I posted an extensive list of candidates that I thought would run for President. The list was long. I failed to include James S. Gilmore, the former Republican Governor of Virginia. He is a no-nonsense conservative. After being elected in 1997, he eliminated the tax on automobiles. He seems like a true conservative who speaks his mind. It is that habit that may make it tough for him to get the nomination.
Yesterday, he announced that he is officially in the race. Prior to 9/11, he served on the National Commission on Terrorism until 2003, and stated that the country was not prepared for an attack. He had poor relations with some of the Bush advisors and then seemed to disappear from the political map.
After George Allen lost his bid for Senator--and therefore his hope for the Presidency--and Mark Warner decided there is more to life than running for President, Gilmore believes that somebody from Virginia should be running for President. If nothing else, he will certainly add to the debates.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 1)
1. The latest politician interested in running for the presidency is James Gilmore. He, and many supporters, point to his elimintion of the auto tax upon being elected governor of Virginia. However, they fail to mention that he then promptly went to the legislature and demanded increases in other taxes to make up for the lost auto tax.
Tennisguy at 2:03PM on Dec 21st 2006
2. I do not believe that Hillary Clinton will get the nomination for President. This country is not ready for a woman President. I would vote for Bill Clinton again if he were to run
Janice at 2:45PM on Dec 21st 2006
3. A great deal of candidates on both parties. All feel it is a popularity contest. There are only two people who would be great candidates with accomplishments, results and experience in running and managing governments and large populations. Almost all the other candidates have failed to run or manage anything other than their staff. The two candidates would be Jeb Bush(R) from Florida and Bill Richardson (D) new mexico. Both have none a great job! Neither has announced and probably neither will. Too bad for our country.
William Lundholm at 2:58PM on Dec 21st 2006
4. I don't think an extreme conserative can win. apealing only to the Republican base may win primaries but will lose in the general election. the Republicans have painted themselves into a corner. All candidates must satisfy the evangelicals and to do that they must be to the far right.
John Klinger at 4:16PM on Dec 21st 2006
5. No Car Tax Gilmore
The simple-minded election strategy of "No Car Tax" administration is not why Gilmore faded away.
It was the economic and socially disastrous state he left Virginia in once the larger "bubble economy" burst. Policies begun by the faux folksy governor Allen. Gilmore's follow-through on these strategies had Virginia careening toward financial disaster when the lean years hit. Virginia's economy was salvaged and retooled for health by Mark Warner's leadership, as well as sensible decisions within our state legislature. Warner deserves to be cited for taking on many of the challenges his predecessor's conveniently avoided. IE: Yes, the car tax was disliked, but the larger impact of it's dissolution was never addressed within Gilmore's term. Virginia's ridiculous one-term governorship limit contirbuted. IE: Gubenatorial budgets were enacted but not implemented until two year's into their successor's arrival. Warner sincerely worked with both sides of the aisle and again, had many in the republican side who deserve credit as well. They had no choice if they were to avoid escalating the short-sided policies Gilmore & Allen promoted. Or maybe it is more accurate to say, working with Warner's cooperative leadership style, they were able to recover our Commonwealth. As a leader, Mark Warner achieved what single-minded, less creative and insightful leadership (Allen, Gilmore)could not. He established a sound economy, built up slowly, and based on sensible taxation, use of tax dollars, and investment in the future. He provided reasonable support for public education--he took flack for not instantly raising teacher pay when it was not prudent--gradually enacted. He understood how to create and sought and nurtured longterm job growth related to the new global technologies America must recognize. He recognized the holistic and fiscal value of our heritage, tourism, and contemporary arts, but only invested in it when it became feasible.
Such decision-making is the hallmark of leadership--not soundbyte slogans like "No Car Tax" or intolerance to other points of view. This is why Warner was so respected across the Commonwealth by both parties, and seen as a viable candidate for President. The last thing America needs is more politicians espousing divide and conquer approaches with the selfish goal of staying in office, or "decisive" leaders with short-term vision that cripples future generations. I suggest readers review Gilmore's record and achievements v. Mark Warner's, in the context of the economic situations in which they served. Gilmore was on the high end of the Enron-era/techno bubbles (to be fair Warner earned vast wealth privately in this era). But to his great credit, as governor, Warner restored Virginia's economy following 9/11's impact! He proved himself a wiser leader. Virginians were very fortunate to have him as our governor, and as a parent, I am all the more grateful he served. Warner could envision the big picture and recognized the value in judicious compromise in order to achieve it. Where others expended great energy stubbornly battling for their vision of the Commonwealth on an eroding and dangerous site, Mark Warner chose the more difficult and less ego-satisfying challenges involved in laying new foundations, firming up the site so future generations would have the option to build their own dreams.
John Wiercioch at 4:39PM on Dec 21st 2006
6. Once again the liberals try to rewrite history to satisfy their agenda. As a Virginian who remembers well, I can say Governor Gilmore made good on his promise to elminate the hated car-tax. His fiscal conservatism was fabulously popular and the Commonwealth prospered.
Mark Warner ran on a pledge to not raise taxes but the first step he took in office was to create an articial "crisis" that necessitated the largest tax increase in Virginia history. Of course, he blamed the Republican who cut the car tax. Panic set in and the legislature went along with him believing the crisis was real. Lo and behold, it turned out later there was no crisis and in fact the state had a surplus!
So, on the one side we have Republican Jim Gilmore who promised to get rid of a tax and did it sucessfully. On the other side we have Democrat Mark Warner who promised not to raise taxes but did anyway - unecessarily and to the great displeasure of many Virginians who felt betrayed in their trust of this wolf in sheep's clothing.
Those, folks, are the facts!
Craig Buck at 10:20PM on Dec 21st 2006
7. Gilmore's No Car Tax was a fraud, since most of the funds went to county and local governments, which has the make up the shortfall by increasing property taxes. Gilmore was a terrible governor, and if he were to run for office here again, would no doubt be soundly defeated
Mike W at 12:27AM on Dec 22nd 2006