Schweitzer:"In England, a baby’s born and they know he’ll grow up to be king..."

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

More Schweitzer sniping at Clinton:

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

More Schweitzer sniping at Clinton:

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Can you copy the entirety of this article?

No, because that's against copyright rules.

[Mr. Morden]

Just go to Google News and search for "Schweitzer".  It's the first link there.  As long as you click the link via Google News, you evade the paywall.  But if you click it from Atlas, it prompts you for login info.

[Mr. Morden]

If you look at the Iraq War roll call vote, everyone that voted against it did not have any presidential aspirations.

Except Bob Graham.

[Mr. Morden]

He opposed FISA the entire time he was in the Senate, including during the primaries in 2008. It was only once he became the presumptive nominee that he voted for it, as the article shows.

If you look at the Iraq War roll call vote, everyone that voted against it did not have any presidential aspirations. That was no accident.

Ronald Earnest Paul.

I was referring to Democrats.

Again, Bob Graham.

[Mr. Morden]

He opposed FISA the entire time he was in the Senate, including during the primaries in 2008. It was only once he became the presumptive nominee that he voted for it, as the article shows.

If you look at the Iraq War roll call vote, everyone that voted against it did not have any presidential aspirations. That was no accident.

Ronald Earnest Paul.

I was referring to Democrats.

Again, Bob Graham.

Maybe I remember this wrong but didn't Bob Graham run only after it became clear the war was going to be a problem (at least in the primaries)?

What do you mean by "after it became clear the war was going to be a problem"?  Do you mean after the war became unpopular, after it became a liability for one party or the other, or what?

In any case, Graham announced his candidacy in February 2003, a few months after the authorization for war was voted on, but before the war actually began.

[Mr. Morden]

What do you mean by "after it became clear the war was going to be a problem"?  Do you mean after the war became unpopular, after it became a liability for one party or the other, or what?

In any case, Graham announced his candidacy in February 2003, a few months after the authorization for war was voted on, but before the war actually began.

A liability for Democrats that voted for it. I remember Kerry making vaguely anti-war comments in early '03 and Dean was against it from the beginning, which generated buzz before the war actually started. Pretty much everything I remember hearing about Bob Graham was "hey it's a vaguely electable guy that's against the Iraq War." I don't remember him being discussed as a potential candidate before the war vote, though he always came up for veep.

I don't think very much changed between October 2002 and February 2003 in terms of the political calculations of the war vote.  Most of the Democratic candidates figured voting against it would probably provide some minor gain in the primaries but potentially a major liability in the general election if the war went relatively smoothly.  And they wanted to be viable general election candidates, so they voted for it.  This is pretty much how it was still viewed in February 2003, still before the war began.  I don't think it was clear at all at that point that Graham might benefit much from opposition to the war.  (And of course he didn't, since those voters tended to go to Dean.)