Jim Webb, who once served as senator for Virginia state, announced this week that he is “seriously” considering a 2016 presidential bid.
In statements to the National Press Club, Webb stated that he is “seriously looking at the possibility of running for president.”
“I want to see if there’s support . . . We’re taking a hard look, and we’ll get back to you in a few months,” he said. Webb added that he would make a decision about running within the next two to five months.
Webb, 68, has an impressive record. He is a highly decorated veteran of the Marines Corps., and served as Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. He took a seat in the Senate in 2006, and served in that house until 2012.
Webb’s experience has given him considerable exposure to military matters, extensive experience collaborating with policy officials, and familiarity with the White House and its administrative structure.
Should he choose to run, it will be difficult for the opposition to levy the same accusations of inexperience that plagued now-President Obama during his first campaign for office in 2008.
Webb is an outspoken economic populist, and an unabashed critic of the nation’s growing levels of inequality.
In the Democratic response to Bush’s 2007 State of the Union address, Webb expressed support for the idea that “we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base”.
Later in the same speech, he said that Bush should “take . . . action” to end the war in Iraq and stated his firm belief that the only sensible path of action at the time would be to withdraw from the Middle East.
Webb has reiterated support for these positions in recent years, most notably with his opposition to the 2011 invasion of Libya.
Given the current state of the United States’s war-weary population and growing preoccupation with the nation’s inequality, this could make him a formidable opponent for Secretary of State HIllary Clinton should they both run for the presidency in 2016.
For now, however, he is withholding criticism of the current administration, despite his well-established and oft-expressed foreign policy views. Earlier this week, he referred to U.S. involvement in the Middle East as a “tangled mess,” but refused to pass judgement on Clinton.
When prompted for his opinion of her level of responsibility for the situation, he responded that he “think[s] that’s a question that should really be directed at Secretary Clinton,” adding that he was “not there to undermine her.”