Mark Warner on Principles & Values Democratic Jr Senator; previously Governor

End partisan gridlock; embrace common ground

They agreed that voters have a clear choice when it comes to personality and leadership styles. Gilmore said he would be a conservative voice in the Democratic-controlled Congress.

Warner argued that he has the experience to end years of partisan gridlock on Capitol Hill and that Virginia voters are ready to embrace his philosophy of seeking common ground.

It’s “the future v. the past” not “liberal v. conservative”

Replace name-calling with bipartisan management

Look at how we approached the budget when we were both governor. Jim Gilmore promised to end the car tax. But it ended up costing three times more than what he said. He used budget gimmicks, tried to hide the problem, and drove Virginia into the fiscal ditch. When I inherited the problem, which grew to a $6 billion shortfall, I leveled with the people, made the hard cuts, reformed state governments, and brought republicans and democrats together, to bring about bipartisan budge and tax reform.

Virginia became the best managed state in the nation. So if you want a senator who will work on budget and the economy and has a proven track record of results, I’d ask you to hire me and bring our country back on the right path.

Term-limited as governor in 2008

Having served only one term as an elected official, however, some believe that Warner may be considered too inexperienced to move to the Presidency; the same point was raised about John Edwards’ one Senate term. But others maintain that his challenge would be no different than that of then Governor Clinton in 1992 who nevertheless was successful in capturing the White House.

We can’t win presidency in only 16 blue states

Voted YES on confirming of Sonia Sotomayor to Supreme Court.

"In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law--it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress's intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand."