Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
40 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jim Webb Forms Exploratory Committee (Original Post) DemocraticWing Nov 2014 OP
I agree. elleng Nov 2014 #1
I welcome every Clinton primary challenger to the race. morningfog Nov 2014 #2
Webb could be interesting. Comrade Grumpy Nov 2014 #3
As expected. herding cats Nov 2014 #4
I used to think Democrats steered clear of people who had formerly lost elections or primaries, but merrily Nov 2014 #13
I think you really covered the differences in losses well in your post. herding cats Nov 2014 #14
A US Senate seat or a gubernatorial seat not what I would consider a local loss. merrily Nov 2014 #16
I hope Schweitzer isn't considering just because of a slip of the tongue. LawDeeDah Nov 2014 #19
It was a rather relevatory slip of the tongue, not an innocuous one. merrily Nov 2014 #36
To be fair, O'Malley himself did not lose - he was term limited and his Lt. Gov lost the race to Midwestern Democrat Nov 2014 #21
Thanks. I relied on a comment made by another poster, that O''Malley merrily Nov 2014 #40
Neither Webb nor O'Malley lost an election. What are you talking about? FSogol Nov 2014 #32
What are YOU talking about? I never said Webb lost an election. merrily Nov 2014 #34
Angry much? Get more sleep and I hope you have a better day. FSogol Nov 2014 #35
LOL. Who's angry? I almost always do have a great day. I wish you the same. merrily Nov 2014 #38
I'm looking forward to much more from the Castro Bros. Voice for Peace Nov 2014 #20
Damaged good? O'Malley didn't lose his election. FSogol Nov 2014 #37
I have reservations, clues to some of which can be found in his wiki. merrily Nov 2014 #5
How was he referencing White Culture? madville Nov 2014 #9
I can't recall the exact words, but I do recall I had a jaw drop reaction when I heard it. merrily Nov 2014 #11
Crickets on my question about your meaning? merrily Nov 2014 #15
What's he going to explore? bluestateguy Nov 2014 #6
Maybe whether he has a shot at being the nominee, finding donors, etc? merrily Nov 2014 #7
Here's a brief discussion of him in the New Yorker last week: Comrade Grumpy Nov 2014 #8
Thanks for posting that, very interesting pinboy3niner Nov 2014 #17
Donit Skeowes28 Nov 2014 #10
I like Webb as a person, but don't support some of the same thing he does davidpdx Nov 2014 #12
Looking for someone to get excited about during the primaries. Ykcutnek Nov 2014 #18
Some on DU will have to try REALLY REALLY hard to like this guy wyldwolf Nov 2014 #22
Because someone has to run to the right of Hillary PDittie Nov 2014 #23
Here's a link to op-ed "Class Struggle" which he sent to WSJ in 11/2006 : Faryn Balyncd Nov 2014 #24
Goodie, another republican! TBF Nov 2014 #25
Thank you! Le Taz Hot Nov 2014 #26
Agreed - I like Bernie. TBF Nov 2014 #28
Excluding Bernie, it's like a battle to see who's willing to be bullwinkle428 Nov 2014 #39
I have one bit of advice for Mr. Webb. Vinca Nov 2014 #27
+1 leftofcool Nov 2014 #29
If HRC does not run, Webb is my 2nd choice Algernon Moncrieff Nov 2014 #30
well Robbins Nov 2014 #31
So Hillary will have a challenger from the right. MohRokTah Nov 2014 #33

herding cats

(19,558 posts)
4. As expected.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:18 AM
Nov 2014

I others still being brandied about in the top include (in no particular order):
John Hickenlooper
Brian Schweitzer
Hillary Clinton
Elizabeth Warren
Bernie Sanders
Andrew Cuomo
Kirsten Gilibrand

Also, there's these two I don't really expect to see run at this point but still may.
Martin O'Malley - who was expected to make a run at it, but lost his election and is now being called "damaged goods."
Joe Biden

Maybe even, Tammy Baldwin. It's still early and anything is possible.


On edit: Yeah, I'm not ready to transfer into the 2016 primary season either. It's insane how they switch from one to the next instantaneously now.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
13. I used to think Democrats steered clear of people who had formerly lost elections or primaries, but
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:52 AM
Nov 2014

Last edited Thu Nov 20, 2014, 10:09 AM - Edit history (1)

that does not seem to be true anymore. For example, we ran Coakley in Massachusetts for Governor after she lost the special election Senate race to Brown (Kennedy's seat) and, well, there's Hillary, but I don't think her 2008 primary loss will be what hurts her. To the contrary, it might help her.

But, I am not optimistic about O'Malley sadly.* I don't think they will run someone for President who did not win the Governor's race because of the risk of not carrying his or her own state in the general, ala McGovern and Gore (which Hillary might also face, if you consider Arkansas her "own state" instead of NY).

Sweitzer put his foot in his mouth terribly, just about as soon as a number of people started talking about him as a potential Presidential candidate. Until then, I was finding him very appealing and his electability potential also looked good to me. He did apologize soon after, but it's hard to unring the bigotry bell within the Democratic Party.

On edit: *Information in this post about O'Malley is erroneous. Please see Reply 21.

herding cats

(19,558 posts)
14. I think you really covered the differences in losses well in your post.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 03:29 AM
Nov 2014

You can lose local and come back and run again for a different seat, or even the same one again. Nothing wrong with that. It could have been timing, the wrong position, or a lack of support which lead to the loss in the previous race, these things happen in politics. I really don't think a loss is a death sentence to a political career depending on the circumstances of the loss.

As for O'Malley, I'm afraid his largest potential financial backers are the ones who will judge him the most harshly for his recent loss. I wanted to see him in the fray, I don't deny it, but it's looking less likely now. Which is something I find disappointing, and hope proves to be wrong. He has/had a lot to offer to the primaries.

As to Schweitzer, I think he's done but he's still put all of the stock he has left into 2016 so he may attempt a run. I've not heard if he has any real support left to make a go of it, though. If he does, I don't think he'll survive the primary. He has more than his image problems from his last slip of the tongue to overcome, he still has to learn how to manage his verbiage under a national spotlight. Which is no easy feat in this day and age.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
16. A US Senate seat or a gubernatorial seat not what I would consider a local loss.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 03:47 AM
Nov 2014

Aside from the Presidency, which is an electoral vote, all elections are either truly local (city, town, county) or statewide. So, basically, Malloy lost in the biggest constituency he could run before, short of running for President (and Coakley did so twice).

And Coakleys loss of that election was due to many factors, but certainly including that her campaign was bloody awful. She did a lot better in her campaign for Governor, but she lost again. I suspect part of that loss would be attributable to her inability to shake entirely the bad impression she made the first time she ran. If you look in the Mass forum, you will see I thought running her again was a mistake and, sadly, I was correct about that.

O'Malley, if he still wants to try, will be judged by the PTB of the Party as well as by truly private donors who act totally independently of the PTB of the Party, though I don't think many large donors do that. And, the PTB of the Party seem to be pretty much in the bag for Hillary, anyway. I would also like to see him in the race, though.

And, that's it for me for tonight. Sunrise is coming soon where I live. Have a good night.

 

LawDeeDah

(1,596 posts)
19. I hope Schweitzer isn't considering just because of a slip of the tongue.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 03:56 AM
Nov 2014

My dog, Hillary has silos full of those.

I'm not too crazy about Schweitzer, overall, but I would like to see him in the race. We need a diverse debate and he fits in well that way.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
36. It was a rather relevatory slip of the tongue, not an innocuous one.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:47 AM
Nov 2014

I don't think people who don't believe those things say them, especially politicians. You know what they say about a "gaffe?" It's a politician accidentally telling the truth.

But, I am fine with his being in the primary. That's the forum for hashing out things like that.

No comment on Hillary, who I don't think made many slips of the tongue.



21. To be fair, O'Malley himself did not lose - he was term limited and his Lt. Gov lost the race to
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 06:01 AM
Nov 2014

succeed him. It was still damaging to O'Malley - Maryland is a very Democratic state and the election could be seen as a referendum on his Governorship but I don't know if it's fatal - for example, no one held it against Reagan that Jerry Brown succeeded him as Governor of California in 1974.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
40. Thanks. I relied on a comment made by another poster, that O''Malley
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 10:04 AM
Nov 2014

lost his election and was being seen as damaged goods. Apparently, the first part of that statement could have been worded more precisely than it was. Do you know if he is indeed being seen as "damaged goods?"

That said, Jerry Brown was not Reagan's Lt. Governor. It may be more like Romney's Lt Governor, who lost to Deval Patrick. Or even Clinton and Gore. (I am one of few Democrats who did think that Clinton hurt Gore, but you know what they say about opinions.)

There were so many other circumstances in 2006, and Axelrod was Patrick's campaign manager to boot, so I don't know if anyone saw Patrick's win as a comment on Romney. When analyzing a relatively routine election loss or an election victory, you can rarely pin it on just one fact.

But I digress: Back to O'Malley. If there is no particular reason to blame his Lt Gov's loss on him, I don't think it will be held against him, either in the primary or, if he makes it, in the general. I don't even think anything Bubba did will be held against Hillary, except Billarycare and anything she expressly approved of or claims to have been part of.

FSogol

(45,464 posts)
32. Neither Webb nor O'Malley lost an election. What are you talking about?
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:29 AM
Nov 2014

O'Malley was prohibited from running again by MD term limit laws and Webb resigned because he saw Senate gridlock as a detremit to changing anything.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
34. What are YOU talking about? I never said Webb lost an election.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:41 AM
Nov 2014

As to O'Malley, I obviously relied on this clear statement from another poster (whom you did not choose to question).

Martin O'Malley - who was expected to make a run at it, but lost his election and is now being called "damaged goods."


How about this: Excuse me for not double checking every comment in a post before I reply to it at 2 am and I'll excuse you for implying that I posted that Webb lost an election when I didn't.


merrily

(45,251 posts)
38. LOL. Who's angry? I almost always do have a great day. I wish you the same.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:49 AM
Nov 2014

I thought your post seemed a lot angrier than mine.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
5. I have reservations, clues to some of which can be found in his wiki.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:20 AM
Nov 2014

Former Repubican (think Panetta),o Reaganite, questions about sexism, both in his real life and his novels, that, for me, are very serious, etc.

Also, I saw him interviewed when he was publicizing his book about the Scotch Irish and was troubled by his references to "white culture" during that interview. Sounded a little too Pat Buchanan about it for my taste.

Seemed as though someone had already challenged him on it, too: The first time he mentioned the term, he added quickly and, I thought, defensively--"and there is such a thing."

I don't want to see him be the nominee, and doubt he will be, but, welcome to the fray, Senator.

madville

(7,408 posts)
9. How was he referencing White Culture?
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:33 AM
Nov 2014

He could have misspoke but there is also an overwhelming white culture in the US that will have to be overcome before progress is made.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
11. I can't recall the exact words, but I do recall I had a jaw drop reaction when I heard it.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:47 AM
Nov 2014

I don't imagine he will repeat that as a candidate.

How are you referencing it when you say there is an overwhelming white culture in the US that will have be overcome before progress is made? I don't know what any of that means.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
8. Here's a brief discussion of him in the New Yorker last week:
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:27 AM
Nov 2014

The whole piece about "inevitable" candidates, Hillary, and other possible contenders is quite good.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/17/inevitability-trap

Former Virginia Senator Jim Webb, who served one term, from 2007 to 2013, and then retired, has the potential to win the beer-track vote. In early October, I drove from Washington to a residential building that sits high on a hill in Arlington. On the eighth floor, in a condominium with a sweeping view of Washington’s monuments, Webb has been plotting his own path to defeating Clinton. “I do believe that I have the leadership and the experience and the sense of history and the kinds of ideas where I could lead this country,” he told me. “We’re just going to go out and put things on the table in the next four or five months and see if people support us. And if it looks viable, then we’ll do it.”

Webb is a moderate on foreign policy, but he is a Vietnam veteran from a long line of military men. His condo, which he uses as a study, is filled with antique weaponry and historical artifacts from his ancestors. He showed me a bookcase filled with collectibles. “I’ve been to a lot of battlefields,” he said. He pointed to some sand from Iwo Jima; glass from Tinian, the island from which the Enola Gay was launched before it dropped an atomic bomb on Japan; and some shrapnel from Vietnam. “I have that in my leg,” he said.

After the war, Webb became a writer. His most famous book, “Fields of Fire,” published in 1978, is a novel based on his own experiences and has been credibly compared to Stephen Crane’s “The Red Badge of Courage” for its realistic portrayal of war. Webb has always moved restlessly between the military and politics and the life of a writer. In the late seventies and early eighties, he worked as a counsel on the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee and later as Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of the Navy. He has also travelled around the world as a journalist for Parade. In 2007, I interviewed him in his Senate office weeks after he was sworn in. He noted that he was having a hard time adjusting to life as a senator and missed his writing life. Now, in Arlington, he talked about the unfinished business of his Senate career.

In his senatorial race, Webb did well not only in northern Virginia, which is filled with Washington commuters and college-educated liberals, but also with rural, working-class white voters in Appalachia. In 2008, those voters were generally more loyal to Clinton than to Obama, but Webb believes that he could attract a national coalition of both groups of voters in the Presidential primaries. He laid out a view of Wall Street that differs sharply from Clinton’s.


“Because of the way that the financial sector dominates both parties, the distinctions that can be made on truly troubling issues are very minor,” he said. He told a story of an effort he led in the Senate in 2010 to try to pass a windfall-profits tax that would have targeted executives at banks and firms which were rescued by the government after the 2008 financial crisis. He said that when he was debating whether to vote for the original bailout package, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, he relied on the advice of an analyst on Wall Street, who told him, “No. 1, you have to do this, because otherwise the world economy will go into cataclysmic free fall. But, No. 2, you have to punish these guys. It is outrageous what they did.”

After the rescue, when Webb pushed for what he saw as a reasonable punishment, his own party blocked the legislation. “The Democrats wouldn’t let me vote on it,” he said. “Because either way you voted on that, you’re making somebody mad. And the financial sector was furious.” He added that one Northeastern senator—Webb wouldn’t say who—“was literally screaming at me on the Senate floor.”

When Clinton was a New York senator, from 2001 to 2009, she fiercely defended the financial industry, which was a crucial source of campaign contributions and of jobs in her state. “If you don’t have stock, and a lot of people in this country don’t have stock, you’re not doing very well,” Webb said. Webb is a populist, but a cautious one, especially on taxes, the issue that seems to have backfired against O’Malley’s administration. As a senator, Webb frustrated some Democrats because he refused to raise individual income-tax rates. But as President, he says, he would be aggressive about taxing income from investments: “Fairness says if you’re a hedge-fund manager or making deals where you’re making hundreds of millions of dollars and you’re paying capital-gains tax on that, rather than ordinary income tax, something’s wrong, and people know something’s wrong. ”

The Clintons and Obama have championed policies that help the poor by strengthening the safety net, but they have shown relatively little interest in structural changes that would reverse runaway income inequality. “There is a big tendency among a lot of Democratic leaders to feed some raw meat to the public on smaller issues that excite them, like the minimum wage, but don’t really address the larger problem,” Webb said. “A lot of the Democratic leaders who don’t want to scare away their financial supporters will say we’re going to raise the minimum wage, we’re going do these little things, when in reality we need to say we’re going to fundamentally change the tax code so that you will believe our system is fair.”

Webb could challenge Clinton on other domestic issues as well. In 1984, he spent some time as a reporter studying the prison system in Japan, which has a relatively low recidivism rate. In the Senate, he pushed for creating a national commission that would study the American prison system, and he convened hearings on the economic consequences of mass incarceration. He says he even hired three staffers who had criminal records. “If you have been in prison, God help you if you want to really rebuild your life,” Webb told me. “We’ve got seven million people somehow involved in the system right now, and they need a structured way to reënter society and be productive again.” He didn’t mention it, but he is aware that the prison population in the U.S. exploded after the Clinton Administration signed tough new sentencing laws.

The issue that Webb cares about the most, and which could cause serious trouble for Hillary Clinton, is the one that Obama used to defeat her: Clinton’s record on war. In the Obama Administration, Clinton took the more hawkish position in three major debates that divided the President’s national-security team. In 2009, she was an early advocate of the troop surge in Afghanistan. In 2011, along with Samantha Power, who was then a member of the White House National Security Council staff and is now the U.N. Ambassador, she pushed Obama to attack Libyan forces that were threatening the city of Benghazi. That year, Clinton also advocated arming Syrian rebels and intervening militarily in the Syrian civil war, a policy that Obama rejected. Now, as ISIS consolidates its control over parts of the Middle East and Iran’s influence grows, Clinton is still grappling with the consequences of her original vote for the war in Iraq.

Although Webb is by no means an isolationist, much of his appeal in his 2006 campaign was based on his unusual status as a veteran who opposed the Iraq war. “I’ve said for a very long time, since I was Secretary of the Navy, we do not belong as an occupying power in that part of the world,” he told me. “This incredible strategic blunder of invading caused the problems, because it allowed the breakup of Iraq along sectarian lines at the same time that Iran was empowering itself in the region.”

He thinks Obama, Clinton, and Power made things worse by intervening in Libya. “There’s three factions,” he said. “The John McCains of the world, who want to intervene everywhere. Then the people who cooked up this doctrine of humanitarian intervention, including Samantha Power, who don’t think they need to come to Congress if there’s a problem that they define as a humanitarian intervention, which could be anything. That doctrine is so vague.” Webb also disdains liberals who advocate military intervention without understanding the American military. Referring to Syria and Libya, Webb said, “I was saying in hearings at the time, What is going to replace it? What is going to replace the Assad regime? These are tribal countries. Where are all these weapons systems that Qaddafi had? Probably in Syria. Can you get to the airport at Tripoli today? Probably not. It was an enormous destabilizing impact with the Arab Spring.”

pinboy3niner

(53,339 posts)
17. Thanks for posting that, very interesting
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 03:49 AM
Nov 2014

Webb's antiwar views are one of his main strengths. He's certainly not a pacifist, but his intimate experience of the horrors of war as a Marine combat infantry platoon leader in Vietnam informs his judgement well on matters of war and peace and foreign policy.

His novel, 'Fields of Fire,' is realistic and helped me overcome many years of psychological suppression of my own VN War experience.

From a progressive viewpoint Webb may not seem to offer much of a leftward push to the primary field (certainly not like Sanders), but he has credibility, especially with conservative Democrats and Independents, and his inclusion might add to the debates.

I agree with you that Webb could be very interesting, and even surprising.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
12. I like Webb as a person, but don't support some of the same thing he does
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 02:48 AM
Nov 2014

It would be interesting if he got in the race.

 

Ykcutnek

(1,305 posts)
18. Looking for someone to get excited about during the primaries.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 03:55 AM
Nov 2014

The more who run, they better off we'll be...

But this guy seems too cookie cutter and

wyldwolf

(43,867 posts)
22. Some on DU will have to try REALLY REALLY hard to like this guy
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 06:41 AM
Nov 2014

Think denial is a big river? Wait until we meet Justification.

PDittie

(8,322 posts)
23. Because someone has to run to the right of Hillary
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 08:12 AM
Nov 2014

There's a huge unrepresented constituency there. Webb understands that Hillary is just too liberal to pull those conservative military-type white rural males that Democrats are going to need to win the White House in 2016.



And he's not running for vice-president or even Secretary of Defense either, by God. (This is not intended to be sarcasm.)

Faryn Balyncd

(5,125 posts)
24. Here's a link to op-ed "Class Struggle" which he sent to WSJ in 11/2006 :
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 08:37 AM
Nov 2014



(can't find it on WSJ website, but Truthout has it)






Class Struggle
By Jim Webb
The Wall Street Journal
Wednesday 15 November 2006


The most important-and unfortunately the least debated-issue in politics today is our society's steady drift toward a class-based system, the likes of which we have not seen since the 19th century. America's top tier has grown infinitely richer and more removed over the past 25 years. It is not unfair to say that they are literally living in a different country. Few among them send their children to public schools; fewer still send their loved ones to fight our wars. They own most of our stocks, making the stock market an unreliable indicator of the economic health of working people. The top 1% now takes in an astounding 16% of national income, up from 8% in 1980. The tax codes protect them, just as they protect corporate America, through a vast system of loopholes.

Incestuous corporate boards regularly approve compensation packages for chief executives and others that are out of logic's range. As this newspaper has reported, the average CEO of a sizeable corporation makes more than $10 million a year, while the minimum wage for workers amounts to about $10,000 a year, and has not been raised in nearly a decade. When I graduated from college in the 1960s, the average CEO made 20 times what the average worker made. Today, that CEO makes 400 times as much.

In the age of globalization and outsourcing, and with a vast underground labor pool from illegal immigration, the average American worker is seeing a different life and a troubling future. Trickle-down economics didn't happen. Despite the vaunted all-time highs of the stock market, wages and salaries are at all-time lows as a percentage of the national wealth. At the same time, medical costs have risen 73% in the last six years alone. Half of that increase comes from wage-earners' pockets rather than from insurance, and 47 million Americans have no medical insurance at all......


http://www.truth-out.org/archive/item/66991:jim-webb--class-struggle






a personal memory:

8 days before Webb wrote this, in the wee hours of Wednesday morning, November 8, 2006, I remember dosing off after no longer being able to stay awake for more returns. At the time, about 3 AM, the returns & media prognosticators were predicting that Webb had not succeeded in his battle with George Allen, and that the Republicans were going to retain control of the Senate (50/50, with the tie-breaker being Dick Cheney).

When my alarm went off about 6AM, and I learned that Webb had pulled ahead, and that Webb would tip control of the Senate to Democrats, tears of joy overwhelmed me.

8 days later, Webb let the WSJ know his views on economics & Class Struggle in America.








Le Taz Hot

(22,271 posts)
26. Thank you!
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:00 AM
Nov 2014

Only ONE progressive so far in the possible pack and that's Bernie Sanders. Everyone else, meh. More of the centrist sell outs.

TBF

(32,029 posts)
28. Agreed - I like Bernie.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:04 AM
Nov 2014

He's not a revolutionary socialist but he does care about people and he has been in Washington at least 20 years. He has the experience to know how to get things done in that city. Better than any of the other folks I've seen floated around.

Robbins

(5,066 posts)
31. well
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:29 AM
Nov 2014

At least Hillary won't be getting a cornation In primarys.

If you attack Webb as too centist then so is hillary.

Hopefully someone else besides him runs against Hillary.I am anyone but her till someone runs i can firmly get behind.Hopefully bernie sanders runs in primarys with ELizabeth warren out.

 

MohRokTah

(15,429 posts)
33. So Hillary will have a challenger from the right.
Thu Nov 20, 2014, 09:31 AM
Nov 2014

My hope is there will be at least one challenger from the Left.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Jim Webb Forms Explorator...