hopefulI don't believe Hillary can win the general election, and even though I'd vote for her over anyone the GOP is going to offer, I think that if she won, the Clinton-hatred that was cultivated in the '90s would come back with a vengeance, making it difficult for her to advance an effective agenda. Among the non-Hillary candidates, Warner seems the fairly clear best-choice. I like John Edwards and Al Gore better on policy, but I don't think either has a serious shot at actually winning. Edwards, if he wants to run for prez again, should really be looking at trying a term or two as governor of NC first. American culture, currently, is extremely harsh on people who've lost in the past; building up a record of political wins, and establishing executive credentials, would set up a much more credible candidacy. As for Gore, I do have a soft spot for his wonkishness, and it ticks me off that he has never gotten a fair shake from the media, which has cheerfully played along with various lies about him. But again, like Hillary, the ingrained attitudes towards him are out there, and would be a major hurdle. Having a candidate who hasn't already been defined would be nice.
Here is Warner as policy wonk, in an interview on health care issues, which shows off the fact -- mentioned in the NYTM article, but not really explored -- that on domestic policy issues, Warner has some good ideas and knows how to articulate them. I do hope he gets better on foreign policy. OTOH, considering how idiotic Bush sounded on both domestic and foreign policy in '00, I'm not sure a good grasp of the issues is necessary, as long as one learns to at least sound decisive. *sigh*
Here is Warner not throwing gays overboard.
Warner restores voting rights to ex-felons -- while one could note that most ex-cons who vote, vote for Democrats, I still believe that denying constitutional rights to people who have served their time is an injustice, unless you cite a serious threat of harm to the public. (e.g. I'm not against tracking child molestors, because their pathologies tend to be persistent. Also, I tend to think purchases of guns by violent felons should be held to a higher standard than a purchase by non-felons. Oddly, the NRA and its GOP stooges don't seem to agree; they seem to think felons should have guns, but not votes.)
Salon interview with Warner -- if anyone's interested in reading it but doesn't have Premium, I can post the text in the comments section...
I have a few spare Mark Warner bumper stickers, if anyone is interested...
