Just out of the box there should be no question who progressives should support in the Governor's race.  It should be Brian Moran.  Based on his record, Brian Moran is the clear progressive, period. end of story.

The fact that there's even a question as to who progressives should support shows the weakness of the campaign he's running so far.

As far as I can tell, Brian is running on endorsements so far.  That was hugely necessary for a candidate like Webb, because all anyone knew about him was that he worked for Reagan. Moran, on the other hand, doesn't need any Democratic bone fides, he's the Minority Leader for crying out loud!

What Moran needs is a message.  Something about how he can win and the other guys can't, or how he understands and other candidates don't, or that he's uniquely qualified in ways that the others aren't.  The point here is that if Moran had a message, the race would be his to lose.

Leading with money and electability is a good move by Terry McFlorida. Until Moran gets a solid message, McAuliffe will remain a threat and could draw away a large number of Democratic votes.  

Deeds has almost the same worldview when it comes to issues, even if he has followed a different tactical approach to getting there at times.

I think both are progressives, and it is not, IMHO, cut and dried.

to varying degrees.  The questions really revolve around personality, electability, and - most important to me - vision. Included in "vision" is who is willing (and able) to stand up to Dominion, Bechtel, and other powerful corporate interests.  Whoever that is will get my enthusiastic support, as I believe all three candidates are generally speaking "progressive" and all three are electable.

I don't think people are even paying that much attention to the 2009 race yet.

Moran made a smart move in bringing Jarding in -- that was a big get.  Deeds has the advantage of having run for statewide office against the likely GOP nominee in a close race.  With Moran it's a bit of an x-factor -- can he close stronger than Deeds?  What kind of map would Moran need to beat McDonnell?  

The "true progressive" mantle I don't see as something that most voters will care about.  They'll want a candidate who can connect to their concerns -- and who demonstrates strong viability in November.

As far as McAuliffe goes, I don't think his ego would be dissuaded by even the most well-run opposition campaign.  He just sees two Virginia politicians who aren't nationally known, and who haven't won statewide office.  Maybe he misread Webb's victory in 2006 (e.g. as a sign that ANY relatively unknown outsider can win in Virginia -- never mind that Webb was a pretty close fit for Virginia with roots here too).

I still think New York and Florida would be more natural fits for McAuliffe's personality and profile.

Throw into the mix a low-turnout June primary, and it should be interesting.  Looking forward to the debates.

You fault Moran for running a weak campaign, but you don't offer an concrete reasons for supporting him.  All you say is "end of story."

Online debates would be a lot easier to win if all you had to say was "end of story."

Tell us why you support Moran without referencing either of his rivals.  Make the best positive case for Moran without any negative attacks.

This is not to single out Moran or his supporters: I'd like to see each of the Democratic contenders make a positive case for themselves and refrain from negative attacks.

I have to agree with the point that Moran is focusing way too much time effort on gaining endorsements.  In the process, he is running the risk of setting himself up as the "establishment candidate."  

In the Old Virginia, this may have been a good thing.  But we now have a DPVA growing precisely because it is attracting a new kind of voter -- the type attracted to unconventional candidates like Webb and Obama; those who read and write blogs; more young people and minorities; folks generally who were outside the party tent, and who in many ways likely still feel like outsiders.

To this, the rising class of the DPVA, being the establishment candidate may well be the kiss of death.

We could always use more money to fund the good candidates. Terry advertising bringing in money for the races may make plenty salivate but that sort of statement is akin to bribery in my book. I want candidates to be funded but not because you want their support in the Democratic primary. Either way, money would be nice but better candidates are better, especially if they have vision.

I tell you what. How about Terry McAuliffe abandon his run and simply raise money fore candidates this season. In four years when we need another governor, I will be significantly less offended or concerned.

I pointed this out regarding someone else a while ago that I do not like candidates for any office that causes me to call into question the genuineness in their seeking such office. I do not like candidates who run for the sake of running or simply just to win. I would rather have a less experienced candidate who has a purpose than a better candidate overall who lacks one. That said, if Terry McAuliffe anounced his candidacy and had very pointed policy goals, above those of his peers, for the next four years then I would welcome him to the race.

Webb is right to praise Moran and Deeds, without saying he won't support McAuliffe.  Of course, I wish he would have simply said he didn't support McAuliffe at all, but I guess he can't do that.  I doubt he likes the guy.  McAuliffe would be a Republicans dream candidate.  He could spend all the money he wants, and the Republicans could simply take excerpts from his books or embarrassing TV appearances where he put his foot in his mouth, and put them in advertisements.  McAuliffe is a used car salesman.  Wasn't he the one who led the DNC when the Party lost two Presidential elections?  I know it was Howard Dean who was DNC chair when Democrats scored massive victories in 2006 and 2008.  His 50-state strategy included Virginia.  Didn't McAuliffe ignore Virginia as "too red" when he was DNC chair?  

My personal choice would be Brian Moran, although I am sure Creigh Deeds would be a good candidate.  I just can't stand the thought of McAuliffe.  Besides, Virginia should follow the trend of excellent candidates.  Look at our two Senators - Jim Webb and Mark Warner are two of the most qualified Senators in the U.S. Senate.  Virginia deserves people like that, not someone like Terry.

...for once again calling it as you see it.  We don't need the McLean Millionaire coming in here and buying the Commonwealth of Virginia.  

And we need someone who treats our state as something more than a resume topper.  Others who have parachuted in from Washington to dazzle Virginia with their brilliance (e.g., Oliver North, Ed Gillespie) have usually not lasted long -- regardless of how much $$$ they spent in the process.