Here's why I think he's the best possible candidate for Prez in 2008. Mark Warner, Consensus Builder:
--worked with a hostile GOP-dominated state legislature to pass budget reform (Kaine's brilliant campaign terminology to describe what were essentially tax increases during the Warner administration) to balance the state's budget (which had been wrecked by the previous two GOP gov's even though the state constitution requires a balanced budget), and maintain commitments to public education, transportation and law enforcement and preserve VA's AAA bond rating.
--earned VA the rating of 'best managed' state in the country.
--Becomes 'lame duck' governor with ~70% approval rating in a state with deep Republican roots, and helps elect a second consecutive Dem governor based on the success of his administration.
Warner will have strong backing from the business community as he had a hugely successful career before getting into politics(unlike our "MBA president", who has wrecked everything he ever touched). He made a fortune in the cell-phone industry. He speaks the language, and because of his record as a businessman, he would do a great job of debunking the notion, used by the GOP to poison the debate since Reagan, that the country's wealthy shouldn't have to give anything back to the society from which they benefit so immensely. I read something here a few days ago saying that more young progressives need to consider careers in the business world, because money and business interests dominate our political system and Republicans dominate these arenas. That was an exceptionally good point, and Warner is a perfect example of how we could start to take back our country. All of America is never going to resemble a liberal utopia like San Francisco or Boston, but I do think with more people like Warner we CAN hope to restore Americans' faith in good commonsense government and decisively defeat or at least marginalize the movement to roll back our rights.
I heard him speak at a Kiwanis club meeting I attended with my father back in 2003 when he was campaigning for his budget reform package, to a group of largely wealthy conservatives, and boy does he know how to work this audience. For example, he presented a clear choice between making needed investments in VA's excellent public higher education system or letting it languish into mediocrity, which it was in real danger of doing as the level of state support for VA's public universities waned. I know, I was a student at UVA at the time. By doing so, he argued, making sure VA had a well-educated workforce would make it an attractive place to do business.
He also skillfully addressed the usual conservative concerns about inefficient and wasteful govt bureaucracy, and the argument that you can't solve problems just by throwing money at them, by talking at length about good government stewardship of taxpayer dollars.
Because of his business background, his credibility is practically unassailable, and were he to gain some backing from the business community as he did in 2001, he would drive a wedge right through the middle of the unholy GOP coalition. If he is the Dem presidential nominee I think he wins in a landslide, with at least 300 electoral votes, because he will pick up VA and perhaps many more narrowly red states, especially out west, and carry every state that Kerry did. Let the Rove smear machine try to tear down Mark Warner. Let's see what happens. His opponent will go the way of Jerry Kilgore. In fact, he was quoted as saying last night that Virginians soundly rejected negative campaigning, which rings true in that many voters cited Kilgore's death penalty ads as a reason for voting against him.
He may actually not be as liberal as some of us might like, on either social or economic issues, but he understands that government is the best solution to some, but not all problems, and he is eminently qualified to debunk the failed trickle-down economic policies of the right without alienating the business community. He understands that simply cutting costs is not the way to run a good business, and that making necessary investments is the best approach for long-term success, an argument which applies even more strongly to our government and our country. On gay rights or abortion issues, he may be somewhat to the right of most of us here, but it is safe to say he is better than anything the GOP will throw at us, and it is safe to say he won't actively work to turn back the clock on civil rights and civil liberties like the GOP does.
In short, I think he would be our most electable possible nominee and would be a good progressive too, a force to be reckoned with in 2008. Team him up with someone with good national security cred (like Clark as many on this website have argued or even Obama) and you might have an unbeatable ticket for 2008, especially if the GOP ticket looks like Allen/Frist rather than McCain/Giuliani.
Plus he could run on sort of the same platform that Bush did in 2000, except with a real record to back it up. A uniter, not a divider, a governor with a record of bipartisan consensus building. In the words of Harriet Miers, "The best governor ever!"