Who's our horse in 2008? [updated]

It occurs to me that one of the main planks of the Democratic '08 platform should be that we will put the best qualified people in places where they are needed, starting with the president. We don't need a CEO president, because the country is not a corporation, the revenue streams and goals are utterly different. It's my belief that we need somebody who can point to an actual PLACE where they were the chief executive, and how they turned that place around. To me, this means mayors and governors. So here's a thought: if you have somebody in charge of where you are, are they any good? Have they turned the city or state around? [at the suggestion of WisVoter, updated to feature democratic governors only]

Democratic Governors

State Governor Next ElectionYear

• Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano 2006
  
• Delaware Governor Ruth Ann Minner 2008
  
• Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich 2006
  
• Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack 2006
  
• Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius 2006
  
• Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco 2007
  
• Maine Governor John Baldacci 2006
  
• Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm 2006
  
• Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer 2008
  
• New Hampshire Governor John Lynch 2006
  
• New Jersey Acting Governor Richard Codey 2006
  
• New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson 2006
  
• North CarolinaGovernor Mike Easley 2008
  
• Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry 2006
  
• Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski 2006
  
• Pennsylvania Governor Edward G. Rendell 2006
  
• Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen 2006
  
• Virginia Governor Mark Warner 2005
  
• Washington Governor Christine Gregoire 2008
  
• West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin III 2008
  
• Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle 2006
  
• Wyoming Governor Dave Freudenthal 2006
  
http://www.democraticgovernors.org/governors
• Mayor of Atlanta, USA
  
• Mayor of Baltimore, USA
  
• Mayor of Charleston, USA
  
• Mayor of Chicago, USA
  
• Mayor of New York City, USA
  
• Mayor of San Francisco, USA
  
• Mayor of Tinley Park, USA
  
• Mayor of Washington DC,

•  Chicago, Illinois

  Daley -  It is the "City that works", you just don't want to know how.

  Blogo- Don't even think it!

  by Muwarr90 on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 09:56:28 AM PDT

  •  Often Wondered...

    He's been prosecuted, and there seems to be some shady dealings, but nonetheless, Chicago is looking pretty good despite the disaster in the manufacturing sector, could it be a model for how to deal with that on a larger scale?

    by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:01:43 AM PDT

    •  It's a good trick

      Both he and his father have been able to pull it off. In the 60's and 70's when the cores of most of the midwestern idustrial cities were dying, Chicago was booming under the elder Daley.

      I've got to say things have been pretty good under Richie, and the city is more beautiful than ever. I don't think he's ever been prosecuted though.

      I guess running the City of Chicago is alot like making sausage.

      by Muwarr90 on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:05:16 AM PDT

      •  Um, no

        > Both he and his father have been able to pull it
        > off. In the 60's and 70's when the cores of most
        > of the midwestern idustrial cities were dying,
        > Chicago was booming under the elder Daley.

        Um, no.  The elder Daley presided over the second great period of growth of Chicago, and then its brutal decline.  Remember what Cicero Ave from 55th to 95th was like in the 70s and 80s?  Richard J had absolutely no idea what to do about that, other than build more neighborhood-destroying expressways.

        What saved Chi-town was the fact that the financial services industry stayed there and then prospered in the 1980s, and that physically it remained a fairly pleasant place to live.  Fortunately Washington (and even Byrne in her own way) loved the city and started fighting to save it.  R.M. Daley came in and picked up on that foundation.  He has done a good job in many respects, but the corruption is not a good thing and will be his undoing (and possibly the city's) in the near future.

        sPh

        by sphealey on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:16:33 AM PDT

        •  It's comparative

          I think when you look at the elder Daley, you have to look at it in the context of what was happening in the context of other cities like Detroit, Cleveland etc.

          Prosperity certainly wasn't uniform in Chicago in that period, but it held together better than most. And if you look at the downtown business districts, Chicago was really was booming through most of that period.

          I'm certainly not saying either Daley is a saint. If you haven't read it already, pick up a copy of American Pharoh about The first Daley. It's an excellent biography that touches many of these issues.

          by Muwarr90 on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:52:15 AM PDT

    •  So did Providence after Cianci n/t

      by Scoopster on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:07:31 AM PDT

•  Mark Warner and Tom Vilsack

  will probably both run and I believe that Mark Warner will be the next President of the United States - just my opinion.

  by RichardG on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:00:13 AM PDT

  •  Waner

    Seems reasonable, is he rock star enough to look good on TV? Can he get people to identify with him?

    by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:03:52 AM PDT

    •  err, Warner

      n/t

      by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:04:09 AM PDT

    •  I'd Vote Green

      No way am I voting for a man who says we should put minors away for life if we can't fry them.

      End of story. Nominate Warner, Bayh, or any other their ilk if you want to kill the party. Nominate Hillary is you simply want to screw the party for another four years.

      Feingold is the way to go.

      by NewDirection on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:52:42 AM PDT

      •  Is that a threat or an offer?

        Sorry, couldn't resist, I agree that we need someone who actually looks like a contrast to the repub. candidate, whomever he is (and it WILL be a he, no?)

        by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 11:47:18 AM PDT

        •  I'd Love A Female Candidate But....

          ...I don't see any good ones close to being politically viable. I wouldn't kick Boxer out of the proverbial bed though.

          by NewDirection on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 11:54:16 AM PDT

          •  I was unclear

            I meant the republican candidate will surely have a Y chromosome. I'd love a X/X president myself.

            by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 12:22:59 PM PDT

            •  Repubs 08: More Likely Two Y Chromosomes Again

              ...Which is the only thing keeping them from wholeheartedly backing eugenics, I guess.

              by NewDirection on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 12:30:43 PM PDT

    •  Warner is a..

      moderate in the mold of John Kennedy - he is a good looking guy who has charisma and he is a good communicater.

      Basically he is the whole package, from a swing state and positioned perfectly on the issues to win nationwide, but he is not a DLC Democrat.

      Warner has maintained an approval rating around 70% for most of the year and he did a good job as Virginia governor.

      by RichardG on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 02:20:47 PM PDT

•  dnamj, would you consider...

  Would you consider doing an update and only listing the Democrats?  Or at least listing each official's party affiliation?  It would be very informative and helpful.  Thanks.

  by WisVoter on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:05:39 AM PDT

  •  done

    and done, thanks for the suggestion

    by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 11:48:57 AM PDT

•  Easley in North Carolina

  Makes John Kerry look like Mr. Charisma. No way he's going anywhere. Plus he's pissed off all the Nascar dads by wrecking two racecars in stupid publicity stunts.

  by Anglico on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:15:17 AM PDT

•  I live in Texas

  Need I say more?

  by Sherri in TX on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:20:13 AM PDT

•  John Edwards is the Progressive candidate

  this time.  Go to his One America Web site.  Edwards is putting forth an agressive progressive platform and is our best speaker besides Obama.

  No more Clarks and Kerrys who either put their foot in their mouth or never speak up when they should!

  by Sherlock Google on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:36:10 AM PDT

•  Not Hillary

  Just please, not Hillary.

  by Dont Just Stand There on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:43:56 AM PDT

•  The best I can say about Gov. Jim Doyle (D-WI) is

  that he has been coming through pretty well with K-12 education funding (university system has taken sharp hits) and he is definitely better than the Repug candidates.  He does not, however, stir much passion.

  Mario Cuomo, despite his age and being out of politics for a while, would get me out in the streets working for him in a heartbeat!

  by AMDG on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 10:47:58 AM PDT

•  If we must pick....

  ....a moderate Governor from a conservative state, I rather like Brad Henry in Oklahoma, Janet Napolitano in Arizona, and Kathleen Sebelius in Kansas.

  by metal prophet on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 11:40:04 AM PDT

•  Any thoughts

  on Bill Richardson? Gavin Newsome?

  by dnamj on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 11:49:47 AM PDT

  •  Richardson seems awfully DLC

    to me...but he could make a decent run...and I wouldn't be unhappy with him. Newsom is WAY too polarizing. We'd lose in .5 seconds...

    by Elise on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 12:43:55 PM PDT

•  Yeah...can't run anyone from Illinois...bummer.

  But I like Schweitzer...a lot!

  by Elise on Thu Oct 13, 2005 at 12:43:02 PM PDT