Skip to main content

The veepstakes buzz today appears to be that Barack Obama is seriously considering selecting Evan Bayh as his running mate. And while there have been a number of other boomlets for VP candidates in recent weeks, the timing of this one -- coupled with the fact that Bayh, unlike a number of other names in the news, hasn't been assigned a speaking spot at the upcoming Convention -- indicates that the buzz might have the ring of truth.

Regardless of Bayh's merits as a running mate and potential vice-president, his selection would carry with it one immutable and giant negative: the inauguration of Vice-President Bayh would very likely create a new Republican senator. Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels is a Bush loyalist who has a substantial, 10-15 point lead over Democrat Jill Long Thompson in his bid for reelection.  As much as we'd like to hope for the best, it's improbable that Long Thompson is going to defeat Daniels.  

Now, Indiana Democrats will point out that Long Thompson has done well in fundraising, and that the presence of Bayh on the ticket would undoubtedly help her. But the fact remains that Daniels is more likely than not going to win the race.  And that means that he would have the ability to appoint Bayh's successor in the Senate. Perhaps he'd choose Steve Buyer, a wingnut who advocated for the use of nuclear weapons in Afghanistan. Perhaps he'd name himself.  

In any case, Daniels would not pick a Democrat to replace Bayh. He would pick a partisan Republican. And that means that President Obama would lose a precious Senate seat at a time when he will need every vote that he can get to defeat near-certain filibusters.  Obama wants to push serious energy reform --  but he won't be able to get it unless he can muster 60 votes in the Senate. He wants to enact the Employee Free Choice Act -- but without the vote of every Democrat, and a handful of Northeast Republicans, the bill will die.  

Democrats can expect to come out of November with 55-58 Senate seats, not including Joe Lieberman, who'll probably go along with the Democrats on a number of cloture votes. That puts us in a very good position to beat filibusters on a number of crucial legislative initiatives.  But every seat that goes to a far-right Republican is a body blow to our ability to really take advantage of our majority. Barack Obama needs to ask himself whether Evan Bayh is worth possibly losing meaningful health reform or immigration reform.

He isn't. No VP candidate is. It's not Bayh's fault -- but circumstances dictate that he is most valuable to an Obama presidency as a senator from Indiana. Someone else can fill in as Obama's running mate. And it should be someone whose accession to the vice-presidency doesn't come at the cost of Obama's legislative agenda.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:50 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  memo to Obama's campaign...do not select him (11+ / 5-)

    Obama/Bayh Sexual 08 will ruin the chances of victory.

    Republicans are not a national party anymore.

    by jalapeno on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:52:19 PM PDT

    •  just like Vilsack can never be a running mate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jalapeno

      Obama
      WillSuck '08

    •  What are you? 12? n/t (11+ / 0-)

      I'm a slut. I give my blogging away for free. Strategy '08.

      by smash artist on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:54:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  BAYH is about the worst choice he can make (11+ / 0-)

      the most boring man in america except for cheney

      Afterlife? Why would I want that?

      by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:56:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe not the worst, but certainly not the best. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        abarefootboy, mcfly, tomjones

        I'm fine with whomever he picks.

        With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

        by brooklynbadboy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:58:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're Fine with it? (7+ / 0-)

          This is a comment from NeuvoLiberal on another thread. It states the issue that you're fine with adequately.

          Suppose that Lamont hadn't defeated Lieberman in the 2006 CT-Sen primary, Lieberman remained a Democrat, and he hasn't endorsed McCain.

          In such a scenario, how enthusiastically would you have supported an Obama/Lieberman in 2008 (i.e. the post-2000 version of Lieberman) ticket on a scale of -10 to 10?

          If your answer is positive, then the Republican party may be a better fit for you.

          If your answer is negative, then you should know that:

            1. Lieberman's and Bayh's voting records are very similar, overall

            2. they're both aggressive neocon war hawks. See: http://tinyurl.com/...

            3. they's both serious DLC hacks (DLC chairs in succession)

            4. both bashed Dean in 2003/2004 badly and Obama this cycle (Bayh during the primary, and Lieberman in the general)

          IOW, Bayh and Lieberman are cut from the same cloth.

          Picking Bayh will be a disaster for Obama in many ways, most importantly, Bayh will negate and contradict Obama's key message against McCain on the war.
          ...

          Bayh's record is:

            1. neocon-conservative-DLC on foreign policy

            2. moderate-to-conservative on economic policies (typical DLC)

            3. moderate-to-liberal on social/environmental issues.

          It's mixed overall, but by picking him, Obama would definitely giving a stamp of approval to the neocon/Republican/DLC approach to foreign policy, war and peace, and civil liberties. Given that war is still the direct+indirect #1 issue, he really ought not do that.

          So you're fine with someone that is essentially a republican in a democratic coat?

          •  why isn't the DLC being discussed as well? (0+ / 0-)

            Didn't Barack Obama insist his name be taken off of the DLC membership list?

            Republicans are not a national party anymore.

            by jalapeno on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:13:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  yes, but that was then... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              jalapeno, no ideologue

              Yes, but that was back in the Primary when he was courting the left wing of the Democratic Party, and now he must veer to the center to attract those independent voters. Don't you read and listen to the pundits in Washington? (read last line as sarcasm)

              "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." - FDR

              by Vitarai on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:24:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Oh. Okay...i guess Obama will just turn the White (0+ / 0-)

            House over to Evan Bayh upon election. Obviously he's not smart enough to set his own agenda.

            Jeez.

            With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

            by brooklynbadboy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:32:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  His Own Agenda? (0+ / 0-)

              Is that really the way you see it? Obama can have any agenda he wants, but what if we lose Obama for some reason. Bayh would step in. Then what will you think of Obama's choice?

              The point is that we need to be a vigilant about the VP selection, as we are about the presidential selection. If you're not willing to do that, then you're not willing to have a say about our government.

              •  The way I see it is this: (0+ / 0-)

                Making decisions like this should not be governed by the President being killed or dropping dead. Obviously you want someone capable of stepping in should this happen, but this cannot be the overriding concern.

                The choice should be made with these two factors at the forefront:

                1. Does it help or hurt getting elected in the first place?
                1. Can this person play a constructive role in the next administration?

                So, forget about Russ Feingold or Bernie Sanders or anybody else on your wishlist. #1 and #2 must be of highest priority NOW, and not gaming out the speculative death of a President.

                I thought this was the reality based community?

                With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

                by brooklynbadboy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:04:37 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'll give you some reality. (0+ / 0-)

                  You don't think that the overriding concern should be speculation about the possible death of a president in the selection of VP. The constitution would disagree with you.

                  The VP has two roles to play, and two alone, that should be the overriding concern. To step in as president, and to break ties in the Senate. That is his constitutional duty. Nothing more, nothing less. If the president delegates other duties to him, those duties are secondary to his primary responsibilities.

                  Selecting a VP is as important as selecting a president, and if you disagree with that, it is because you are not appreciating the role of VP.

                  Instead, you are trying to cast a new role for the VP, one dependent on whether it will help the nominee get elected, whether this person can play a constructive role outside his constitutional duties, and this is the wrong view to have.

                  You're free to overlook all this if you choose, but it will not be me living outside reality, but rather you trying to invent a new one out of the abundance of your imagination.

                  •  What do you think this is... 1791? (0+ / 0-)

                    You're ridiculous constitutionalism is completely out of step with the modern world.

                    If being alive and voting in the Senate were the sole factors of concern, you could put any schmuck to be Vice President. Nobody gives a fuck about those things. NOBODY.

                    What almost everybody DOES happen to look at, in 2008 and not some liberal fantasy world, are political considerations first. Fuck voting in the Senate if you don't actually get to do it. Under your antiquated idea, the best person to be Vice President is frickin Robert Byrd. Don't be ridiculous. Politics is always PARAMOUNT during an ELECTION. ALWAYS. Never has a vice president been chosen under your academic criteria. I can't think of a single one. Political considerations are ALWAYS first, and always have been...not who is best to cast tie votes in the Senate.

                    Finally, and this is also a modern idea which I hope you can understand, Vice Presidents these days are active participants in every administration. So, said person should be considered on how well they get along with the President. Will the person add some wisdom and experience to the Adminisrtation?

                    Almost of little concern is "what happens if im dead?" First, i suspect like anyone else, Obama expects to...you know, LIVE. Of course, he wouldnt put in a complete moron, but nor should he try to find a stunt double of himself. The idea that he would is ridiculous. Besides, im sure in his mind, the main thing is that should he end up dead, the country will survive as long as it is in capable hands, not someone who reflects and ideological checklist.

                    With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

                    by brooklynbadboy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 07:06:10 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Your empty arrogance is noted. (0+ / 0-)

                      Finally, and this is also a modern idea which I hope you can understand, Vice Presidents these days are active participants in every administration.

                      That was ridiculously beneath your usual evenhanded debating style, but maybe I've over estimated you.

                      That said, I find it interesting that you characterize the constitutional functions of the VP as:

                      completely out of step with the modern world.

                      According to you, the needs of our nation are best met with a Vice President that

                      1. "Get along with the President;"
                      1. "Add some wisdom and experience to the administration;"

                      That is one shallow view of the requirements for the VP, and exemplifies a lazy mind that is unwilling to evaluate the appropriateness of a nominee's selection. It's a trait that is better described as sycophancy, since it expresses itself as blind loyalty to party. That's really what we're talking about here, isn't it. It matches your previous statement perfectly:

                      I'm fine with whomever he picks

                      No independent thought. No reflective opinion. No challenge. Just blind, raw, and unadulterated sycophancy. That's the sort of democrat that is useful for nothing but a vote; and we have drones aplenty nowadays.

                      •  We need MORE drones, not less. (0+ / 0-)

                        The problem with the Democratic Party is there is too much Democratic and not enough Party. A political party exists for one purpose: to attain, retain, and wield POLITICAL power. POLITICAL. That means politics, obviously.

                        Now, just because you want to play a parlor game with a bunch of white beards at a historical society, does not make your game in any way relevant or meaningful. It just makes you an old misanthorpe, which as we all know is an amusing but ultimately useless person.

                        The bottom line here is that there is nothing YOU can do to influence Obama's decision making. He will weigh his options, he will conduct highly secretive, highly researches focus grouping and polling on his choices, he will consider the advice of his top advisors and others he trusts, and then he will make his decision. Thats what YOU have to live with when the leader of your PARTY has been duly elected.

                        Again, i could care less because I understand people don't vote for Vice President. They vote for the guy at the top of the ballot. The other guy just comes along. So I really am not so pedantic as to believe "I MUST WEIGH IN ON THIS" knowing that it is futile and pointless, other than hearing my own bloviations.

                        Which, of course, is mighty DEMOCRATIC. Lots of talk, no unity, and failure.

                        With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

                        by brooklynbadboy on Thu Aug 14, 2008 at 02:46:16 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  More drones? (0+ / 0-)

                          Many would prefer to have a thinking populace, rather than one eager to sign off on every ill-conceived venture our representatives develop from an over abundance of incompetence.

                          The republican style of expecting a blank check from its members destroyed their chance last cycle, and will do so again this cycle. You seem to prefer that our party replicate this losing strategy.

                          You argue for the benefit of the powerful, the party elite. You seem to prefer the good of the party, rather than the good of the country. The two are not synonymous, as is evidenced by our party's proclivity for endorsing almost every move the administration has made. You want to perpetuate this with "more drones" to ensure an uninterrupted hold on power for the privileged and the rich.

                          One wonders what benefit you get letting others think for you, for sacrificing your own opinions for a party that has served you so poorly. Or maybe you're one of those that believe everything is just fine. So let's just keep doing what we've been doing, right? The rich and powerful will look out for our interests, right? Right!

      •  Bayh's not a bad speaker at all these days (0+ / 0-)

        It's been a long time since the 1996 Dem Convention.

      •  Obama thinks Bayh is dumb (0+ / 0-)

        "I don't oppose all wars. What I oppose is a dumb war, a rash war." Sorry if that is not verbatim, I am quoting Barack's October 2002 speech from memory. Bayh supported the invasion of Iraq. That is completely inexcusable. Over 20 Democratic Senators, and at least one eloquent Illinois State Senator had the good judgment to know what a disaster it would be for the US to invade a sovereign nation that posed no imminent threat to us. How is Bayh even an option? Obama doesn't realize how many votes he got in the primaries because of his stance on Iraq. If Hillary had voted "Nay" that day we would be wondering whether Hillary was going to pick Obama to be her VP. I cannot fucking believe that Obama would betray his anti-Iraq-War supporters and pick someone like Bayh. Hopefully this is simply misdirection on their part, a ploy to get the Republican Dirt Digging Machine to waste some man-hours.

        "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent". - Thomas Jefferson

        by bobscofield on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:58:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  agree check this link (0+ / 0-)

          Never forget the legendary 156 who voted against Iraq War
          by irrationalbutsane [Subscribe] [Edit Diary]
          Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 11:04:43 AM PDT

          the above is a diary I posted a month ago about those brave congressmen

          Afterlife? Why would I want that?

          by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:06:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  That's the least of his problems (0+ / 0-)

          Yes, he's got the charisma of packing foam. But his REAL problem is that he's a DLC wet dream. He's a warmonger, an elitist, and craves nothing more intensely than approval from Republicans.

          If Obama picks Bayh, he BETTER win. Because he won't be able to blame the blogs if he loses. And then he'll have to confront the fact that maybe moving to the right wasn't such a great idea after all.

        "Le ciel est bleu, l'enfer est rouge."

        by Buzzer on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:19:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  What does this mean? n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pine
    •  TR-ing (0+ / 0-)

      Sorry, I'm TR'ing. This kind of humor is not cool.

    •  Bayh is not a confident of Obama, why would he? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Marie, x, SecondComing

      Obama has said that he will pick the person most in sympathy with his point of view, not for political reasons, who can win which state, etc.

      Bayh may be a swell human being, but he was a huge shill for Hillary and said some disparaging things about Obama and his ability to lead.  So why in heck would Obama give him the big hug?  He wants someone who has his back, not someone who tried to put a knife in his back.  

      If it were me, I would give Bayh a pass, for about five different good reasons.  Obama is about ten times as politically savvy as any of us is, even if we are inclined to flatter ourselves.  It ain't gonna happen.

      •  Worse, he wasn't even a very effective shill for (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dclawyer06

        Hillary.

        If you're going to be a shill, you should at least excel at it.

        Bayh only ranks above Venneman and Hagel and Leiberman as a VP candidate for Obama.  

        I am at a loss as to who the Obama campaign thinks selecting Bayh would attract.

        Certainly not Hillary supporters.  The guy is not good on choice.  Bearable but not good.

        As far as I know, there are only three people who like Bayh for VP: Al From, Bob Shrum and David Broder, which is 3 very good reasons to run away from him as fast as possible.

        WTF happened to the message of change & get out of Iraq.  You can't be more of hawkish DC insider than Bayh.

        Plus boring.

    •  There are so many reasons not to pick Bayh (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      roxtar, SecondComing, zett, esquimaux, seabos84

      that detracting from them by playing on his name as "bisexual" is really stoopid.

      If you want a slogan to influence Obama, try "Bayh Now, Pay Later!"

      John McCain's Court will overturn Roe; don't kid yourself.

      by Seneca Doane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:01:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rec'd to counter HR (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jalapeno, Hillbilly Dem, esquimaux

      by reader who isn't getting the fact you're not making fun of Bayh, but that the GOP will pull stuff like that (i.e. "Bayhsexual").

    •  ugh. that explains the hr. (0+ / 0-)

      ``...Stand still. The forest knows
      Where you are. You must let it find you.''
      from `Lost' by David Wagoner

      by dlcox1958 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:05:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Uprated (0+ / 0-)

      Crass, but not trollworthy.

      Thicker skins are in order. Foreskins included.

      "Lighten-up" has never worked before on Kos' website, butt I keep trying.

      How much is enough, Gordon?

      by SecondComing on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:51:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just one more good reason not to pick Bayh (16+ / 0-)

    Bayh would be a real disappointing pick.  A war monger, McCain-collaborator.  Ugh.

  •  How about a poll? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MI Sooner

    Bayh, yeah or nay?

  •  Please not Bayh! (18+ / 0-)

    Honestly, what does he gain by choosing Bayh?

    Never give up! Never surrender!

    by oscarsmom on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:52:58 PM PDT

    •  IN (5+ / 0-)

      But I don't want Bayh, either.  

      "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine 4130+ dead Americans. Bring them home.

      by Miss Blue on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:57:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  it's what we all gain by keeping the gossip alive (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      oscarsmom

      with the buzz that's now a-hummin', guys like Al From and the witless Bullmoose will be less toxic overall during the run-up to the convention

      i think it's a head fake ... but what do i know?

      Which pundit most resembles Ruby Rhod?

      by wystler on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:58:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm with you, there is nothing to gain here, Wes (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Vitarai, doss, mconvente

      Clark would literally shut this entire election down, it would be over in a New York skinny minute.  Wes as VP compliments Obama in every single way. Gen. Clark is as brilliant as Obama, and sorry folks (whoever), but we have got to have a strong Military man (who happens to have more integrity in his little finger than "Crash McCain" has in his entire evil body).  I just don't get it, I really don't.  This is such a total no brainer, and Obama has the power to just turn the tide and take the biggest landslide victory probably in the history of our country, if he just does the right thing.  Obama's only drawback is that some view him as 'risky' in foreign policy, and with wars all around us, I cannot imagine that he wouldn't have the brains to pick the only guy that has it all: brilliance, brains, courage, experience, fortitude: General Wesley Clark.  Please don't let us down Obama.  I know I'm suppose to be like, 'oh whatever, I trust Obama...la de da...., but I just can't be that way. There is too much at stake here, way too much.  Oh well....

      We shall not fail or falter, we shall not weaken or tire..give us the tools and we will finish the job. Winston Churchill

      by Badabing on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:22:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  David Broder's approval for 24 hours. (0+ / 0-)

       And that's The Most Important Thing In The World to Obama, apparently.

      "Le ciel est bleu, l'enfer est rouge."

      by Buzzer on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:24:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  uggh, please noy Bayh (6+ / 0-)

    There are so many better choices.

    Off topic, sorry, but did any of you catch this?

  •  re (7+ / 0-)

    That's like reason #48832 why I don't want the guy picked as VP.

    "Steve Holt yells at clouds. No wait. That's John McCain" - Steve Holt

    by cookiesandmilk on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:53:19 PM PDT

  •  This is the same deal as Mark Warner (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SecondComing, Miss Blue

    We need a substantial Senate majority to push our legislative agenda, and Virginia will now host two - count em, two - Democratic Senators.

    Let's pick that guy from Delaware.  I like him.

  •  Word up. n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux

    Don't tell me about the "new politics" if you're an asshole.

    by Ms Johnson on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:53:35 PM PDT

  •  See, this is why I try not to pay attention (10+ / 0-)

    to the veepstakes. It's way to easy to drive oneself insane ...

    Denny Crane: But if he supports a law, and then agrees to let it lapse … then that would make him …

    Shirley Schmidt: A Democrat.

    by Jyrinx on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:53:46 PM PDT

  •  the VP will reinforce the youthful image (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cookiesandmilk, dnamj, mcfly, chicago minx

    which can only mean...

  •  Evan Bayh would be a good, safe choice (9+ / 0-)

    ...but is that what we want?

    I have been pushing Wesley Clark..and the more research I do, the more I like him as a choice.

    Former NATO Commander, Rhodes Scholar, #1 in his West Point Class...a SOLID resume, especially on the international, geopolitic front.

    •  the last thing we need is a safe choice (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      esquimaux

      Afterlife? Why would I want that?

      by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:58:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  with the bradley effect looming (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Don Enrique

        we need a dynamite vp choice, young,exciting and risky  yes   risky becsause boring doesn't cut it in 2008 after 8 yrs of bush and an overwhelmingly racist country stacked up against us
        we need to bet the house
        we have already lost incredible ground playing safe

        Afterlife? Why would I want that?

        by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:01:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  there's no such thing as the Bradley Effect (0+ / 0-)

          see kos' diary earlier and Nate Silver's post over at 538 and the primaries and every race with an AA candidate in the last two decades and the fact that pollsters use automated surveys.

          •  kos is polL obsessed (0+ / 0-)

            if pollsters could measure the bradley effect there wouldn,t a bradley effect.

            but there is a bradley  effect
            kos operates on a wishful thinking basis which is commercially oriented
            the more positive the message and hope for victory he can project the more clicks he gets on his site.
            i don't blame him because this is a business
            but he is not one to use as proof.
            zogby almost went out of business after new hamp primary  when he missed by 15 pts because the white geezers up there told him they were voting for obama

            Afterlife? Why would I want that?

            by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:40:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  this is the dumbest comment I've ever read (0+ / 0-)

              polls don't measure the Bradley Effect but election results do. And a thorough comparison of the results with reliable pollsters shows... no Bradley Effect, just as no race with an African-American candidate has shown a Bradley Effect since a couple of crappy Virginia pollsters decided they needed to come up with an excuse for their lousy methodology.

              And automated surveys destroy the entire basis of the theory.

      •  why? (0+ / 0-)

        I think "safe choice" is EXACTLY what Obama needs.  This campaign is very much about Barack Obama - just ask John McCain, who can't stop talking about him!  A non-"safe" candidate will distract from the chosen focus.

        As for Bayh... he's NOT a "safe choice".  Choosing him costs Obama a Senate seat he'll need.  It puts someone who seems stylistically incongruent into the Obama inner circle. Etc.

        I think Tom Daschle and Wes Clark are the true "safe choice" candidates.  Experienced Washington insiders that can work well with Obama.

        American logic: I don't want to wear a seat belt so I can be thrown from the car in case it catches fire.

        by Orbital Mind Control Lasers on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:08:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  clark is good choice (0+ / 0-)

      but maybe a little too old

      Afterlife? Why would I want that?

      by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:02:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Clark is excellent on our issue of LGBTQ rights. (4+ / 0-)

      Whereas he was silent prior to becoming a full-throated people powered progressive Democrat, now that he is in that role he has been an excellent champion of LGBTQ marital rights.

      People power = LGBTQ marital rights = OBAMA '08!

      by kevinspa on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:03:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He's NOT a "safe" choice (0+ / 0-)

       He's an extremely risky one.

       His presence on the ticket muddles Obama's message on Iraq. It moves the ticket away from where the voting public is.

       Obama's been moving to the right nonstop since May. And that's gained him zilch in the polls.

       Bayh would be a disaster at EVERY level.

      "Le ciel est bleu, l'enfer est rouge."

      by Buzzer on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:27:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  hopefully a feint (5+ / 0-)

    Could this be a feint?

    So we all sigh in relief when someone a bit more palatable is chosen?

    •  i've been hoping so (0+ / 0-)

      lowering our expectations so that anyone else looks good.

      "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" - John Adams

      by esquimaux on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:07:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  we hear today (0+ / 0-)

      that he's been begging Warner to change his mind and yet simultaneously we are told he's all but chosen Bayh?

      Eh, anything is possible, could be Bayh, but I'm just going to wait until I hear something from the man himself.

      And unless it's Lieberman, I'm inclined to believe it will be a better team than McCain and anyone else.

  •  No matter what Obama does (8+ / 0-)

    there will be outraged diaries and dramatic pronouncements predicting doom.

    John McCain: Vowing to connect real leaders with real bowels

    by chicago minx on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:54:27 PM PDT

    •  I kind of ENJOY all the hand wringing & head (0+ / 0-)

      bashing ...

      too bad we don't to the chains on the back thing like 1 of those groups in Iraq!

      btw, I don't like bayh in the least.

      Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

      by seabos84 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:09:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  he might surprise us all (0+ / 0-)

      it could be someone nobody even considered and when the announcement is made it will be like 'duh.' PERFECT!

      (and Musakey might enforce justice as the AG too) ;-)

  •  I'm not looking forward to the day (11+ / 0-)

    he finally picks his VP.  It's gonna be madness around here.

    I'm a slut. I give my blogging away for free. Strategy '08.

    by smash artist on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:54:41 PM PDT

  •  Bingo. (12+ / 0-)

    Bayh's general policy on everything is to put his finger to the wind first, and then very, very cautiously blow in whatever direction the winds are blowing.

    He ought to be a non-starter, I can't believe he's even being considered.

  •  Bayh. I just don't see it (0+ / 0-)

    Tell me why I am wrong

    "For the love of god learn to think on your own" Me

    by givemhellHarryR on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:55:52 PM PDT

  •  Where are you getting 15%? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Superribbie

    Looks like it is 5% race from last SUSA. The last 2 polls were REPUBLICAN polls which has effected the pollster average. Remember this is Indiana which has historically had democratic governors, and this is the same Daniels who did that huge tollway debacle.

    •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sulthernao

      Methinks the point of the piece (don't pick Bayh) is coloring the description of the gubernatorial race.  Thompson has as much chance of knocking off Daniels as Rossi has of beating Gregoire in Washington--and more chance, I'd say, than do Kay Hagan, Bruce Lunsford, Rick Noriega, Larry LaRocco, Tom Allen and Jim Martin do of winning Senate seats.  And all have reasonable shots.

      The frogurt is also cursed. -8.25, -6.51

      by Superribbie on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:04:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Don't forget the daylight "savings" debacle n/t (0+ / 0-)

      8/29 changed everything Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -6.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.10

      by wsexson on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 06:27:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Let me just go on record (again) (21+ / 0-)

    ... in stating that Evan Bayh fucking sucks. He's a pathetic neocon in Democratic clothing... A better-looking -- but just-as-boring -- version of Joe Lieberman.

    In case I'm not making myself clear, I cannot stand that asshole from Indiana who has spent more of his time in the Senate bashing fellow Dems than he has taking on Republicans.

    In fact, he co-sponsored a particularly egregious piece of legislation with that vile hack, Rick Santorum.

    Evan Bayh sucks.

  •  Makes sense to me. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jalapeno

    Thats why I'm still thinking its going to be Chet Edwards.

    With him from the beginning, with him until the end.

    by brooklynbadboy on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:56:52 PM PDT

  •  lousy reason to not pick someone (0+ / 0-)

    Bayh has a lot of positives, the first being he helps us win!

  •  Obama/Area Man (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    davebert

    Oh yeah.

    Iran, Russia, Saudia Arabia, and Norway will no longer be oil exporters by 2030. Link

    by aztecraingod on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:57:18 PM PDT

  •  I really hope it's not Bayh (10+ / 0-)

    I remember how disappointed I was at the choices of Lieberman, Bentzen, and Ferraro.  When you choose someone to try and neutralize your weakness, you've emphasized your weakness.

    "Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war." Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

    by Pangloss on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:57:31 PM PDT

    •  Exactly-- and you're giving power to those who (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pangloss

      seek to point out your weakness, because the attempt at neutralization is an acknowledgement of what they've been saying, and they proclaim it to be such.  It's a lose-lose proposition.  Plus it's just a bad choice for an Obama VP.

  •  I'm not crazy about a dual-Senator ticket (4+ / 0-)

    for many reasons -- this is one of them. I'd rather see him dip into the ranks of the governors, or totally go off the reservation with someone like Wes Clark. (Yeah, I know it's a long shot, but a girl can dream after all...)

    "Old soldiers never die -- they get young soldiers killed." -- Bill Maher

    by Cali Scribe on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:57:45 PM PDT

    •  Bayh was Indiana's governor (0+ / 0-)

      "Before his election to the Senate, Bayh was elected in 1988 to the first of two terms as Governor of Indiana..."

      (From Bayh's Senate.gov bio.)

      I don't care much for Bayh, but he does at least have some exec experience.

  •  Nooooooooooooooooooooo... (7+ / 0-)

    ...oooooooo - gasp - oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!

    Please, not friggin' Bayh.  Anybody but Bayh.  Hillary, Biden, Lieberman - ok, not Liberman - anybody, but not freaking Bayh.

  •  Here is the money quote for me (11+ / 0-)

    ...it should be someone whose accession to the vice-presidency doesn't come at the cost of Obama's legislative agenda.

    Let's remember the big picture.

    This is not a time for a candidate who will offend no one; it is time for a candidate who takes clear stands and kicks ass - Molly Ivins

    by TigerMom on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:59:25 PM PDT

  •  n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    abarefootboy

    I couldn't agree more.

    ___
    To achieve the impossible, it is precisely the unthinkable that must be thought.
    ~Tom Robbins

    Conlige suspectos semper habitos

    by Marcus Junius Brutus on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 02:59:35 PM PDT

  •  Obama has lost my vote. (0+ / 0-)

    He got it in the CT primary.

    But lost it over FISA.  (Not to mention faith-based initiatives and his Iraq pronouncements.)

    I'd choose him over McCain, if it weren't for the electoral college.

    IMO, if he chooses Bayh, he loses.

    Not because I won't vote for him.  But because a whole bunch of progressives will write him off.

  •  This is a very good post (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    science, ThePrometheusMan

    I really like Evan Bayh.  I always have.  I don't know if that makes me a centrist or not.  I kinda try to avoid labels.  On most things I consider myself a liberal.  On others a centrist.  On a distinct minority, a conservative.  Either way, in a vacuum, I really like an Obama/Bayh ticket.

    I completely understand your point about losing a senate seat.  I agree that it is a crucial consideration.  However, when I look at the other options, I think losing the sneate seat is worth it.  I just don't like an Obama/Kaine or Obama/Biden ticket.  If these are the other options, I prefer to lose Bayh's seat.

    That being said, there are plenty of other tickets I could get behind that wouldn't cost us a senate seat.  Obama/Clinton, Obama/Clark, Obama/Corzine, Obama/Powell (just kidding).

    So, in the end, my response to your excellently reasoned post is that it might be worth it depending on who else is in consideration.

  •  Hope, I have HOPE it's not Bayh.Can't stand the (6+ / 0-)

    guy. Comes from many times I've heard him speaking in the Senate and elsewhere. NEver impresses me as progressive.

    No, Sen. Obama, NO, NO, NO!!

    IT TOOK five years, the deaths of 4,100 US soldiers... to make Iraq safe for Exxon. ~ Derrick Z. Jackson

    by Gorette on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:00:33 PM PDT

  •  everybody shut up. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SecondComing, wsexson

    It's gonna be Oprah, and you all know it, so cut the crap.

    McCain is a Chode.

    by dnamj on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:00:54 PM PDT

  •  You all got it all wrong.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    zett, Indexer

    this is who its going to be...

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    http://politicz.wordpress.com/

    by GlowNZ on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:01:42 PM PDT

  •  Bayh? BLECCCCH (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    musicalhair, TeddySanFran, mconvente

    is the Obama campaign determined to kick every progressive in the face? is that how it works?

  •  Bayh is not the best VP candidate. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    seabos84

    I will repeat my recommendation of Rep. Barney Frank who best reflects people powered kossack values and epitomizes everything we desire and demand in a Vice President (plus the fact we don't have to worry about a Rethug Governor appointing his successor).

    That being said, Sen. Bayh while to his credit voted against Alito and Roberts because they would not pledge to support people powered LGBTQ marital rights on the bench has other issues as listed previously. We are not giving our heart and souls and time to a candidate who is lukewarm on our issue of fundamental LGBTQ marital rights. We are supporting Senator Obama because he has told us in small gatherings that he will support and prioritize LGBTQ marital rights, we can not afford a VP who is not willing to take the same pledge on our issue.

    People power = LGBTQ marital rights = OBAMA '08!

    by kevinspa on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:02:07 PM PDT

    •  frank would be risky (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kevinspa

      and that is exactly what we need

      Afterlife? Why would I want that?

      by irrationalbutsane on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:05:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yuck (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      musicalhair

      The last thing we need is a choice who has been censored for ethical violation (no matter how long ago it happened).  I like Barney Frank, but he is not a national level politician.

      •  Barney Frank. Okay. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        musicalhair

        God this place amazes me sometimes.

        Dear Democratic Party: Win This One or Just Disband

        by Tuffie on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:20:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I like Barney Frank. Forget his personal (0+ / 0-)

        orientation.  He's smart, he's in the midst of the housing/banking fiasco-cleanup.  His sister Ann Lewis was Hillary's campaign something-or-other. (that to placate Hill's Mill's)
        Whoever...just so they have a brain!

        Where people fear the government there is tyrany: "Where the government fears the people, you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson

        by ROADRUNNER DEM on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:35:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Doesn't he have a... (0+ / 0-)

          ...little baggage, though?:

          In 1990, the House voted to reprimand Frank when it was revealed that Steve Gobie, a male escort whom Frank had befriended after hiring him through a personal advertisement, claimed to have conducted an escort service from Frank's apartment when he was not at home. Frank had dismissed Gobie earlier that year and reported the incident to the House Ethics Committee after learning of Gobie's activities. After an investigation, the House Ethics Committee found no evidence that Frank had known of or been involved in the alleged illegal activity.

          It looks like Frank wasn't at fault here, and, to his credit, he reported things as soon as he found out about them.  Still, I'd hate to think how this would sound on a negative advertisement.

          Some of the less socially progressive voters already have a lot to wrap their minds around with being asked to vote for an African-American for president.  Putting in the VP slot an openly gay man with very liberal politics, and baggage involving a gay call service to boot, might be asking them to accept just a bit too much.

          •  you're probably right, I guess we should (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            WayneNight

            just be happy if we can past this 'race' thing.  I know how many in my own family think.  Maybe someday we can disagree with people, even ignore the things we dont like about them, and still show some respect.

            Just dont use 'someone to have a beer with' ever again as a presidential requirement!  

            Where people fear the government there is tyrany: "Where the government fears the people, you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson

            by ROADRUNNER DEM on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:03:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Whoa... Barney FRANK? (0+ / 0-)

      Waaaay to liberal for a national ticket.

      I like the guy and all... But his future is in Congress.

    •  He's too liberal (0+ / 0-)

      And having a gay would be toxic for the ticket.

      •  Too "liberal"? (0+ / 0-)

        I beg to differ. Rep. Frank embodies our people powered progressive views. And on what issue does he disagree with Senator Obama? I'm not interested in a VP who "balances" (i.e. disagrees!) with our Presidential candidate on key issues to us as people powered progressives. And, on foreign policy, economic policy and our prioritiy of LGBTQ marital rights, Rep. Frank and Sen. Obama 100% agree!

        People power = LGBTQ marital rights = OBAMA '08!

        by kevinspa on Thu Aug 14, 2008 at 06:13:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  ignore the Beltway Heathers (7+ / 0-)

    They like the idea of Bayh because Obama was right all along about Iraq, and thus allied himself with the Dirty Fucking Hippy Peaceniks.  Remember, it's not about whether you're right, it's about who thinks you're cool!  And the official groupthink of the Heathers is that a Dirty Fucking Hippy Peacenik candidate (i.e. a Democrat) MUST balance out their ticket with a "hawk" (i.e. wrong about foreign policy and thus cool).  

    If the concern trolls would stop gnashing their teeth for a bit, they might notice that Obama is a very smart, long-term thinker.  He's not going to pick ANYONE that costs Democrats a Senate seat!  And that's on top of the demoralizing blow to the base for picking a Dumb Fucking Hawk like Bayh. Obama clearly doesn't feel a need to do what the Heathers think is right.  If he did, he'd never have won the nomination in the first place!

    American logic: I don't want to wear a seat belt so I can be thrown from the car in case it catches fire.

    by Orbital Mind Control Lasers on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:03:10 PM PDT

  •  When Obama announces his VP (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ericwmr, GlowNZ, ROADRUNNER DEM

    Remember when Obama announces his VP in  a few hours, no matter who it is we all should blog that "this is the brilliant, slam-dunk decision that  shows why Barack is the leader that America wants as President"

    Also remember that no matter what McCain announces we should all blog, "Oh, what a terrible mistake on McCain’s part. This is the decision that historians will say cost him the election.  I have no doubt the phrase "EPIC FAIL", a term from the video game community, now has a place in political history."

    Why?

    Because the Republicans will be doing the reverse.

    •  I am not a Republican (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AtlantaJan, TeddySanFran, ChicagoPat

      And will comment appropriately, whether I think Obama has done the right thing or the wrong thing.

      A Bayh nomination would unfortunately demonstrate that Obama has learned all the wrong lessons in this campaign.

      Remember that Bayh voted for the 2002 AUMF against Iraq. We undermine the Dem position against McCain, nominate someone no one outside of a few midwest states has ever heard of, plus we lose a Dem senator in the bargain? Sign me up!

    •  Hold the candidate to a high standard (0+ / 0-)

      When I agree with the candidate, I am happy to make that known.  But I refuse to go along with the candidate when I think he is wrong.  I expect Sen. Obama to run an intellectually honest and rhetorically consistent campaign.  If he changes his mind on some issues or refines his positions as his understanding of the facts changes, then that can be positive, but I will also evaluate those positions independently and make my own determination whether I support them.

  •  Buyer beware (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux, TeddySanFran

    beware Bayh

    A liberal is a conservative who's been hugged.

    by raatz on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:05:20 PM PDT

  •  Breaking story: Ark Dem Chair Shot (0+ / 0-)

    --- January 2009: A time to mend!

    by KingBolete on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:05:25 PM PDT

  •  Republican LITE V.P. WORSE than Senator Thug! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SecondComing, TeddySanFran

    what the fuck is NEW about selecting from the poisoned tree of DLC-ism?

    yuk.

    rmm.

    Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous

    by seabos84 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:06:00 PM PDT

  •  Where does Bayh stand on meaningless drilling? (0+ / 0-)

    I have not heard from him on this issue. is he on the same page as people powered progressive and our spokespeople like Speaker Pelosi and KO regarding meaningless offshore domestic drilling?

    People power = LGBTQ marital rights = OBAMA '08!

    by kevinspa on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:06:21 PM PDT

  •  Evan Bayh? Beyond dumb! (6+ / 0-)

    I want Wes Clark!

    "Lash those traitors and conservatives with the pen of gall and wormwood. Let them feel -- no temporising!" - Andrew Jackson to Francis Preston Blair, 1835

    by Ivan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:06:51 PM PDT

  •  You'd think nobody ever heard of (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    givemhellHarryR

    a trial balloon.

    Chill out, everyone.  There have been 25-plus names floated to this point and they all have upsides and downsides.  

    Let the man pick the VP he wants.  

    "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." (Frederick Douglass, 1857)

    by dotalbon on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:08:34 PM PDT

  •  Wholeheartedly agree. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SecondComing, TeddySanFran

    I hope Obama's team isn't so caught up in the largely specious talk of how VP picks can "deliver" their homes states that they forget about how difficult it is govern after you've won the election. Bayh's seat would be a concrete, measurable loss in the Democrats' governing power. Bayh's addition to the ticket would be an intangible and probably small boost to Obama's electoral prospects. Here's hoping the noise machine's VP speculation doesn't come to anything in Bayh's case.

  •  Worse than losing a senate seat (5+ / 0-)

    Obama would be picking one of the DLC types. Bayh was DLC chairman from 2001-2005 (a great period for Dems, I might add)...

    This would truly be an awful pick.

    From wiki:
    -Voted in favor of banning 'partial birth' abortion
    -60% ACLU rating
    -2001 voted yes to ease wiretapping restrictions
    -at an AIPAC convention he "described his lifelong affection for the state of Israel"
    --also said "Yasser Arafat is no partner for peace. Not until there is new and better leadership within the Palestinians will there be a chance for peace." (Arafat did win a Nobel Peace Prize, btw)
    supported the KylLieberman amendment that Obama made a key part of his critique of Clinton.
    -supported the initial Iraq War

    Get ready for more Pelosi/Reid style leadership coming from him as the VP:

    Yeah, we're technically in power, but we're going to keep doing what the Republicans want because, honestly, the big corporations finance us, too. FU regular Americans.

  •  A neo-con VP? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TeddySanFran

    Just what we need. Would provide balance -- bring in some idiocy on foreign policy.

  •  Hopefully Holy Joe (0+ / 0-)

    will be McCain's VP, and resign from the Senate.

    "Only the most deluded of us could doubt the necessity of this war." Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

    by Pangloss on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:09:33 PM PDT

    •  No change in the partisan split (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pangloss, TeddySanFran

      Since CT has a Republican governor, there would be no change in the partisan split if Joe L. became VP. Of course, if that happened, there would be far worse things to worry about than Republican filibusters in the Senate.  In fact, Joe L. would not resign his seat even if picked for the VP slot; he did not do that when Gore picked him.

      No chance that McCain picks Joe L., any more than Obama might have picked Chuck Hagel. The media pundits may go all dreamy about such fusion tickets, but real world politicians like Obama and McCain know that such a choice would blow their base to bits.

      Speaking of dreaming, there's always the chance that McCain will pick Romney. And I realized a week ago Obama picking Bayh would likely cost the Democrats a seat in the Senate, if (and that's the whole point) Obama went on to win the election.

    •  Lieberman wont resign, he didnt in 2000 (0+ / 0-)

      Where people fear the government there is tyrany: "Where the government fears the people, you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson

      by ROADRUNNER DEM on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:42:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Excellent reason not to pick Bayh (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    abarefootboy, TeddySanFran

    In addition to the substantive reason.

    Now, his father would be a different matter.

    Shill, Shill, Shill.

    by Paleo on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:09:38 PM PDT

  •  WHITE HOUSE (0+ / 0-)

    This amazes me.  If Bayh can bring Indiana, we win.  We NEED Indiana.  I'm sorry, but I'm not putting my eggs in Ohio's basket, or Virginia's, or Colorado's.  A Senate seat?  How about we win the damn Presidency???

    Dear Democratic Party: Win This One or Just Disband

    by Tuffie on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:09:46 PM PDT

  •  It's the same reason that he won't (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, TeddySanFran

    pick the much more sympatico Jack Reed for his VP.

    Still say that Sebelius is on the short-short list.  Wish it could be Napolitino.  

    What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

    by Marie on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:10:35 PM PDT

  •  Please, not Bayh... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    abarefootboy, TeddySanFran

    He was a cheerleader for the Iraq war, is among the worst of the DLC hacks, supports DOMA, and is in FAVOR of amending the U.S. Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

    "In the event that the courts do invalidate our state or national laws prohibiting same sex marriage, then a Constitutional amendment should be considered."

    Bayh: Marriage Should be One Man, One Woman

  •  I Haven't Heard A VP Pick That Bad... (7+ / 0-)

    ...since Al Gore picked Joe Lieberman.

    Wrong on the war AND he gives a Republican Governor a chance to pick a Senator?

    I read this as Barack Obama telling me "fuck you, I don't need your vote and I don't respect your views."

  •  Bayh's more liberal than Webb and Tester (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ericwmr

    Who people on here would geek out over as VP picks.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/...

  •  Bayh as VP is the fastest way to get me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wsexson, TeddySanFran

    off the fucking train and possibly out of the party for good.

    The biggest threat to America is not communism, it's moving America toward a fascist theocracy... -- Frank Zappa

    by NCrefugee on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:13:39 PM PDT

  •  It won't be Bayh. (0+ / 0-)

    But coming THIS close will make people in Indiana feel good enough to vote for Obama I bet.

    Mark Warner.

  •  Long-Thompson is behind by 10? (0+ / 0-)

    I didn't realize that.

    It's very sad. :-(

  •  Would Everybody Settle Down? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TeddySanFran

    It's not going to be Bayh.  Why is everybody talking about this dude all of a sudden?  The Obama campaign has made no indication that Barack will choose him.  He is a Senator.  He doesn't have the same priorities as Obama.  He supported the war.  He's boring.  There's just no upside to his candidacy.  And I think we can trust the Obama campaign to recognize that.  Why aren't people talking about the fact that the VP night of the convention will be called "Securing America's Future" and Wes Clark's PAC's motto is "Securing America's Future".  Now THERE's a story.  Forget Bayh.  Obama-Clark '08.  It's gonna happen.

  •  MEMO TO OBAMA CAMPAIGN: Don't do it! (5+ / 0-)

    My God what are you people thinking?  It is the absolute worst choice.  Have you stepped back yet and thought about the possibility of a "President Bayh"-- God forbid.  Can you seriously be thinking that Evan Bayh would continue or work toward half of the things that Obama wishes for this country, were something to happen to Barack Obama?  It's a bizarre choice, one that makes no sense either for the campaign or the country's future.  Please, please, please, do NOT choose Bayh; do not make a choice of expediency focused solely on the attempt to win the White House.  That would be a very, very shortsighted decision-- and the Obama campaign has excelled at avoiding shortsightedness.  Don't begin to lose track of what you've been working toward in the long run!

    •  MEMO TO COMMENTATOR (0+ / 0-)

      let the obama camp make this decision. They have  done ok so far...

      http://politicz.wordpress.com/

      by GlowNZ on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:18:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  MEMO TO GLOWNZ (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bbrown8370

        They have  done ok so far...

        One word: FISA.

        •  two words (0+ / 0-)

          JOHN MCCAIN.

          http://politicz.wordpress.com/

          by GlowNZ on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:22:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  heres a few more words (0+ / 0-)

          THOUSDANDS OF AMERICANS DEAD IN IRAQ.

          http://politicz.wordpress.com/

          by GlowNZ on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:22:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  FISA (0+ / 0-)

            FISA

            FISA

            FISA

            FISA

            FISA

            FISA

            FISA

            Oh yeah.  And: FISA.

            •  sigh. (0+ / 0-)

              single issue voters need to get a clue.  Its about the future not about your one issue.  Its about all americans,

              now shut the fuck up.

              http://politicz.wordpress.com/

              by GlowNZ on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:24:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not a single issue voter (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Lynwaz, ROADRUNNER DEM

                I'm actually planning on working and voting for Senator Obama, despite being pissed off over FISA.  Precisely because I think he's better than McCain on the vast majority of issues.

                I'm just saying - No matter how much I prefer Obama, I do not blindly trust his judgement, in part because of FISA, and in part because blind trust in a single candidate/president helped to fuck this country up so much in the first place.  

                I plan on speaking my feelings about everything - including the VP pick.  And I encourage everyone to do the same.  Becuase we need to make our opinions clear.

                Also, just to piss you off:

                FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA
                FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA
                FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA
                FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA FISA

                •  I sent that out in a large 'reply all' email (0+ / 0-)

                  today.  

                   DONT BE SIMPLISTIC!   THINK!
                  DONT BE A 'ONE ISSUE' VOTER.  DONT BE  R A C I S T!!

                  REMEMBER,  IT WAS A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT, REPUBLICAN SEC DEFENSE,  ATT GENERAL AND REPUBLICAN NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR/SEC STATE  WHO GOT US TO THE POINT WE'RE IN NOW.

                  READ...STAY INFORMED...VOTE STRAIGHT DEMOCRAT IN NOVEMBER!

                  that was small part...I was wound up.

                  Where people fear the government there is tyrany: "Where the government fears the people, you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson

                  by ROADRUNNER DEM on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:51:17 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  Blah blah, here's what matters: (3+ / 0-)

              Making right decisions. Don't think that just because someone has made good decisions in the past means they are going to make good decisions in the future. Each and every decision that needs to be made needs to be evaluated on the facts surrounding that decision.

              On this decision, of choosing Bayh as a running mate, the facts surrounding the situation tell us that this is a bad pick. I list a quick incomplete list of the facts above. This is a bad pick. Bayh stands for a lot of stuff Obama has railed against. If Obama chooses Bayh, it will be a sign that he's abandoning his prior good decisions in favor of future bad ones.

              I like Obama too. I don't think he's going to pick Bayh. Bayh may not have a speaking slot yet at the convention because Obama doesn't want him to open his damned mouth anywhere near a mic for fear of him saying something like "Appeasement won't work" concerning Iran.

              But again, if Obama does pick him, it is a bad decision.

              •  Couldn't agree more (0+ / 0-)

                Personally, I can tolerate Bayh on the ticket.  I am not going to refuse to vote for Obama if Bayh is on there with him.

                However, for the reasons that you cite, I don't think that Bayh is the best choice out there.

      •  MEMO TO GLOWNZ (0+ / 0-)

        Better attach that response to most of the comments in this thread... I'm sure not the only one who's not happy about the prospect of Bayh.

        Though you're right the campaign has done okay-- more than okay!-- so far.

    •  how about Caroline Kennedy? (0+ / 0-)

      she could pull a Cheney (sorry for comparison) and pick herself as best choice.

      OBAMA - KENNEDY '08

      looks good on bumper sticker.

      Where people fear the government there is tyrany: "Where the government fears the people, you have liberty." Thomas Jefferson

      by ROADRUNNER DEM on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:47:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Puhleeze. not Bayh! (3+ / 0-)

    Claire McCaskill is my number One.  But dear God, not Bayh!  

    Webb is my number Two!  

    Someone strong.  Someone who eats nails for breakfast.

    Bayh is a weakling.

    Kaine is my number Three._

    Anybody but Bayh!  Give him Ambassador to Barcelona, not VP. Please.

    Obama/Webb.

    Killer diller ticket.

  •  Sigh. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    concernedamerican, zett

    What an awful, AWFUL day.

    My chairman was shot & killed, polls are looking worse and worse, and Obama's quite likely going to pick the worst person the Party has to offer.

    Bayh offers nothing, he wouldn't help carry IN, and we'll lose a Senate seat (bad as Daniels is, I don't have any faith in Jill Long Thompson). I want Wes Clark for VP and always have, but Obama won't do that.

    This country is worthless.

    Obama '08. Good for the Party, Good for the Country.

    by SouthernFried on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:17:28 PM PDT

  •  Nuclear Option? (0+ / 0-)

    I don't want Bayh for the loss of a Democratic Senate seat reason, but how about a two year exercize of the nuclear option if the Repugs get too nasty?

  •  Co-Chair With McCain (7+ / 0-)

    Evan Bayh was the co-chair, with John McCain, of the Committee to Liberate Iraq.  The only other Senator member was Joe Lieberman.  

    The Executive Director was Randy Scheunemann, recently a lobbyist for Georgia and chief foreign policy adviser to John McCain.

    Evan Bayh voted for the war.  He now says that our failure to "win" in Iraq shouldn't sour Americans on the need to make war on other countries, like Iran.  Or maybe Russia.

    Obama's Veep should not bring this baggage to his ticket.  It muddles the message, big time.

  •  I think this is a facade argument (0+ / 0-)

    In place of that you just don't want Bayh as VP

  •  Who appoints? (0+ / 0-)

    Is it even the new Guv?  Would Thompson be sworn in before Bayh would have the chance to resign?

    "Whether the British ruling class are wicked or merely stupid is one of the most difficult questions of our time." - George Orwell on the Spanish Civil War

    by Ramo on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:21:46 PM PDT

  •  Evan Bayh Bayh (0+ / 0-)

    Leave him where he is. If we're going to have a promoter of the Iraq war on the ticket, let's get Colin Powell. I still think Wes Clark is a great choice - and for a long shot why not Chuck Hagel?

    Canada - where a pack of smokes is ten bucks and a heart transplant is free.

    by dpc on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:22:24 PM PDT

  •  Buyer is my representative :-( (0+ / 0-)

    He's crazy, I hope he loses to Nels Ackerson.

  •  Red herring, wild goose chase... (0+ / 0-)

    Bayh has no speaking slot.

    Sebelius (co-chair of the convention) stated that every VP candidate would be speaking at some time.

    We need not think alike to love alike -- Ferenc Dávid

    by ogre on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:23:55 PM PDT

  •  Blah to Bayh. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Prognosticator

    Yet another capitulating Dem.  Leave him in the Senate where he belongs.  Remember hat dumb war Obama said he was against?  IIRC, wasn't Bayh one of the Dems helping McCain and the thugs push it through?

    Yech, what a silly choice for someone who is supposed to be an agent of change.  Bayh is just more of the same spineless Dem status quo. But one of my dogs just spilled a shitload of white paint on my carpet so I'm in a pissy mood anyway.  Still, Bayh? Blech. Obama might as well choose the paint stain on my carpet for all Bayh adds to the ticket.  Bonus--we don't lose a Senate Seat.

    Just say no to Senators on the ticket, Obama.  Please, for the love of God, just say no to Senators.

    News Pundits - The Dopplerless weathermen of our time. Jon Stewart

    by mentaldebris on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:25:23 PM PDT

  •  In doing my research on (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SecondComing

    whose NAME would do better on the ticket

    (Clark, resoundingly - see this comment for why)

    it turned up that Bayh apparently has VERY few "folks", and look where they are FROM:

    There are 11 unique 'Bayh' last names in the United States.

    Name Ranking
    Bayh is the # 332,879 ranked last name in the United States # 332,878  Baybeck # 332,879  Bayh # 332,880  Baylard

    Top States for last Name Bayh

    Texas  4 listings  
    Indiana  2 listings  
    Maryland  2 listings  
    California  1 listings  
    New York  1 listings  

    I noted: Am I to understand that Bayh doesn't have enough relatives to... fill an egg carton?!

    And they are mainly from TEXAS?  I take "Maryland" to be DC.  Who IS this family???

    I wish folks had asked about BUSH's family, and "who THEY were" a little more before voting for him...

  •  Tom Daschle (0+ / 0-)

    an execrable pick from the point of view of progressives, but a perfect pick in the sense that he is a skilled Washington insider who knows how the game is played.

    And since he already lost his Senate seat, there's no danger of losing another by picking him.

    •  I could tolerate Daschle (0+ / 0-)

      Unfortunately, I think the right has done a good job at "defining" him. Which helped cost Daschle his Senate seat 4 years ago.

      I still remember visiting a friends house in 2005, and listening to his (Republican) Dad rail on and on about Daschle's "expensive hair cuts," and how he was "glad he lost re-election," etc., etc., etc.

  •  V.P. Bayh (3+ / 0-)

    Besides costing a Senate seat, Bayh is one of John McCain's war-mongering DLC-o-crat buddies. Why would Obama want to pick someone like that?

    Mr. Bayh’s support of authorizing force in Iraq stands in sharp contrast to Mr. Obama’s oft-stated view that he showed the good judgment to oppose the conflict from the start. After his vote, Mr. Bayh in early 2003 joined Mr. McCain as an honorary co-chairman of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which made regime change in Iraq its central cause.
    "He was not only wrong, he was aggressively wrong," said Tom Andrews, national director of the Win Without War coalition, referring to Mr. Bayh. "In my view, he would contradict if not undermine the Obama message of change, turning a new page on foreign policy and national security."

    http://www.crooksandliars.com/...

  •  I think it's going to be a surprise.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mariken

    ..that will literally shock the world!

    But then again, I'm still waiting for the email from Obama HQ.

    Conservatives are close-minded, shallow, superficial people that live in a fantasy world where everything is black and white and there are NO shades of gray.

    by Brad007 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:35:11 PM PDT

  •  how does clemons (0+ / 0-)

    have some inside info that no one else does?

    It may be Bayh, but not sure clemons knows more than the rest of us.

    •  Because Clemons is an insider (0+ / 0-)

      Who may or may not have legit inside dope that we don't, who may or may not be the target of deliberate misinformation by the Obama campaign, and who may or may not be a willing party to such deliberate misinformation.

      I.e., who the hell knows? We'll know when we know.

      Sic transit gloria mundi - ancient Roman proverb

      by kovie on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:54:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Iraq, Bankruptcy, FISA (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    zett

    Bayh is Al From and the corporate/militarist wing of the party's dream VP candidate. And young enough to run for president in 2016!

    If it hadn't been for the theft of Florida in 2000, you'd likely have Joe Lieberman as your presidential candidate this year.

    For the sake of the nation, I hope you don't get a similar set-up this year.

    I do disagree with this:

    circumstances dictate that he is most valuable to an Obama presidency as a senator from Indiana.

    Evan Bayh is most valuable entirely out of office.

    This nicely summarizes what's wrong with American political life today. (Source)

    by GreenSooner on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:40:03 PM PDT

  •  Not Bayh (0+ / 0-)

    I just don't think it will be him.

  •  Hate to say this (0+ / 0-)

    but Obama needs a white guy. I love McCaskill, Sebelius, etal, but they are great where they are. We are asking a lot of the American electorate already to support a black guy. There is still a great deal of racism and sexism in this country.

    Bayh is a non-starter. Too bad, too, because his daddy was one of my favorite politicians.

    That said, I have an Obama bumper sticker ready to put on my car. Whether I do it or not -- and I will vote for him regardless of who he picks -- depends largely on who he picks.

    I want to fall in love with this ticket. Bayh isn't going to get me there.

    Oh, and by the way, I believe the conventional wisdom that no one votes for vp.

    It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson

    by AtlantaJan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:49:00 PM PDT

  •  Thinking/hoping that it's a head fake (0+ / 0-)

    as he goes for the outside shot, likely/preferably a 3-pointer.

    We know that he can sink those. (Heh.)

    Clark? Reed? Sibelius? (Although my long-shot dark horse guess would be Cantwell.)

    And please oh please don't let it be Hagel or Bloomberg. Or Biden. Or, yes, Clinton.

    Sic transit gloria mundi - ancient Roman proverb

    by kovie on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:51:36 PM PDT

    •  Only Clark is a better political choice (0+ / 0-)

      And that's to cinch Virginia.

      Might be other reasons not to give the VP slot to Clark. He might be more valuable elsewhere.

      Choosing Bayh hits all the bases:

      * Establishing Indiana as a swing state

      * Gaining moderate creds that could turn votes in other "red" states and force the Republicans to spend more money on their own turf.

      * Unifying the party with a likely Clinton VP pick.

      * Gaining a VP nominee who specializes in nuclear non-proliferation

      * Helping a down-ticket governor's race (Indiana!)

      * Gaining a VP who has had success working with Republicans on what should be nonpartisan issues (foreign affairs)

  •  If Obama selects Bayh I`m going to freeze; (0+ / 0-)

    the reason being that I won`t be living in the USA if McCain is elected,and if Bayh is  the choice,Obama loses.
    I know it`s cold in Canada,and I hear it`s cold and rainy in Ireland, but at least the people are not as nuts as here.

    Democracy is not dead;it merely smells funny

    by sully18 on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:53:35 PM PDT

  •  Here's another thought (0+ / 0-)

    horrible as it is to actually voice.

    Obama has to pick someone who would carry on his policies were something to happen to him. Bayh is not that person, and I think Obama is smart enough to know it.

    We all have to acknowledge that there are many, many loonies out there.

    It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. -- Thomas Jefferson

    by AtlantaJan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:57:12 PM PDT

  •  Name a Person That's a Better Fit Than Bayh (0+ / 0-)

    Hillary Clinton.

    See, that's a damned low bar to get over.

    The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

    by easong on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 03:59:40 PM PDT

  •  True but... (0+ / 0-)

    The same argument could be made for Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island where a Republican governor is also in control.  And if Obama chooses Tim Kaine, the lieutenant governor, a Republican, would become governor and most likely run for governor next term thereby halting the Democratic transformation of Virginia.  There is no perfect candidate here folks.  I think it is more important to have Obama in the White House than it is to lose one senator.

    Lincoln was overrated...

    by ThePrometheusMan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:09:45 PM PDT

  •  A huge problem is that in 2016 (0+ / 0-)

    Bayh would be the candidate.

    And that's a HUGE step backwards rather than forwards.

    If Obama believes in Progress, Bayh is unacceptable.

    I wouldn't actively support Bayh in 2016 and neither would many Progressives.

    And he can't win without our active support.

    •  This means we're essentially conceding 2016 (0+ / 0-)

      to a DLC Dem or a Republican.

      And 2016 will be a critical point in our history, when some of the left's policies will really start to get going.

      We're cutting ourselves off a the knees, basically guaranteeing that anything we accomplish will get tempered by DLC initiatives.

      This is the opposite of Progress.

  •  Yes.. (0+ / 0-)

    Daniels will win.  He will appoint a Repub.. either Buyer, PENCE or himself.  

    PICK KAINE!

    From a Life-long Hoosier DEM

    McSame = 4 more years of BUSH

    by gnwmann on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:15:24 PM PDT

  •  The question is... (0+ / 0-)

    How many liberals will not vote or vote for McCain if Obama selects Bayh?  I don't see many in either category.  Obama has got the liberal vote already, what he needs are moderates and independents.  And Bayh is certainly moderate.

    Lincoln was overrated...

    by ThePrometheusMan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:21:25 PM PDT

  •  And for those who hate Bayh so much... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    taraka das

    Who would you suggest?  Warner, Webb, and Rendell are out.  Kaine needs more experience, Hagel is a conservative Republican, Reed has the same problem as Bayh, Biden and Richardson have too many gaffes, Nunn is conservative and old, Edwards is out, and Sebelius lacks foreign policy experience.  Bayh is a safe choice who has been around for awhile, I dislike some of his decisions but I don't see any other good alternative.

    Lincoln was overrated...

    by ThePrometheusMan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:28:29 PM PDT

  •  Bayh is more liberal than McCaskill and Webb... (0+ / 0-)

    Here's the link:
    http://voteview.com/...

    Lincoln was overrated...

    by ThePrometheusMan on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 04:35:04 PM PDT

    •  Funny cuz it doens't look like he is (0+ / 0-)

      since he has a lower percentage of correct votes than those two do

      110  4812 82  HAWAII  D INOUYE        16  359   0.955  29.000
      110 49901 22  INDIANA D BAYH          56  383   0.854  30.000
      110 40703 14  PENNSYL D CASEY         19  388   0.951  32.000

      110 40706 40  VIRGINI D WEBB          30  386   0.922  41.000
      110 14922 56  WEST VI D ROCKEFELLER   23  367   0.937  42.000
      110 40701 34  MISSOUR D MCCASKILL     46  384   0.880  43.000

      8/29 changed everything Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -6.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.10

      by wsexson on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 07:19:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama/...... (0+ / 0-)

    Clarke/Richardson/Dodd/Webb/anybody other than the names floated so far....

    "..The paper holds their folded faces to the floor, and every day the paper boy brings more...." - Pink Floyd

    by LamontCranston on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 05:42:09 PM PDT

  •  It's Lame to Try to Push Obama Away From Bayh (0+ / 0-)

    If Bayh's Obama's choice he should pick him. I am sure he does not have to be reminded of the potential Senate seat loss.

    The implication of the diary is that it makes little difference who he chooses.  But the VP choice will have at least a small affect and in a very close election that small effect could decide. What if Obama made the stragetic choice that Bayh was his best shot but passed on it to save Bayh's seat.  What if Obama then loses a close election where Indiana was lost by a handful of votes.  Or he lost becuase his second choice VP made gaffes Bayh would not?

    As compared to any "one thing" in the campaign (such as good first debate performance, good closing ad, good acceptance speech) the VP choice is the most important thing.

    The irony here is that the problem of losing Bayh's seat is only a problem if Obama WINS!  In that world it all cheers and high fives -- losing one Senate seat is not so big. See if anybody on election victory night is crying about Bayh's lost seat.

    Losing Bayh's seat should not stand in the way if Obama wants him.

    "I can't believe that the noblest impulse of man-- his compassion for another-- can be completely dead here."

    by Daxman on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 05:46:48 PM PDT

  •  Wow...You All Need (0+ / 0-)

    to settle down.  Evan Bayh is not the worst candidate.  There is a reason he has been on the final shortlist of now four different presidential nominees (Clinton 92, Gore 00, Kerry 04 and Obama 08)....he has great vice presidential potential.  

    For Obama he is a potential good fit.  He is white, youngish (52), midwestern, All-American, scandal free with a picture perfect family.  He has 8 years of excecutive experience, 10 years in the Senate with national security and foreign policy experince.  He has a moderate bi-partisan reputation.  He will not overshadow Obama and is extremely disciplined and loyal.

    And most importantly he is very popular in Indiana a new swing state this election year.  Right now Obama and McCain are tied in the state.  Bayh would give him that needed edge.  

    This election will be won again in the Midwest.  Obama is doing well there and Bayh could help him bring along Indiana, Ohio, Iowa and Missouri while shoring up Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota.  If he can help do this then he is worth the pick.  

    I know many don't like his support of Hilary, his DLC membership and his support for the Iraq War.  He has admitted he made a mistake on Iraq.  And he has been far more liberal than you think in recent years.  And one last fact....he will be VP not President!  Obama will be the one in charge.

  •  I don't want Bayh mainly because he would (0+ / 0-)

    be replaced by a Republican. But I do like him for one reason: the "activist base" hates him. And if the "activist base" doesn't like him then maybe he actually can appeal to mainstream voters.

    •  Why? (0+ / 0-)

      If Bayh is the VP nominee, don't you think the Dems would get serious about defeating Daniels?

      You don't think we could beat Daniels? Why not?

      I live in Indiana. Daniels SUCKS as a governor. He's a freakin fascist who thinks the answer to everything is to turn it over to a corporation, soak the population, and throw more people in jail.

      Here in Indiana, Republicans have this bizarre idea that taxes are taboo, but paying an arm and a leg to corporations who are NOT regulated is fine and dandy. LOTS of people, probably a majority, are waking up to the fact that this approach is deeply flawed.

      Turn all functions over to unaccountable corporations! It's not over the top to call it fascism. It IS fascism.

      People here are PISSED OFF. They know the corporations have us all by the throat. But they don't know what to do about it. Very simple campaign strategy: BLAME DANIELS.

  •  Why should Bayh get a speaking spot? (0+ / 0-)

    I don't think this is evidence that he's the veep pick. God, I hope not!

    tragically un-hip
    ..- .... --..-- / --- -.- .-.-.-

    -5.88, -6.82

    by Debby on Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 06:14:56 PM PDT

  •  A different scenario (0+ / 0-)

    Indiana IS A SWING STATE, not "reliably red."

    The polls all support this. Barack Obama is leading McCain slightly in the state.

    Indiana demographics are changing. Within a couple of years, the electorate will be dominated by Generation X and the Millenials.

    A little campaign funding in Indiana will go a long way.

    I see it differently than the front-pager here. If Bayh is the VP candidate, it will pull Obama further ahead and generate enthusiasm down the ticket.

    Jill Long isn't that far behind right now, (less than ten points) and she has NO PRESENCE in campaign ads. Daniels' current lead really is a slight bump from his advertising. Daniels' ads contain blatently FALSE claims, and there hasn't been any answer from the Long campaign.

    Long needs money from the DNC. And apparently, a better campaign staff.

    Now, as for the results. If Bayh wins and Long wins, there will be no Republican pick-up in the Senate. Bayh won't take office as VP til after Daniels leaves office as governor. Jill Long would appoint Bayh's replacement.

    THINK SWING STATE.

  •  Can't believe I'm disagreeing with lefties on thi (0+ / 0-)

    Because you see, I'm one of the fiercest lefties on this site.

    But Bayh makes political sense. Worry about 2016 in 2016, ok?

    Remember that Al Gore was a DLC'er, too.

    •  Sorry, dude. (0+ / 0-)

      Your data is out-dated and you seem to have drunk too much Obama-Koolaide (didn't you support his FISA capitulation too?)

      We need some refresher for you:

      1. See my sigline for Bayh's McCain/Lieberman category warmongering
      1. it's a bullshit Naderist smear to call Gore a DLC'er. My blockquote on this follows:

      Gore had his own progressive positions when he ran in 2000 and had a populist theme. Here's his platform back then.

      Gore, the party nominee, wasn't a participant or a signatory to DLC's Hyde Park declaration  (Kerry was, BTW. Check the link) which came out in August 2000, their "vision" for the country.

      Gore didn't attend ANY of the DLC annual meetings since 2001 even though apparently Al From invited him personally in 2001 (DLC national meeting speaker lists: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007).

      That shows the Gore didn't consider himself a part of the DLC crowd in 2000 or at any time thereafter.

      Since 2002, of course, Gore was the first leading politician to oppose the war (which the DLC was pushing), he endorsed Dean over many DLC candidates in 2004, came to support single payer healthcare, opposed warrantless wiretaps strongly and opposed the Bush regime every step of the way on major issues. Most of these ae counter to what the DLC was doing and/or pushing during this period.

      So these associations people make loosely between Gore and the DLC were misguided in 2000 and are completely off-base since then.

      IMO, Jack Reed would be an excellent running mate for Obama. My thoughts on why.

      •  Gore was a DLC'er (0+ / 0-)

        I'm not disputing your facts.

        I'm speaking from a longer term view. In the 1980s and 1990s, Gore was indeed a DLC'er, and he was one when he ran for VP in 1992 and 1996.

        Bill Clinton changed the focus of the DLC, and he was the most successful politician from that school of political thought.

        That's essentially my argument about Bayh. Might be a DLC'er, but as VP, he'll have the power to influence that faction of the party and he will undoubtedly influence it under the leadership of Barack Obama.

        Gore's evolution is an example of my argument. If we're worried about 2016, then let's fight that battle then. We need to have the DLC on our side right now, and for at least the next three years.

        I did support Obama's FISA vote. I'm with Keith Olberman and John Dean on that one. The law as it exists allows criminal prosecution and only provides immunity from civil lawsuits.

        No doubt, when the criminals are finally tried, they will try to point to this law as an indication that Congress condones the actions taken. But be of good cheer. That law has been immediately challenged legally by the ACLU.

        Obama's vote was like the other votes: a bid to take the issue off the table for the November election. A bitter pill to swallow, but unfortunately necessary if we are going to get to the point where we can take action against the crooks.

        I'm not a big fan of these kinds of compromises, and I regularly attack them, as everyone should. What's the alternative?

        •  I don't think (0+ / 0-)

          John Dean supported Obama on the FISA vote. Neither did KO actually, I think he was being cautious to undermine since he's on TV and he's our only serious progressive presence on TV.

          DLC as a label means diddly. DLC as in policy/positions is what matters and they have been especially horrible and unacceptable since 2001.

          Once can say that Gore was sort of a DLC dude in his 1988 run. But, I'd take even that 39 year old DLC Gore over DLC/neocon Bayh of any time. Don't even think of compaign Gore of 2000 or now with that chump.

          "That's essentially my argument about Bayh. Might be a DLC'er, but as VP, he'll have the power to influence that faction of the party and he will undoubtedly influence it under the leadership of Barack Obama."

          That's not realistic thinking. if you paid attention to what Bayh has been doing on war and civil liberties (see my sigline diary) and on smearing progressive Dems (like Dean, and the primary-time version of Obama), the only logical conclusion is that is Bayh is going to try and influence anyone, it will be Obama towards the McCain/Lieberman/neocon direction of foreign policy, and the DLC/corporatist on domestic/economic policy. Obama is already vulenrable to making compromises benind towards rightwing, and having Bayh as his numero duo would be the worst possible scenario. We need a progressive like Reed pulling Obama towards the progressive (and hence most of the time logical, rational and common sense) side.

          •  Well, you talk a good game (0+ / 0-)

            And you're a fellow lefty.

            I have to heed what you say because you're pretty darn convincing, but I still think my point of view bears some consideration.

            Call me on the fence, OK? You've given me pause over my previous arguments.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site