From DLC to agent of change
Warner has a terrific personal story for a politician. The first in his family to graduate college, he got a law degree from Harvard but then went into business as an entrepreneur. His first two start-ups failed miserably, but his third became the cell-phone giant Nextel. He expanded his wealth as a venture capitalist, and made a couple of failed attempts at political office before becoming governor of heavily Republican Virginia in 2001. “I stand before you as a living embodiment of someone who’s been blessed to live the American Dream,” Warner said in a speech last week to about 225 Democratic activists in Stoddard, New Hampshire.
He’s a pretty good candidate as well, with a physical resemblance to Robert F. Kennedy and an ability to connect with voters without coming across as too slick. “He’s tall and handsome,” says Bonnie Mitchell, a New Hampshire state representative. “He looks at you like Bill Clinton — he makes you feel like you’re the only person in the room.”
Warner has formulated an appealing stump speech, heavy on JFK-esque calls for national, communal sacrifice in the name of “transformative,” rather than incremental change.
Talk of self-sacrifice and tough roads ahead appeal to many grassroots activists, says Green, because it sounds more authentic than the typical “we can have it all” pandering that has come to be associated with the faux optimism and dishonesty coming from both sides of the aisle. “People are hungry for truth-talking.” Straight talk may count for more than ideology this time around, he says.
But Warner runs into trouble during post-speech question-and-answer periods, when party activists typically ask about their pet issues. In New Hampshire last weekend, he was asked about Iraq, gay rights, and funding social programs while balancing the budget. Warner is seldom on their side on these or other major liberal issues. He opposes gay marriage, supports a ban on "partial-birth abortions" (except in cases where the health or life of the mother is endangered), supports the death penalty, approved gun-lobby legislation, favors welfare reform, and is a staunch believer in "fiscal discipline." Warner has no history of opposing the Iraq war, and he opposes a timetable for troop withdrawal. “We’ve got to get out of Iraq,” he recently told the Phoenix, “but we’ve got to get out with a plan.”
That could make it tough for Warner, particularly in the wake of Ned Lamont’s defeat of Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary for US senator, seen by many as huge validation for grassroots progressives who wish to purge the party of moderates — particularly with regard to the war in Iraq.
A year ago, in fact, Mark Warner was planning to run for the nomination as the candidate to the right of Hillary Clinton, says Raymond LaRaja, professor of political science at UMass Amherst. Warner even penned an essay in the Democratic Leadership Council’s (DLC) Blueprint magazine last fall, touting the “sensible center”; the DLC, which Lieberman chaired for years, is the whipping boy of the progressive grassroots.
That’s all changed. It’s not that Warner is renouncing the centrist beliefs that got him elected governor — the road taken by his Republican doppelgänger Mitt Romney (a handsome, wealthy businessman/venture capitalist, elected governor in a state dominated by the opposing political party, and now running for president boasting of this crossover appeal). Rather, he is downplaying the ideology and emphasizing his outsider credentials. The dynamic of his campaign is “not left/right, but future/past,” he told the Phoenix.
