not even a Christian I have no real reason to be put off by Romney's Mormonism. One of my best and oldest friends is descended from dignitaries of the Mormon Church, although her parents, confronted with the obligation to pass the theology on to their daughter, realized they didn't believe it. But she does not regard it as an embarrassing heritage, rather a complex one like any other. One of my husband's and my good friends is a Vietnam veteran and a convert to LDS, with only admirable results.

As for Giuliani's baggage, clearly he's not the only one who has it. He just carries his openly. Maybe as a culture we're finally becoming adults about such things? We'll see.

[Icepick]

The inside word on McCain is "he's tetched." Fruit-cake is less nutty than he is.

Ruth Ann, does this mean he's flaky and twitchy, or bat-sh*t crazy? Because if he's bat-sh*t crazy, I may have to change my position and actually vote for him. That could make for some explosive entertainment, given that he would have his finger on the button.

[Tom Strong]

Being a liberal, I'm less than totally enthused about Romney, but it seems to me that there are worse candidates out there - including a couple on my side. I like the fact that he's interested in creative thinking about economic issues, even if I don't always like his solutions. His Mormonism should not be a factor.

I never liked Giuliani - his prosecutorial style always rubbed me the wrong way - but I have to admit he was effective. I wouldn't cry myself to sleep if he were elected.

[Tom Strong]

As for McCain, it just amuses me how much his fellow Republicans hate him. That alone would earn my vote.

[BrianOfAtlanta]

I'm sorry to see Warner out of the running. I didn't know that much about him, but what little I saw and heard about was positive. I can't see myself voting for Hillary. Not that she'd be disastrous, but I'd never vote for her.

Giuliani would be great, and McCain or Romney would be acceptable. I'm just grateful that Allen so magnanimously removed himself from the running.

[Donna B.]

In 2012, maybe 2016, I'd like to see Obama run against Bobby Jindal, who I hope will be Louisiana's next governor.

As for McCain, I think he's batsh*t power hungry crazy. He wants to be president too badly for me to vote for him.