"I have decided not to run for president," Mr. Warner said at a news conference in Richmond.  He said his decision was based on family considerations, but he pointedly did not rule out another try for public office later on.

Mr. Warner, who finished the single term that a Virginia governor is allowed in January, has spent the majority of his time since leaving office traveling to New Hampshire, Iowa and other key states in the presidential nomination process.  His political action committee, Forward Together, was assembling the framework for a full-blown presidential campaign to be formed after the midterm elections.


In other words, for almost a year he's been behaving like a man who has already made up his mind, and is taking the steps to implement his decision.  He has already raised tens of millions of dollars in campaign funds.  He has traveled extensively to all of the key nominating states.  He has developed a highly sophisticated campaign infrastructure.  He was the only Democratic presidential contender to speak at this year's lefty blogger convention, YearlyKos.  He even went to the trouble of creating a character of himself on the cybernetic-alternate universe site Second Life, to reach out to the "youth" vote.  He has been hungry, creative, and focused on the laying the foundations of a clearly apparent presidential run.

And I think it would have been a good one.  I'm not saying this centrist, pro-gun, NASCAR-loving millionaire is every progressive's dream.  I'm not saying I would have voted for him in the primary.  But there are many reasons why he would have been a terrific voice to have had there. 

For one thing, barring the unlikely re-entry of either John Edwards or Al Gore into presidential politics, Warner would have been the only Southern candidate in the Democratic field.  If nominated, he almost certainly would have pulled Virginia to the Democrats, and likely have made Tennessee, Kentucky, and North Carolina at least competitive.  This in turn would have forced the GOP to devote resources to states they currently take for granted, and divert resources from "battleground" states like Michigan and Ohio, which would have fallen to the Dems more easily.  If you do not take the fight to their turf, they will take it to yours, and you will be the worse for it.

Now, the field of Democratic candidates is almost certainly going to be limited to a handful of Northeastern "liberals".  Neither Hillary Clinton, nor John Kerry, nor Joe Biden are liberals, in any honest sense of the word, but that doesn't matter.  The first one's an evil lesbian, the second a traitorous kitesurfer, the third a balding, plagiarizing weirdo.  Only the last of these three things is true, but they would all become "true" once Karl Rove is done with them. 

Warner, despite his massive wealth, walks, talks, and, most importantly, acts like a Southerner.  I hate to spoil anyone's utopian fantasies, but there are a few more pressing issues in this country right now than eliminating gun shows and mandating child-safety trigger locks.  A pro-gun Democratic nominee would be a serious blow to the GOP"s lock on white males.  If a pro-gun candidate is a non-starter for you, I guess winning presidential elections is, also.

So why did Warner drop out?  "Family considerations"?  The report says he suddenly made this decision within the last 48 hours.  Ok, I hate to be like this, but do I smell affair?  Impending scandal?  Widespread financial impropriety?  What happened, or was about to happen, in the last 48 hours that suddenly made this decision necessary?


As for his decision to remove himself from presidential politics, at least for the time being, one Democratic official friendly to Mr. Warner said: "He realized how hard this was going to be.  He's a great general election candidate, but he thought he would have difficulty winning the primary."


I'm sorry, but that just doesn't cut it for me.  Right now, the two leading candidates on the Republican side are a maverick, administration-bashing Senator, and a pro-choice, pro-gay northeastern former mayor.  Are they going to have a hard time in the primary season?  You bet.  Does that mean they're dropping out?  Absolutely not.  Would both of them be "great general election candidate(s)"?  Of course.  Are Republican voters smart enough to nominate the candidate most likely to win in November?  Looks like it to me.  Are Democrats?  Oh, boy, I really don't know anymore.

Whatever Mark Warner's reasons are, his exit today results in a real loss of opportunity for the Democratic Party.  It solidifies Hillary's position as the likely Democratic nominee in 2008, as well as the all-but-assured loser in the general election.