Jim Webb - And Why We Aren't Talking About Him

[Agschmid]

We already have a challenger in the race for the 2016 Democratic Primary, but we aren't talking about him... and here is why.

[center][/center]

Hillary Clinton may be dominating every poll of potential Democratic hopefuls for the White House, but some progressives are desperate to find a candidate who will challenge her from the left. Groups have sprung up to encourage Elizabeth Warren to take a stab at the nomination, but with the Massachusetts senator repeatedly saying she isn't running, liberal activists will likely have to turn elsewhere—perhaps to socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) or Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley—if they aren't satisfied with Clinton. But so far, the only Democratic alternative officially in the race is former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, who launched an exploratory committee in November.

A former Secretary of the Navy under President Ronald Reagan, Webb is being touted by some on the left as an Appalachian populist who could champion causes Clinton would rather ignore. The Nation's William Greider, for example, lauded Webb's presidential ambitions in a column headlined "Why Jim Webb Could be Hillary Clinton's Worst Nightmare." Greider praised Webb's non-interventionist tendencies in foreign policy (Webb was a vocal opponent of the Iraq War). "I think of him as a vanguard politician—that rare type who is way out ahead of conventional wisdom and free to express big ideas the media herd regards as taboo," Greider wrote, while acknowledging that Webb was unlikely to win.

There's at least one key issue, however, on which Webb's record is far from progressive: global warming. That's a big deal. Unlike Obamacare and financial reform, much of the progress President Barack Obama has made on climate change rests on executive actions that his successor could undo. At first glance, Webb might look like a typical Democrat when it comes to environmental policy. The League of Conservation Voters gives him a lifetime score of 81 percent—on par with Hillary Clinton's 82 percent rating, though far below Sanders at 95 percent. And unlike most of the Republican presidential hopefuls, he acknowledges that humans are causing climate change. He even supports solving the problem—at least in theory.

But when it came to actual legislation, Webb used his six years in the US Senate to stand in the way of Democratic efforts to combat climate change. Virginia, after all, is a coal state, and Webb regularly stood up for the coal industry, earning the ire of environmentalists. As Grist's Ben Adler succinctly summed it up, "Jim Webb sucks on climate change."

Source.

Here is his announcement video...

So what is it DU... why aren't we talking about him (he is after all one of the ONLY announced candidates)?

[Agschmid]

1. See...

We certainly aren't talking about the candidates who are actually running are we?

(Yup... shameless self kick, but it makes my point).

[bigdarryl]

2. He's a.non factor that's why no one is talking about him

[Agschmid]

3. He's a candidate who is running...

He's got some pretty progressive stances on some issues, and some conservative ideas on others. People seem to be pining for the "other" when they talk about candidates and here we have one but yet... nothing.

[DonViejo]

29. An exploratory committee does not necessarily mean he is running...

Earlier this week, Webb is quoted as saying he'd like to run but, it depends on the $$$ and if he'll be seen as a viable candidate:

Webb wants to get into 2016 race under ‘right circumstances’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141015148

[Agschmid]

30. It's more action than others have taken.

But yes you are correct.

[wyldwolf]

4. I'm not talking about him because he's a confederate sympathizer

[Agschmid]

9. Here is the source for that if anyone wants it...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/10994.html

[A Little Weird]

5. I don't know much about him

I had heard that he was pro-coal and that is something I don't like about him but I would be interested to hear more about what he stands for. Particularly his stance on TPP and H1B.

[Agschmid]

8. TPP

The following interview was conducted jointly for Weekly Toyo Keizai, and Dispatch Japan. Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, is chairman, East Asian and Pacific Affairs, subcommittee, Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

TBL: How does the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade initiative fit in this picture?

WEBB: TPP is an emerging concept; ratifying itself as it goes along. But the notion of countries coming together with us in this kind of format does affirm that we should have a very strong presence in the region.

We have seen free trade agreements that China has negotiated with ASEAN and other countries that could potentially give China tariff benefits. I was a bit skeptical of TPP at the beginning, but with the countries now coming on board, I am more in favor.

TBL: Many top Japanese leaders remain skeptical about some of the economic details, but see TPP as creating a strategic architecture to which China has to respond.

WEBB: That is a valid point. I view over strategic interests in two stages. First, the Korean Peninsula. Korea is the only place in the world where the direct interests of Japan, China, and Russia intersect historically. Over the centuries, whenever one of these three has gotten a bit too much power, there has been a lot of volatility. I think that since World War II, people have come to see that the United States is the balancing force in the region. And if there is not stability in Northeast Asia, we won’t have stability in Southeast Asia.

Meanwhile, given the emergence of China, the best overall approach we can take is to develop multilateral systems, and to invite China to mature as a governing entity that is welcomed to participate.

China may not do that right away. This is the 10th anniversary of China’s entry into the World Trade Organization, and there are questions as to whether this has really been the benefit that many Americans thought it would be as a means of easing Chinese political rigidity.

But we now see a lot of nations saying the time has come for China to be more overt in helping other countries solve problems, rather than always taking stances that only favor Beijing.

In that context, TPP, and Mekong development, and the South China Sea are all issues where the US can facilitate multilateral approaches that add to stability.

[A Little Weird]

13. Thanks for the info

I will spend some more time reading up on him but my initial impression from the info you and others have provided in this thread is that he is more like a republican than a democrat. That is the same problem I have with Clinton. It sounds like they are both good on some issues (enough that they are clearly better than the Republicans' likely candidates) but wrong on many other important issues.

I think it's time the Democratic party started moving back to the left. This gradual shifting to the right hasn't worked. I don't think we are going to start seeing real progress in this country until we start electing progressives. Although with corporate control of the media and Citizen's United, I fear that may no longer be possible.

[Agschmid]

14. No problem.

When it comes to Webb I think we are in agreement.

[truedelphi]

28. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^n/t

[Comrade Grumpy]

38. Here is a pretty thorough profile of Webb:

And all the other Democratic contenders.

I'll just excerpt the Webb section.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/17/inevitability-trap

In his senatorial race, Webb did well not only in northern Virginia, which is filled with Washington commuters and college-educated liberals, but also with rural, working-class white voters in Appalachia. In 2008, those voters were generally more loyal to Clinton than to Obama, but Webb believes that he could attract a national coalition of both groups of voters in the Presidential primaries. He laid out a view of Wall Street that differs sharply from Clinton’s.


“Because of the way that the financial sector dominates both parties, the distinctions that can be made on truly troubling issues are very minor,” he said. He told a story of an effort he led in the Senate in 2010 to try to pass a windfall-profits tax that would have targeted executives at banks and firms which were rescued by the government after the 2008 financial crisis. He said that when he was debating whether to vote for the original bailout package, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, he relied on the advice of an analyst on Wall Street, who told him, “No. 1, you have to do this, because otherwise the world economy will go into cataclysmic free fall. But, No. 2, you have to punish these guys. It is outrageous what they did.”

After the rescue, when Webb pushed for what he saw as a reasonable punishment, his own party blocked the legislation. “The Democrats wouldn’t let me vote on it,” he said. “Because either way you voted on that, you’re making somebody mad. And the financial sector was furious.” He added that one Northeastern senator—Webb wouldn’t say who—“was literally screaming at me on the Senate floor.”

When Clinton was a New York senator, from 2001 to 2009, she fiercely defended the financial industry, which was a crucial source of campaign contributions and of jobs in her state. “If you don’t have stock, and a lot of people in this country don’t have stock, you’re not doing very well,” Webb said. Webb is a populist, but a cautious one, especially on taxes, the issue that seems to have backfired against O’Malley’s administration. As a senator, Webb frustrated some Democrats because he refused to raise individual income-tax rates. But as President, he says, he would be aggressive about taxing income from investments: “Fairness says if you’re a hedge-fund manager or making deals where you’re making hundreds of millions of dollars and you’re paying capital-gains tax on that, rather than ordinary income tax, something’s wrong, and people know something’s wrong. ”

The Clintons and Obama have championed policies that help the poor by strengthening the safety net, but they have shown relatively little interest in structural changes that would reverse runaway income inequality. “There is a big tendency among a lot of Democratic leaders to feed some raw meat to the public on smaller issues that excite them, like the minimum wage, but don’t really address the larger problem,” Webb said. “A lot of the Democratic leaders who don’t want to scare away their financial supporters will say we’re going to raise the minimum wage, we’re going do these little things, when in reality we need to say we’re going to fundamentally change the tax code so that you will believe our system is fair.”

Webb could challenge Clinton on other domestic issues as well. In 1984, he spent some time as a reporter studying the prison system in Japan, which has a relatively low recidivism rate. In the Senate, he pushed for creating a national commission that would study the American prison system, and he convened hearings on the economic consequences of mass incarceration. He says he even hired three staffers who had criminal records. “If you have been in prison, God help you if you want to really rebuild your life,” Webb told me. “We’ve got seven million people somehow involved in the system right now, and they need a structured way to reënter society and be productive again.” He didn’t mention it, but he is aware that the prison population in the U.S. exploded after the Clinton Administration signed tough new sentencing laws.

The issue that Webb cares about the most, and which could cause serious trouble for Hillary Clinton, is the one that Obama used to defeat her: Clinton’s record on war. In the Obama Administration, Clinton took the more hawkish position in three major debates that divided the President’s national-security team. In 2009, she was an early advocate of the troop surge in Afghanistan. In 2011, along with Samantha Power, who was then a member of the White House National Security Council staff and is now the U.N. Ambassador, she pushed Obama to attack Libyan forces that were threatening the city of Benghazi. That year, Clinton also advocated arming Syrian rebels and intervening militarily in the Syrian civil war, a policy that Obama rejected. Now, as ISIS consolidates its control over parts of the Middle East and Iran’s influence grows, Clinton is still grappling with the consequences of her original vote for the war in Iraq.


Although Webb is by no means an isolationist, much of his appeal in his 2006 campaign was based on his unusual status as a veteran who opposed the Iraq war. “I’ve said for a very long time, since I was Secretary of the Navy, we do not belong as an occupying power in that part of the world,” he told me. “This incredible strategic blunder of invading caused the problems, because it allowed the breakup of Iraq along sectarian lines at the same time that Iran was empowering itself in the region.”

He thinks Obama, Clinton, and Power made things worse by intervening in Libya. “There’s three factions,” he said. “The John McCains of the world, who want to intervene everywhere. Then the people who cooked up this doctrine of humanitarian intervention, including Samantha Power, who don’t think they need to come to Congress if there’s a problem that they define as a humanitarian intervention, which could be anything. That doctrine is so vague.” Webb also disdains liberals who advocate military intervention without understanding the American military. Referring to Syria and Libya, Webb said, “I was saying in hearings at the time, What is going to replace it? What is going to replace the Assad regime? These are tribal countries. Where are all these weapons systems that Qaddafi had? Probably in Syria. Can you get to the airport at Tripoli today? Probably not. It was an enormous destabilizing impact with the Arab Spring.”

Early on as a senator, Webb championed the idea of the so-called “pivot to Asia,” a rebalancing of America’s strategic and diplomatic posture from the Middle East to the Far East—an idea that Obama and Clinton subsequently adopted. Webb pushed Secretary of State Clinton to open up relations with Burma, a policy that Clinton includes in her recent book, “Hard Choices,” as a major achievement. (Obama is travelling to Burma this week.) When I raised the subject with Webb, he seemed annoyed that he hadn’t received adequate credit for the Burma policy. People who know him well suggest that part of what’s motivating him to consider a primary challenge to Clinton is his sense that she hasn’t expressed the proper gratitude.

It remains to be seen whether Democratic voters will care as much about foreign policy in 2016 as they did about Iraq in 2008. And it’s unclear how Clinton’s record on the Middle East will look two years from now. If Webb runs, Clinton will face an unpredictable debate about her hawkishness.

At the end of our interview, I noticed a picture of Don Quixote on Webb’s wall of military treasures. He laughed when I asked about it. “The beauty of Don Quixote is not that he dreamed impossible dreams,” he said. “It’s that, because he believed, he caused other people to believe.”

[A Little Weird]

51. Thanks for the link

[TwilightGardener]

6. He won't be able to raise money. If he was grabbing

some donors and making some inroads to get media attention, he might get more notice, but sadly, the Hillary Inevitability has sucked all the oxygen ($$$) out of the process. So you have a situation on the Repub side where there's a decent range of challengers, sort of what we had in 2007, and we have...one person. All eggs in one basket. Better hope she's all that and a fucking bag of chips, Dems.

[karynnj]

12. True, but he had trouble raising money even for the Senate and opted not to run

for reelection - even though he was up in 2012, which would have been easier than 2010 or 2014. He is a horrible candidate and was lucky that Allen imploded. He was also a rather mediocre Senator. I suspect that he has gotten more attention than his credentials warrant.

[4139]

27. You are correct, Webb got lucky... My cat could have beaten George Allen!

[Tarheel_Dem]

35. +1

[dissentient]

7. I like some things I have heard so far about him, he is an intriguing candidate to me

I think it is just way too early to be discussing him yet, or any candidates for that matter.

That is why I think the "Hillary is inevitable" meme being pushed by some Hillary supporters is wayyyyy premature.

[pnwmom]

23. Obama was already a candidate at this point in his first election.

This isn't too early. Any serious, lesser-known candidate should be running now -- in order to have a chance to actually win -- and we should be talking about them.

[Comrade Grumpy]

39. Dissentient, check this link:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/17/inevitability-trap

It's about Hillary and the inevitability trap, but also includes lengthy profiles of most of the other candidates, too, including Webb.

[dissentient]

41. Will read it, thanks!

[Agschmid]

45. Thanks for that!

[karynnj]

10. Because he would be a horrible choice

He is very bad on the issue of climate change and was never a vote that could be counted on for many thing while a senator. He also was horrible raising money for his own campaign and that was part of why he opted not to run for reelection.

However for me, one thing - that many here might consider petty or unimportant is the real reason I seriously will NOT - even if he is the nominee vote for him. The reason is that he swiftboated John Kerry in 2004 when it was clear that he was our nominee in an oped he wrote.

Now, Webb, a Reagan era secretary of the Navy, was a Vietnam vet. However, it was NOT that he bought the right wing lie that Kerry spoke against the soldiers or accused them of things they did not do. In fact, his books used graphic atrocities as plot devices! It turned out that his anger against Kerry - where he refused to shake Kerry's hand for 30 years - was because of Kerry's comments in 1972 that the war was continuing even though the leaders knew it could not be won. He argued repeatedly on the floor of the Senate that the war was supported by the country and it could have been won. (Even MacNamara said in Fog of War in the 1990s that he knew by 1968 that there could be no victory. Note that half the soldiers died after that point.)

In 2006, Kerry endorsed Webb in the primary because he was the likeliest to win and he was a vet. Kerry's leadership PAC funded Webb's primary GOTV and Kerry sent his email list a request to support Webb once he won the primary. This demonstrates the character of Kerry, not Webb. Kerry may be big enough to put Webb's smears behind him -- I'm not.

To me though the inability to change his obsession that the Vietnam war could have been won even decades later when he would have had more information is troubling and indicates a rigid intellect that rejects ever reconsidering whether he is right or wrong.

On other issues, Webb is an interesting mix -- especially with his interest in the Scotch Irish population. He is a populist on some issues, but he voted with the Republicans all too often. While not a fan of Clinton, I would EASILY vote for her over Webb -- there is no doubt that she is a Democrat.

[Agschmid]

11. Interesting, thanks for your reply.

[daredtowork]

15. He has to stand up for the coal industry because...Virginia

But I don't think that's what sinking him.

First, it's the same thing that's keeping Bernie Sanders down vs. Elizabeth Warren. The women in the country want the first female President. We wanted the first female President when we elected Obama: we just wanted healthcare more. Had Obama been female: yahtzee!

The fact that there is so much opposition to Hillary DESPITE her being female should tell you something.

Second, Webb is from Virginia. A lot of funky, untrustworthy politics come out of Virginia. People on the left aren't going to trust him at all unless he can prove he's pro-union, not a racist, and not going to screw up immigration again all in one shot. Good luck with that, Jim! Oh and it would be nice if he's not a misogynist pig, too. Because...Virginia.

Jim Webb may indeed be a great candidate. If he has problems in his past, he may have grown out of them. But because of the shadow of Virginia, he needs a very loud bullhorn to prove it.

[msongs]

16. he should run in the repub primaries nt

[Autumn]

17. His votes on climate change legislation is a deal breaker for me so I don't take him under

consideration at all.

[MohRokTah]

18. I won't be voting for him in the primary.

The only way I'll cast a vote for Webb is if he wins the nomination.

[tritsofme]

19. He's not a serious candidate, that's why we're not talking about him

He's probably selling a book. His "campaign" gets all if not more attention in the media and here that it deserves.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. He's the guy who while serving in the Reagan administration wrote the paper 'Why Women Can't

Fight'. He said lots of sexist, homophobic things and I think he was found with a gun in the Congress and all sorts of bullshit. And what is with the pattern of holding up Reagan Republicans as being uber liberal progressives? I'm sorry, but Reagan Republicans do not wake up one day suddenly liberal. Is Bernie the only alternative to Clinton that was not a Reagan Republican? Who are you people?

[Agschmid]

24. Starting to seem like everyone was a Regan republican...

[Bluenorthwest]

25. Everyone on the right was a Reagan Republican, which is why it is confounding that so many of them

are held up as being liberals when they are not. Webb is by and large to the right of Hillary Clinton. That's just how it is. Frankly the people who are most strongly opposed to Clinton seem to favor Reagan Republicans who have 'switched teams'. A mystery to me.

[pnwmom]

21. His overall record is to the right of Hillary's.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/James_Webb.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm

[Agschmid]

22. It is.

[Comrade Grumpy]

40. Not on Wall Street, not on foreign policy.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/17/inevitability-trap

[Rosa Luxemburg]

26. Probably be OK as a VP?

Clinton/Webb Clinton/O'Malley Clinton/____?

[karynnj]

37. What does he add?

He was a pretty mediocre Senator and not a person who particularly likes or excels at campaigning. He never was a star in the Senate even though DKOS fell in love with him when he first ran. Not to mention, he appeared not to be a team player --- which is one thing -- at least during the election -- a VP should be good at. I personally think that 1) he has done nothing to deserve it, 2) he brings nothing unique to the ticket and if age is an issue he is a year older than Hillary (and some argue she is too old - even though women live longer) 3) we can do far better.

Another possibility is Castro -- young, charismatic, Hispanic AND a real Democrat and a talented politician.

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. Because no-one thinks he stands a chance, and no-one here likes him

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/democrat-candidate

Coal? Reagan? Not a DU candidate.

[Agschmid]

32. Reagan is clearly not a disqualifier...

[HereSince1628]

33. A campaign not generating any buzz on DU sounds like he needs to buy some sockpuppets!

[TheKentuckian]

34. Because people are not looking for another formulation of conservative?

Or a different face or a different gender or a different race or different religious affiliation or lack there of.

Of course less warmongering goes a long fucking way and I see little to indicate that he'd actually otherwise DO anything worse than Clinton so maybe some consideration is merited but it feels like fool's gold, judges would probably be dangerously compromised from what seem to be his views over the years.

[Joe Turner]

36. Jim Webb is a top notch candidate

If he has a problem raising a ton of money it's because he isn't a corporate lapdog. I like his stance on most issues and he is talking about the issues that only few, like Bernie Sanders, and E. Warren are willing to tread.

[karynnj]

42. Bernie Sanders is my Senator and he is at the opposite end of the Democratic spectrum from Webb

Number 1 - Sanders is 100% behind acting against climate change - Webb, not so much. Unlike Webb, I dare to find ANY link to Sanders ever diminishing the ability of women to do anything. On health care, Sanders is the sponsor of single payer -- Webb one of those whose vote was never a certainty. (Warren incidentally is good on all of these too.) Not to mention he seems very pro gun.

There are issues where he is better, but in general I really do not trust him as a person.

[Octafish]

44. +1

Webb has integrity.

[JI7]

49. no, Jim Webb is no Warren and he certainly is no Bernie Sanders

[brooklynite]

43. Actually, we aren't talking about him....

....for the same reason the Republicans aren't talking about George Pataki: nobody takes his campaign seriously. There's no sign of significant political or financial support, and no likelihood that his campaign is going to take off.

[FSogol]

46. Here is why we are not talking about Webb or O'Malley:

Despite making actions toward running, neither has hit the campaign trail besides some trips to Iowa and NH. As their campaigns start, they will talk to people and give speeches, elaborate on policy, and state why you should vote for them. Reporters will scramble to cover them and report on what they said. Then, we in turn will have discussions about what is good and bad in their proposals. And this being DU, both will be eviscerated.

Wishing that it would start sooner does not make it happen. We are all stuck in a holding pattern until some Democrat launches a full time campaign. There is plenty of time, relax.

PS. If climate change/the environment is your issue, check out O'Malley.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/12/martin-omalley-longshot-presidential-candidate-and-real-climate-hawk

[geek tragedy]

47. Because he would alienate ethnic minorities

with his "Democrats have turned their back on white men" schtick.

Has very questionable voting record on immigration and related issues.

Terrible candidate who barely beat Sen. Macaca in a pro-D year.

[JI7]

48. FUCK NO

[herding cats]

50. He has some serious expalining to do before he gets my support.

His record isn't impressive.

Webb voted in favor of an amendment to move the Keystone Pipeline forward.[1]

He voted in favor of an amendment that allowed off-shore drilling in Virginia (his home state).[2]

He also cosponsored legislation to expand offshore drilling.[3]

In a 2006 article in the Wall Street Journal, Webb said he supports developing alternative energies instead of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).[4]

Webb opposed the EPA rules under the Clean Air Act that limited carbon emissions from coal plants. He spoke on the floor saying he didn't believe the EPA had the authority to regulate emissions under the Act.[5]

He expressed concerns with the 2009 cap and trade bill.[6]

He also voted against passing cap and trade in a budget bill where it would only require a simple majority.[7]
http://ballotpedia.org/Jim_Webb_possible_presidential_campaign,_2016/Energy_policy

Webb voted in favor of building 700 miles of additional fencing on the U.S./Mexico border.

<>

Principles

Webb voted with Republicans on the first six amendments to Obamacare. His main concern was the cuts to Medicare and if those were sustainable.[72]

In the end, Webb voted for the bill with the Medicare cuts, but has expressed regrets about doing that.[73]

Webb resigned as Navy Secretary under Ronald Reagan because he disagreed with budget cuts being made.[74]

Ethics

Webb's PAC, Born Fighting PAC, came under fire for paying out close to $100,000 to his wife and daughter after he left the Senate in 2012. The PAC ceased political activity and stopped donating to political candidates.[75]
http://ballotpedia.org/Jim_Webb_possible_presidential_campaign,_2016

And he's wishy-washy at best on Marriage Equality.

In 2006, Webb stated he supports civil unions[1]

He also stated that he believes marriage is between one man and one woman, but he opposed a constitutional amendment in Virginia that would have defined marriage as that.[2]

In a 2014 interview, he stated he is comfortable with the court decisions paving the way for same-sex marriage.[3]
http://ballotpedia.org/Jim_Webb_possible_presidential_campaign,_2016/Gay_rights

He's a weak candidate at best. I'm seriously hoping we do better than Webb. I don't care for him and will not support for him in the primary, of that I'm sure. If I'm forced to vote for him in the general it will take two, not one, clothespins on my nose to get the deed done.

[Agschmid]

53. Ummm...

Yeah I think I get why he isn't ahead now.

[cyberswede]

55. LOL - I just saw the date of this thread.

[cyberswede]

54. Good lord.

The Democratic Party has lurched so far to the right it isn't even funny.

The destruction of unions and mainstream politicians sucking up to corporate interests is why worker wages have been stagnant for ages.