Markos in his front page story on Webb announcing for the Presidency acknowledged the role the Virginia blogosphere played in getting Webb into the race - here one should note especially the role of three people, Lowell Feld (lowkell), Josh Chernila, and Lee Diamond (more an activist than a blogger) - as well as the role they played first in his primary win and then in the general election. Josh and Lowell were on staff throughout the campaign, and others played a role as well, including yours truly, who wrote a number of blogs on Webb's behalf at this site.
There was a massive grassroots effort as well, and many of those people have stayed together now over 8 years, in a group called Brigades, which still has monthly meetings, whose support is regularly sought by Democratic candidates for office, especially in Northern Virginia.
I think many people misjudge Webb. Unfairly, in my opinion.
I too sought to get Webb into that 2006 race, starting in December of 2005. I do not agree with Jim on everything. But I respect him, both his intelligence, and his passion for justice, especially for the ordinary working folks, the ordinary military person.
So please follow me below the fold where I offer a few additional thoughts on the subject of Jim Webb.
Jim Webb and I are contemporaries, albeit of very different backgrounds. He was born in February 1947, I was born in May. To put things in context, both GW Bush and Bill Clinton were born later that same year, as was our own Meteor Blades. In the eyes of some that makes us all past our prime (try telling that to my students) - on a list of progressive activists in which I participate some were concerned that adding Webb to a mix of Clinton (younger than Webb by about 20 months) and Biden (a few years older) marks the Democratic field as geriatric as compared to Republicans who might field millenials like Paul and Rubio. Then again, age is just a number, and what would have been old a few decades ago might still have one in the prime of life.
I cannot claim I am a close friend of Webb, but we operate in a relationship of mutual respect and trust: I was very actively involved in his campaign, and I am fully supportive pf his exporing the possibilities of the 2016 cycle - that is NOT a guarantee either that he will ultimately run or if he does that I will support him. I will say that people who describe him as "stiff" or "rigid" or "too conservative" or any other dismissive expression underestimate how effectively he can connect with people, because he comes across NOT as a politician, but as genuinely himself, and quite frankly, there is a real hunger for that kind of genuineness.
What I do want to address is the matter of policy and positions. I have had these kinds of conversations and exchanges with Webb on multiple occasions, before he was in office and since he left the Senate.
First, for all the support he got on his opposition to the war in Iraq, the real reason he ran for the Senate is because he saw the American dream being destroyed for too many - 8 years ago he was talking about the increasing disparity between CEO pay and that of ordinary workers.
He values privacy: during that campaign he would regularly note that the government needed a damn good reason to come across his doorstep on three issues - how he prayed, who he loved, and his guns. He is more than a bit of a libertarian, but he is also on economic issues far more progressive than many Democrats, including the likes of Chuck Schumer with his tilt towards Wall Street, Harry Reid, and arguably the President.
It might be worth revisiting several things
He stated while running for the Senate campaign that he would never vote to raise taxes on ordinary, earned income. He kept that promise.
He repeatedly called for raising taxes on passive income such as capital gains and dividends, which is the principal source of income for the ultra-wealthy. we should remember that capital gains and "carried interest: are currently taxed at the rate of 15%, which is how Mitt Romney could manipulate things to pay less than 15% in income related taxes on a huge income while two public employees my wife and myself paid at an marginal rate of 28%, 17% of adjusted gross income, on top of which you can add 7.65% of payroll taxes.
Webb also introduced legislation for a windfall profits tax on executives from corporations that received more than $5 billion from TARP -- which was denied a vote. Remember - during all 6 years Webb was in the Senate Harry Reid was the majority leader.
My sense is that Webb would be an effective president. He might not be as progressive as I am on some issues, but I think he might actually get more done than someone whose progressive ideas are more in tune with my own.
And unlike some other politicians, I don't see him as ever selling out to corporate or other interests in order to have their support, financial or otherwise. When he stakes out a position, it is because he believes it. People here should remember that many Americans who agreed more with Mondale on the issues voted for Reagan in 1984 because they did not really know what Mondale stood for, and they respected Reagan for being in their eyes forthright on his beliefs, even when they disagreed with him.
I am not at this point attempting to persuade anyone reading these words to volunteer for Webb, or to give his campaign money. At this point I am merely suggesting that before anyone either hyperventilates or totally dismisses him, they take a deep breath and step back.
Look, if Hillary is the only woman in the race - which she will be if she runs - and there are multiple men in the race, absent a serious gaffe or a serious health issue she will be the nominee. There will be multiple men who will take a shot, and that will pretty much guarantee her success.
But if she does not run, then there could be three women in the race - Warren, Klobuchar, Gillibrand. That creates an entirely different playing field.
One last point - we have already seen some talk about how Webb would be a good Vice Presidential candidate because of states/groups he might bring into play. I believe we have been down this road in 2008. I believe Webb was asked if he wanted to be considered for the VP slot, which would have made sense for Obama. He had many of the same strengths as did Biden in terms of what he added to a national ticket.
My sense is that it is not his inclination to be in a subordinate role, although I would not necessarily rule it out completely. After all, he did title his latest book 'I heard My Country Calling" and is very much motivated by a sense of service.
For what it is worth, I think Webb is in many ways more credible as a presidential candidate than any other male currently being mentioned. For all the criticisms offered in his direction, one can make just as many about Martin O'Malley, Joe Biden, Brian Schweitzer, Andrew Cuomo, and yes, even Bernie Sanders.
I'm not saying he should be the nominee. I'm not even saying he should ultimately run. I think it is perfectly logical for him to initiate the process. Whether all here agree with him on his approach, I suspect it will have a decent amount of appeal outside the confines of this particularly website. And I remind people that part of the appeal Obama had in 2008 was the sense that he would NOT be a total partisan - and that was how he first appeared on the national scene, with his keynote in Boston in 2004 about Red States and Blue States and United States.
Make of this post what you will.
While I am in contact with Webb, I did not ask his permission nor inform him that I was going to make this post.
He's too busy.
He is overwhelmed with the hundreds of emails that are coming his way since this morning.
For what that's worth.
Peace.