Campaign Official Says Vilsack Dropping Out (CNN)

[Silvermint]

* From the AP: "Senior aide says ex-Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack to quit presidential bid."

* Article linked by the AP: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VILSACK_2008?SITE=SCFLO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

* Breaking on CNN: "A senior campaign official says former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack will drop his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, The Associated Press reports."

* CNN Political Ticker link: http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/

* CNN permanent link: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/23/vilsack.2008.ap/index.html

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- Democrat Tom Vilsack is abandoning his bid for the presidency after struggling against better-known, better-financed rivals, a senior campaign official told The Associated Press on Friday.

Vilsack left office in January and traveled through states holding early tests of strength. He had faced a tough challenge from rivals such as New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and John Edwards, who have had more success raising money and attracting attention -- even in Vilsack's home state of Iowa.

Vilsack was scheduled to make a formal announcement later in the day. The official spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity to avoid pre-empting the Democrat's statement.

Vilsack was the first Democrat to formally enter the 2008 race when he announced his candidacy in November. He conceded at the time that he faced a difficult race.

Trying to counter perceptions that as one of the least known of the prospective candidates he was too much of an underdog to succeed, Vilsack said in a campaign video: "I've never started a race that I've been expected to win, and I've never lost."

As governor of Iowa, Vilsack had carved out a reputation as a centrist balancing his state's budget and refusing to raise taxes, while emphasizing increased spending on such priorities as education, health care and higher wages. Until recently he chaired the Democratic Leadership Council, the party's signature centrist group.

More at link....

=================================
EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY
4 OR 5 PARAGRAPHS FROM THE
COPYRIGHTED NEWS SOURCE PER
DU RULES.

[brooklynite]

1. Too bad...

I still think we're better off with a Western/Southern Governor than with someone from the Senate.

[Silvermint]

4. Yeah

Can't win without regional strength, no matter what national polls say. Don't think Vilsack was the candidate to accomplish that, but your point still holds.

[Ken Burch]

31. We don't need another left-bashing nominee.

We need somebody with guts and eloquence.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Well, Here's to hoping the General gets in fairly soon......

Cause that's what it looks as though we need....not a governor, not a senator, but a Good and Democratic General! :patriot:

[Silvermint]

3. Or at the very least,

here's to candidates whose sole virtue isn't their state of origin or their last name by marriage.

[Dinger]

24. After Feb. 27th In NY, I Think He Will

Feb. 28th/29th. Whaddaya think Frenchie??
:patriot: :patriot: :patriot: :patriot:

[brooklynite]

28. What's happening on the 27th?

[Dinger]

38. Right Here:

I believe Hillary has an event at the same time, in New York.

http://securingamerica.com/node/2254

[jobycom]

5. That's the first noise his campaign has made. I wonder who his voter will go to.

Too bad, really. He had a good voice on a lot of issues.

[mikelgb]

6. One down.

I feel no loss here he was not on my radar.

[catgirl]

7. AP: Ex-Iowa Gov. Vilsack ending '08 bid

DES MOINES, Iowa - Democrat Tom Vilsack is abandoning his bid for the presidency after struggling
against better-known, better-financed rivals, a senior campaign official told The Associated Press on Friday.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/ap_on_el_pr/vilsack2008;_ylt=Aj1Ji5isuNyOVGRPwgoJkqys0NUE

[Arugula Latte]

8. Whoops. I blinked and he's out.

Yowza. That didn't take long.

[Ken Burch]

32. Look at the bright side...

If you hang onto your "Vilsack in '08" button for 20 years, it'll get appraised for big-time cash on "The Antiques Roadshow".

[Hardrada]

41. I have a Vilsack campaign sign!

I guess I can cash it in for major chips when I am 82.

[Chimichurri]

9. good.

All he wanted to do was privatize Social Security.

[FrenchieCat]

12. True....

Some picked up on that during the NV forum. Thank goodness!

[leQ]

10. it was fun while it lasted.

[FrenchieCat]

11. This is exactly why when folks start talking about Wes Clark

hurrying up to get into the race, I scratch my head.

Getting in early doesn't mean one will do any better than taking one's time.

Considering the media obsession with Hillary/Obama with a bit of Edwards thrown in, jumping into the frey for fear of being left behind is not how it will work. One has to have a compelling message, and be a compelling personality. whether one jumped in back in December or jumps in the first week of March makes no difference except for burning up a couple of million in the meantime.

Free publicity is the biggest commodity wanted by candidates. With the media giving the lyon's share of it to Obama/Hillary/Edwards, they are in essence fixing the race.

Plus Vilsack didn't want to lose in his home state...and 11 months of being ignored could have done it.

Too bad! I'd rather see more folks in it than less, truth be told!

[station agent]

16. Wes's son was on the radio

a couple times this week on The Young Turks (Air America). He's very impressive and said that his dad wouldn't run and couldn't win. He wants his dad to relax and hopes he stays out of the race. He said that because he's military 30 percent of Dems would never vote for him anyway. Wes Jr. was so good on the air that I hope someday he runs for office and he gave me a new respect for Wes Sr. I doubt Sr will run though. Jr. really made it sound very unlikely and he was not playing around.

[FrenchieCat]

18. I like Wes Jr. as well, but I will say that he doesn't speak for the father

in what the Sr. will ultimately do.

Just like Wes Jr.'s customary cussing doesn't reflect on his father, neither does what he says in reference to if Clark sr. decides to enter the frey or no.

But if I were Wes Clark's son...I probably would not want him to run either.....in this sorry state of affairs known as our political process these days. Might as well just go an audition for the media, cause that's who decides who will be popular. :(

:hi:

[MGKrebs]

27. Except that in the meantime other campaigns are

sucking up all the top professional staff and lining up donors. Somebody like Gore could probably get in late and pull it off, but Clark doesn't have any built in base.

[knight_of_the_star]

49. I wouldn't put as much weight on the professional staff

Look what the pros got us in 2000, 2002, and 2004.

[andykef]

13. Shame but interesting

I think that it is a shame that Tom Vilsack has dropped out. I think that he would have made a valuable contribution to the race. His demise with strengthen Hillary, as both Rodham-Clinton and Vilsack are DLC. This is where the fun begins the race is shaping up to be Rodham-Clinton Vs Obama, are we sure that either of them can win? Edwards could get the nomination by default and then it really is over, GOP win 2008.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

44. You sound pretty concerned. Welcome to DU.

:hi: MKJ

[no_hypocrisy]

14. I guess "Hillary's people" got to him, huh?

Honestly, I'm getting cranky about having my candidate picked for me before I get a chance to vote.

[BigDDem]

20. Oh, yes, it must be Hillary

since she's sitting at 38-40% and Vilsack was at ZERO; I can see
why "her people" got him out of the race.

By the way, which candidate was "picked" - I didnt get the memo.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

15. Iowa's Electoral Votes Wouldn't Have Helped Much

I'm surprised. I thought he'd be a contender.

Then the drugs wore off.

[Ian David]

17. I forgot he was running. I'm glad he's out, though. What a dickhead he was on The Daily Show. n/t

[bottomofthehill]

19. Iowa Caucuses matter less and less

With California, Florida and now Pennsylvania moving their primary elections up, the Iowa Caucuses will matter less and less and with a native son in the race it gave other candidates even a bigger reason to skip Iowa this cycle. Now that Vilsack is out, the second tier candidates will start to play there again in hopes for free press while the money candidates will play in the big states.

My bet is that the hospitality industry in Iowa was working hard to get Gov Vilsack out of the race.

[Silvermint]

21. I find it annoying that

the classic two states, Iowa and New Hampshire, have both gone red at least once in the last two presidential cycles. And they pick the democrat that's supposed to represent us? I have to say, I like the updated primary/caucus schedule. Having lived in Minnesota most of my life, the nomination race was always over before it reached us.

[lakercub]

22. Just as well

I honestly don't know much about Vilsack...and he may be a wonderful candidate, but what the Dems need now is unity, not 5 contenders eating each other alive. I am hoping Edwards, Hillary, Obama, and Kucinich keep this in mind. I have my choice among this group (and, realistically, Kucinich doesn't have a prayer) but I will vote for whoever gets the nomination among these folks. I just don't want their blood all over my hands when I do it. The last thing we need is to devour our own when we are so close to getting this country back on the right track.

In a perfect world, we would get some choices. But the overriding goal in 2008 has got to be to get the Republicans as far away from power as possible so we can begin cleanup. That is made difficult by a messy primary. And Hillary and Obama are already showing signs of giving us a nasty, messy primary. It's the last thing we need.

If Vilsack was the best choice then that is too bad, but right now, I am willing to make a few sacrifices so long as we ride into office in 2008 with momentum enough to change the course of Bush's disastrous reign.

[Rhiannon12866]

23. K&R. Too bad, since I think we need to hear his voice, like that of Kucinich...

And he also just happened to go to my school...:-)

[Robbien]

25. MSM has already made its choice

Vilsack would never be able to get a word in edgewise. Even this news barely made a blip on the radar.

[missTheBigDog]

26. Our party has no hope now

He was the last remaining candidate against the war or didn't vote for it (ie. Hilary, Edwards, and Biden). Gore better win the Oscar this weekend and announce his attentions because this field is his for the taking.

[cascadiance]

29. But he was also very much in the DLC leadership structure too...

And even though I went to Univ. of Iowa for my college years, there wasn't any way I would be talked in to voting for him. With his questionable viability against other candidates and not enough distance from the DLC, there's no way he'd help us. We'd be better off campaigning for Kucinich (who at least has the right character and stands on issues even if he's not considered someone who's got a good shot at winning).

I think he probably saw through the fact that he was just one of many corporatist candidates running, so he wasn't going to potentially pick up a big grass roots campaign like someone of Kucinich's stature still might.

I'm with you though, I want Inconvenient Truth to win both Oscars it's nominated for, so that Al Gore can give a great speech as a prelude to running, and then also have a ready made campaign song of Melissa Etheridge's to play at his campaign stops!

[Ken Burch]

30. He is NOT the last candidate against the war of didn't vote for it.

We still have KUCINICH, dammit.

Give Dennis a chance here. Every vote he gets, whether he's nominated or not, helps boost the chances of peace and of having our party fight a winning campaign based on principle and guts.

[missTheBigDog]

33. There's no doubt...

I like Kuchinich just as much as I liked Dean last time. But let's get real here. The guy has no realistic shot. It's better to focus our efforts on getting a viable candidate up there this time that has a shot of winning.

Kucinich, Sharpton, Mosely-Braun, type candidates are pretty much just window dressing.

[Ken Burch]

36. We don't have to settle for a centrist hack like HRC.

Even if she did win, we wouldn't know she was a Democratic president anyway. Just like with Bill.

And there's always the option for one of the "electable" candidates to embrace Kucinich's ideas. They don't have to stand for mush to win. Edwards or Clark running on Kucinich's platform would win in a landslide. Edwards really would be the next Robert Kennedy then, rather than just a DLC'er who's pretending to be Bobby like he is now.

[missTheBigDog]

35. Not to mention the fact that...

if somehow nominated, the pubs would eat him alive. There is so much dirt they could dig up from his Cleveland mayor days, it isn't funny.

[JerseygirlCT]

34. TBH, I don't think many even noticed he was *in*

Sort of flew below the MSM radar on this bid, didn't he?

[cascadiance]

37. Anyone consider that his point of being in is the timing of his dropping out?...

Perhaps it's part of the DLC's strategy, which a few more of those lesser known ones like Biden will adopt later and drop out too, in an effort to make it sound through their MSM echo chamber like the race is "already decided" for Ms. Clinton, to keep someone like Al Gore from entering in later, as it appears he might be looking to do if the conditions are right?

[skipos]

40. Ah Jeeze

You know, DUers were claiming that VIlsack's ENTRANCE was part of some DLC conspiracy to make Hillary look better in case she didn't do well in Iowa.

Now some think his exit is part of some DLC conspiracy?

Not everything is a conspiracy.

[cascadiance]

42. Nope, don't know it's a conspiracy at all!

But, I'm always leery of things going on behind the scenes. I don't want to see what happened to Howard Dean in last election happen again, which I do believe was the establishment finding a way to push him out. I also think that's what has Gore waiting on the sidelines now to wait for the proper "entry point" too. A lot of these issues are probably "non-issues", but I consider every possibility.

It does feel like the DLC is trying to force us to some "early conclusion" that one of theirs is the candidate to be the one to get behind long before the primaries start to try and exclude the possibility of a Kucinich or a Gore changing the equation. With the early MSM consternation of narrowing the field of "viable" candidates down, Hillary's elevating the competitive financial entry point of competing candidates by very early bypassing public financing options all feel like they want to tighten up the race to their people. Just considering the possibility of the entry and leaving of these candidates that many feel had no chance to start with were possibly a way of them trying to create a perception of the race thinning out to be only for their more "viable" horses running early.

[Ken Burch]

43. That's just what the conspirators TOLD you to say!

:sarcasm:

[Pastiche423]

39. One less DLCer

Good.

[UrbScotty]

45. While not my first pick, it's disappointing to see him go.

I mean, since he did head the DLC, he wasn't at the top of my list. Still, it's unfortunate to see our field narrowed because a candidate couldn't get enough money.

[blasphemousinner]

46. This discussion is so callous...

Everyone here is talking about who has a chance at winning and who doesn't based on their publicity and campaign financing and I'm really sick of it. I have read this website daily for too long to remember and I just started an account here because of how surprisingly awful the debate is turning. Before I begin my tirade, I'd like to point out three things I'm sure everyone here can agree on:

1) Corporate Media attempts to choose candidates for us through coverage and often pays more attention to campaign-power than campaign-smarts.
2) Corporations don't want us to choose certain candidates out of self-sustaining philosophy and thus certain candidates have marginal funding.
3) For those that have heard them: The bottom candidates are all very intelligent and thoughtful. We might not agree with everything the bottoms have to say, but Clinton, Obama and Edwards certainly aren't saying anything that we couldn't have thought of ourselves.

Now, if we agree on those three things then it's an easy conclusion that the candidates getting major coverage aren't automatically the best or most electable. We all know how conservative this media is; why do we trust it concerning our candidates when they're not outright attacking them?

I must admit, I watched the Stephanopolous C-Span Speeches/Interviews this week and was not very impressed with the major candidates. All of the more minor candidates have a lot to offer that most of my fellow local volunteer Democrats aren't even aware of:

Joe Biden worked closely with Wes Clark last-minute to restructure some of the plans in Serbia that are attributed to the clean transition of government after the UN Invasion. Mike Gravel's ideas about the Fair Tax and eliminating the Income Tax is the only realistic way we could ever keep the super-wealthy from being able to lobby out of their taxes. His ideas on how our political system needs to restructure itself against the imprint left from Pro-Slavery Virginia during the making of our constitution are so heavily overlooked it's sad. Dennis Kucinich is probably the one candidate who's "quickest on his feet." He's very clever in debate and all of his speeches have a level of passion that is so lacking in all the major candidates.

Now, this is the part of it all that disgusts me about fellow Democrats at times:

We're more intent on winning and setting records than putting out the BEST CANDIDATE! Why do you think Hillary's campaign site is constantly trumpeting about her electability? It's basic propaganda playing on the worst of all of your desires! We want our Candidate to strike home runs, but if they're on corporate steroids do we still want to go that far? This is one area where we are starting to shadow the GOP, and probably the most disturbing of all.

We all want our candidate to win in 08', especially after getting a good thrashing in 2000 and 2004, but we have to keep our eyes on the BEST candidate. Picking a candidate because of polls two years ahead is not intelligent voting and we should NOT be judging candidates solely on their stances within the political spectrum, nor what demographic record they will be setting by getting into office. This person will be our commander-in-chief and a super-funded Hillary or Obama can be just as politically cumbersome as President Bush is right now.

I know from personal experience that the candidate's spot in the political spectrum doesn't matter at all if they can convince the American public that they have the correct reasoning and facts behind their stances. Likewise, I don't want a candidate who needs their speeches written for them during "Conversations." If the bottom candidates can make such impassioned speeches without high paid speech writers what does it say when Hillary, Obama and Edwards pale in comparison with their gargantuan funds?

The main issue about "Funding" drives me crazy, too: Any candidate who receives the Democratic Nomination will have enough funding to knock any Republican out of the water. Extra money doesn't matter after a certain point: what you need is a candidate that's engaging and energizing enough to get volunteers and voters out in large numbers during the 3-6 months before November of 08. No amount of money can trump a strong message in that respect.

KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BALL FOLKS!

[bpeale]

48. A F*****G MEN!!!

[dave420]

47. Ballsack, more like.

seriously. He'd never get in with a name like that.

[knight_of_the_star]

50. Bug on the windshield

Honestly, before this announcement how many people on here would stand up loud and proud for Vilsack, much less outside of DU. He didn't really seem to be one who had much support going for him.

[Bluzmann57]

51. Now whether one likes Vilsack or not

it is kind of sad to see him go. It seems that only the rich have any chance of winning anything anymore. His dropping out is a reason we need campaign reform in this country.

[confludemocrat]

52. If a tree falls in the woods...

One out-and-out DLCer down, a couple of other DLCers (or closet DLCers) to go