It's really frustrating for me because I think Jim Webb is the most capable person, not running, to be president.

But he can't jump into a presidential primary after only a couple of weeks in office, no matter how masterful, intelligent, and charismatic his appearances on t.v. are.

The timing is wrong.  And despite those of us who would like to see him emerge as the "savior" of the 2008 race, I also support open, fair and democratic primaries.

The Democrats - and the Republicans - have a right to choose their candidates in an open and transparent process that brings people into the political system.  Candidates should not be chosen in smoke filled back rooms and in brokered conventions.

Back in the seventies, those were the reforms I fought for. It was right back then and it's still right.

And the truth is that I don't think it's even possible to have brokered conventions anymore.  There will be open, democratic primaries and a candidate will be picked by the citizens of this country, which is exactly the way it should be.

But oh what a dream!

In Kentucky we never get to choose who's going to be our candidate.  It's already decided in the early primaries.  The Iowa Caucus is a smoke-filled room. New Hampshire is almost as bad.  As more states jump in on front-loaded primaries, too many Americans won't get to choose.  Nothing that Democratic about Iowa and New Hampshire setting the table and then as candidates run out of money, they have to drop out.  Our current system is loaded in such a way that the candidates with the money have the greatest chance of surviving what I call the primary lottery. 

I go on the web and I see page after page of bloggers and commenter call for Jim Webb.  This is as good a Democracy as the present primary system. 

I still say Webb stands at a crossroads with this country.  I'm tired of the same old afraid-to-offend Democrats.  I'm going to have to disagree with this one.  Maybe the first time I've done so with this fine writer and blogger.  Webb '08

Nick

I miss the point on your piece.  Note to self--read more carefully, then post.  Sorry about that. 

Thanks, Anonymous annd Lowell; to repeat here from my earlier posting elsewhere on RK:

I sincerely believe that Jim Webb would run for President if he thought he could be even more effective for his/our country in that capacity.  He would do it only out of a sense of duty to country.

He'd probably agree to be a vice-presidential candidate for the same reason; if he thought it would benefit the Democratic ticket and carry it on to victory.

Jim Webb has a very strong sense of duty; I think he's currently most effective as our Senator, and he's got plenty of time.

One thing's for sure; Webb would not run for higher office due to ego or hubris.

He's much too humble and intelligent to do that.

Regardless; I'll always vote for him.

As would most of America...

Thanks!

Steve

 

he has a newborn daughter.  In 2008 she will not yet be 2 years old.  As a military brat he grew up with his father often away.  I think he would have real concern about being there for his daughter.

Yeah, if he thought it would make a difference, he MIGHT accept a VP nod, but I cannot imagine him being willing to be president.  He would defer to someone like Wes Clark, with whom he probably agrees on most issues.

Think of all the time he's been away from home in the past--like the month's each year he spent in Vietnam.  Beside's how long has it been since we had a baby in the White House?

I have said Webb for VP, but I do not believe it would suit Jim. It would be about the same position as Secretary of Navy. Just these few months of listening closely to Webb's speeches, he belongs in only one position and that is the roll of Leader.
Any one who says he does not have the experience has no ideal of what experience is. How anyone could say this of some one who has led men in combat and wins the medals he has, then become Assistant Secretary of Defense, move into Secretary of Navy and is now a US Senator, who will have 2 more years of experience before Jan. 2009, just how much experience is some one suppose to have. It is certainly more then Delegator Bush ever had.

Jim knows where he wants to go and can lead others there, plus he will listen to others along the way. That is more then we can ask of anyone.

In my opinion, There is only one other person with as much experience as Jim in the inner circles at the White House and that is Hillary. Personally I believe she will have the delegates for the first round. Jim could always be nominated as a favorite son and if she does not make the first round, then Jim Webb could certainly make it.

June 2008 is a long way off in politics. And as was said, the inner smoke filed rooms may appear.

he is a human being who cares for his fellow citizens.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

Steve

to run in 2016. He'd be 70. If McCain is elected in 2008, he'll be 72. Webb's a baby boomer. He'll have millions of other boomers in this country to serve as examples. Some bad, some good.

If Webb's elected Vice-President in 2008 he'd be almost a shoo-in for the presidential nomination in '16.

One way or another he will be with us for the next 25 years.

Jim will not be a conventional convention; that is, he will not be a clerk sent to manage government and regulate legislation as Senators are expected to do. Instead, it can already be seen that he has started a new populist movement. He is the perfect figure for it and the time is right. It is impossible to tell how this will awakening, but my feeling is that it will be very, big. It is in the nature of Hamiltonian federalism that when things change they change universally throughout the system - there are no internal barriers to localize change. An old friend of mine from Wake Forest, David Smiley, a distinguished Southern historian now passed on, used to make the point to his students that by 1845 when things changed in the U.S. they changed throughout the world. We have seen it in our time with Elvis, with JFK and with others. My feeling is that the country is on teh tipping point and ready for enormous change and the demographics are right as well. It is not unreasonable to think that he will change the world.

Yes! It's becoming clear in the wake of Webb's speech that he is the face of a political sea-change and hopefully a sea-change in American history. Everything in American politics feels like it has changed ever-so-subtly since Webb spoke. Tiny changes that are going to snowball with Webb continuing to be the voice of the whole thing.

We are sitting here watching history being made.

The poor guy must be baffled. Jim Webb didn't set out to be the 'Trickster' or to be Vice President or President and he doesn't want to lead a movement. But here it is. It's starting to happen and it's carrying him along whether he likes it or not.

So if you all had your druthers, who would you like to see him be VEEP for??

I was struck by his two Americs statement in his SOTU response. Seems like I heard that before. Kinka makes you wonder if he is thinking about some of what Edwards is saying.

With Clinton, Obama, and Richardson in the race, the Democratic Party is getting lots of positive buzz for finally offering some diversity. It's gonna be kind of disappointing to have two white guys on the ticket.

I think Obama makes the most sense. They were both against the war before it was popular to do so.

I think Jim really talks about three Americas--the very top, the very bottom and a middleclass being pushed down toward the bottom.  Not that he and Edwards have much to argue about on this point, but consider if you look at the body of Jim's work, his understanding of the class system in this county is evident in much of what he has written, both in fiction, editorials, and other magazine and newspaper work.

Just looking at the Iraq war dead, we can see who's doing the dying.  Rural Americans are 60% more likely to die in Iraq than their urban Americans.  This is not just blind patriotism--it is still the economy, only this time the flagging rural economy  is the culprit.  Outsourcing, the decline of the family farm, few jobs in coal and timber, all combine to make joining the military and getting that signing bonus look pretty good to someone from Southwest Virginia with a couple of hungry kids.

There is a whole world out there many people do not see.  Whether it's Edwards or Webb, they both bring strong bottom-up populist thinking back to the Democratic Party.  The poor and disenfranchised used to be a big part of the Democratic base, but the Democratic party has for the most part ignored these very people Jim Webb has spoken about.

It seems strange to me to think of him as vp for anyone.  He seems so much more qualified to lead from the top.  We'll see what unfolds.  It's only been a few days since the SOTU and I expect things to get very interesting, or at least I hope so.

Jim Webb's given the Democratic Party a much needed shakeup and in his retort to Bush on Tueday, there was a message to Democrats as well--a call to the party to return to it's populist roots.  I for one believe this call is long overdue.

Running on experience is codeword for corrupt and uninspiring.

The "experience" argument never works.

Change vs. More of the same.

The perfect, winning combination!

Of course, Clark first has to decide to run and then raise enough money to do so, and then Obama has to decide not to go for President this time and to settle for VP...

To quote "Garfield", lying stationary in his bed and under his blanket while just thinking about exercising; "Run, run, run - pant, pant, pant - sweat, sweat, sweat..."

Thanks!

Steve

Remember V.P. John C. Calhoun and Pres. Andrew Jackson.  Calhoun was a thorn in the side of Jackson at times.....oh yeah that was along time ago, and there was that constitutional amendment to do away with split Pres/VP ballots...so never mind

Web for President 08'????  I say Webb for Senate in 2012.  I wish people would stop this Presidential wishful thinking.  It is not going to happen, for reasons that have already been mentioned, and it shouldn't happen.  First, if he runs for the White House, we would lose our senator to the campaign trail for the next two years.  (What good would that do us?)  Second, WE JUST ELECTED HIM!!!

  He is doing a good job so far.  He is doing what Senators should do.  He is doing what Allen and the other Rubber-stampers didn't do.  I couldn't be more pleased with Jim Webb.  If we had 50 senators like him I would feel even better, but so far there is only one (or only a few) and he is ours.  Let us keep him.  Virginia will do no better.  (And America needs senators like him.)

Webb is a great Senator, but he's also a man who alway accepted the call to duty.  I suppose for me, it's a win/win situation.  If he were to run for President, I think he's win.  If he stays in the Senate, we'll have a great Senator. 

I am convinced that Webb will be asked by the eventual nominee to be the running mate. All 3 of our front runners lack foreign policy & defense credibility.  Which is the #1 thing that the bottom of the ticket has to fix. We have 2 possibilities for that. Clark & Webb.

Wesley Clark has been invisible for several years now and his star is fading. Webb's is ascending. Jim Webb is now the Democratic Party's one and only national voice and leader on Iraq - the #1 issue in America right now. The only substantive case against him as a running mate is that he could overshadow the the top of the ticket.

Teddy Roosevelt was the leader who transformed America from the world of the 19th century to the world of the 20th Century. Jim Webb is the guy who will do the same thing for the 21st century. He's like TR come again, representing this swell of Americans who are looking for progressive leadership with some balls.

Something is happening here. Jim Webb is tapping into something that's been missing from American politics for a long, long time. Webb is the face of a sea change.