When we take back this country, we will have a hell of a lot to do. Primping for cameras won't cut it.

would be appealing to southern blacks...

well, one might not exist. :) Maybe Feingold, that's about it. :) Then again, I am quite disenchanted nowadays. :rofl:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:



I want some of the drugs you're taking !!!!

Why not Bayh/Obama?

Why not Bayh? I live in Indy. I used to work for the state and saw firsthand what Evan's 'governing skills' accomplished while he was Governator. He created a budget surplus with smoke and mirrors - by rearranging the books. His leftover cronies were appointed to agency directorships and knew NOTHING about what they were doing, only that they were 'friends of Bayh'.

As a Senator, he's the master of the non-answer - his opinions and stances change depending on his audience - literally over the course of a day's worth of speaking engagements!

He's nothing more than what we already have at 1600 - a pretty boy in an empty suit who's made a career riding his daddy's apron strings and his 'famous' last name.


Why not Obama? Yeah, every redneck KKK member - living or dead - would rush to the polls on election day to vote AGAINST a Democratic ticket with his name on it.

His voting record to date and many of his public statements have led me to think that he's just not ready for prime time yet. One good speech does not a president make.

:rofl:

better to laugh than cry. :)

I do NOT want a sitting Senator to be our nominee. Only one person (Kennedy) went directly from the Senate to the White House in the 20th century. The reason? Senators have a long voting record, which leaves opponents much to obfuscate. (Witness what the Repugs did to Kerry's Iraq war vote.)
Clark, career military, is the Republican nightmare, because he neutralizes the security issue. Edwards brings the bad treatment of the middle class to the table, and is a great and articulate spokesman.

I like Clack don't get me wrong but I'm not comfortable with him running against McCain...

Have you ever seen him vs. right wing generals on the talk shows? 'nuff said.
Under your scenario we'd probably lose 1, maybe both Senate seats WHICH WE CANNOT AFFORD.

Clark, and I should say I didn't vote for him in '04, is one impressive guy. He is great on those shows vs the RW generals. He's fascinating to listen to, he did a BookTV spot last month when he interviewed an author, wow. That guy gets started talking about foreign policy and my jaw drops. I study FP. I have been published on PNAC and consider myself pretty solid at those issues, and Clark is one of the most intelligent and impressive people I have ever heard talk about FP. He is a bonafide intellectual with a decorated military career. Seriously an impressive guy. You know, I didn't support him for president last time, and probably wouldn't vote for him in a primary for '08, but this guy is respectable and the real deal. We would be so lucky to have him for president, I'd proudly vote for him in a general election. I genuinely can't say how he would match up against McCain, my sense is he'd match up pretty well, but I couldn't say for sure. One thing though, he'd be a million times better president than McCain. Bayh, on the otherhand, might be the least impressive politician I have ever heard. He's boring, weak, wishy-washy and can't be trusted to fight for what is right. Dems do not need a candidate like that. He's a sure loser.

You think he couldn't handle MCCAIN???? I am left speechless at that thought...in my book, he's exactly the one man you WANT to go against McCain...
windbreeze

Democratic nominee. And he isn't even Catholic.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

me thinks the writer of the op, hasn't checked in with us in a really long time, or s/he would have never ever mentioned Bayh name in these parts..

I think that Clark would be a wonderful nominee but discounting every US Senator is ridiculous. Long voting records are a strike against you, sure, but they don't prevent you from becoming president. Only one sitting VP had been elected President in the 20th century and nobody was using that as a reason as to why Gore shouldn't be nominated in 2000.

Edwards is a wonderful idea guy. But as a candidate he was a snooze. Did he do a thing but nod every time Cheney lied during the debates.

Sorry Edwards, you had your chance and you were invisible.

... but the American public (correctly) sees the Congress as part of the problem, and hence unable to be part of the solution.

There is a reason that people prefer to choose their presidents from outside the beltway, and IMHO it is not really a bad reason.

Clark has the military background and Durbin has the middle class and poor convinced that he has their back.

He's sqeaky clean (no Monica's in the closet) He can turn Indiana blue if anyone can. Whats not to like about him? Obama or Edwards I don't care but we need a young team that will appeal to the southern vote, and that will insure us the white house for more than 8 years...


Why not? your turn...

could turn Indiana blue. I've listened to a lot of people over the last two years, and not a one of these very active, motivated Democrats would vote for Evan for President.

""During a trip to Iraq in January, Bayh said a top general told him that there may be a political solution to the conflict in Iraq, but there is no military solution." http://www.wfsb.com/Global/story.asp?S=4685913

Since Clark's being saying this since the war started..... maybe Bayh should've been listening to Clark ... and saved the taxpayers the cost of a trip to Iraq and the lives of more than 2000 American soldiers.

I'd rather vote for Clark -- a true American original-- than a pale echo who seems to only repeat 'talking points" anyway.

Bye-Bayh. You're years too late.

means what it used to mean. it now means more of the same ol', same ol'.

i'm just sayin'...

:shrug:

As for me, I think Bayh might be to conservative for Obama to run with, personally.

Afterall, He's a 'Repub-lite'...

lol.

We don't need super liberals to win the election...
We need them once we've won it!...

According to DU CW will automatically consign that person to 'Repub-Lite' land. I believe I have seen virtually every Democratic member of the U.S. Senate called this, or some other derogatory name based on a single vote...even Russ Feingold...

There is little tolerance here for anything but a purely progressive politician.

If he is a moderate he leans a little bit right.

.

I'm a Gore/Clark person myself

... but I'd work for a Gore/Clark ticket, too !!!


:hi:

Then so be it. Your's would be a harder sell...

What does Evan Bayh stand for? How does his record as a US Senator and Governor reflect this? What major accomplishments has he made as a US Senator and Governor? In what ways has he distinguished himself as a national leader? How assured is his victory in Indiana considering the state is solid GOP and hasn't gone Dem since 1964?

The Democrat he is as opposed to the Democrat he would be is two different things. He was a successful Governor who got Elected to the Senate, from a red state, he's young, bright and promising. You give me reasons he shouldn't be!...

these are his ratings from interest groups and in the past 2 years he's seems to be voting more pro-choice.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=CNIP9107

You are the one who is promoting Bayh for President. Most of the questions above are about what Bayh's vision is for America. I need to know what someone's vision for this country is and how their accomplishments reflect this before I am going to support them for President of the United States.

I am. See my response to your post earlier in the thread ...

and there never was a Governor friendly to our area...

Uh-uh.

Nope.

Feggedaboudit.

DLC Captain, Evan Bayh, happily voted to give the pResident the authority to bomb the living daylights out of Iraq on false pretenses. He hasn't renounced that immoral IWR Aye vote yet. That does not bode well for being a step above the current idiot in the White House when you have supported DimSon in the biggest American blunder of the 21st century.

:rofl:

But Obama's not experienced enough, and Bayh is about as inspiring as a plate of cold spaghetti.

But I have to say Bayh is not the most dynamic personality in the world...

And although I firmly believe Obama will be President someday, he really does not yet have the experience!

I have heard a lot of rhetoric but no substance...I think people should take a serious look at this guy from the stand point of who he'll be running against...
I'd trust him as a lot more level headed than John McCain anyday...and the swing voter may be turned off by a hot headed liberal...thats why I'm not running :mad:

Bayh could certainly become our nominee based on his paper resume, and the DLC push that we get behind an "electable" candidate (Image is very important to the DLC....much more than substance oftentime).....BUT primary voters look for more than a pleasing face and a resume, most want substance and that's where Bayh gets off the plane. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2520022&mesg_id=2520022

They are trying to push people on us they think they can beat...

to get a star next to your name? Please enlighten us as to why the right-wing is fearful of Bayh.

And a good laugh.

I'd say that's a big part of why Clinton lived in the White House for 8 years. I also agree with you about Obama for this reason too.

It really depends on what people are looking for. It is conceivable, after the juvenile antics in the White House over the last 6 years people may be looking for a more mature, less in your face personality. Bayh definitely projects maturity and confidence!

This is Bayh's record in the last Congress:

He voted FOR the bankruptcy bill, damaging the middle class economically.

He voted to limit class action lawsuits, promulgating corporate legal invincibility.

He voted to confirm a convicted war criminal, John Negroponte.

He voted for the disastrous Cheney Enrgy Bill, further pulling America down a morass of energy dependence and rising gas prices.

He refused to stand with some of his fellow Senators when they brought floor speeches and a vote to not certify the Ohio 2004 election results.

He recently voted for the renewal of the Patriot Act, indicating that he either likes Americans to ose their civil rights or he trusts Bush a little too much to obey the law and act in god faith.


If I have a problem with Bayh (not saying I do...he scores Okay on my scale, about halfway (see my journal)), it would be for the aforementioned reasons.

as much as why did it...
You know that Bills are attach with many thing...it could have been an appropriations bill, it could have been anything...
I would trust him to do whats right for his constituency. If he voted in such a way then I'm sure that was a guiding factor...
As President that constituency changes. I believe he would make wise decisions based on the situation at the time...
I Like Him and no one here has changed my mind about him...

why don't you check out how I score senators. I do not count ANY individual provision or amendment....only the votes that result in bill passage (or rejection).

I am not here to change your mind, but rememeber you wanted to discuss facts upthread. Assertions that you "are sure" that he is wise (without examples) and that you like him are a far cry from fulfilling the burden of proof of why Obama/Bayh would be the "smartest" choice.

The "trust me" approach to politics no longer applies to many online blogger-types (like DUers). This applies to Bush as well as any Democrat. Too many lies, too many betrayals, too many missed opportunities, too much misery, and too easy an access to the truth makes this approach ineffective.

Blind faith in Republicans and our government in general got this country into this mess. Blind faith in a politician with a D by his name will not rescue us from it.

We need a leader who will reverse this mess, and I want to see a record proving that he/she will do so, not platitudes.

Not everyone blogs in fact I will give you that most voters get their information from sources other than online...Yes there is tons of information out there, but the average voter is going to find out from their co-workers or TV, and both these men play well in Peoria...

pushing...like Hillary? I mean, why do you think that Bye is it? Because the man appeals to conservatives? That's cause he is conservative? but they don't vote in our primaries....and if McCain or Romney end up with the nomination....they ain't gonna be voting Republican lite.....instead of Republican.

Is "Bye" supposed to be strong on National Security or something (the GOP trump card still to date)? And if you think so, what is it in his persona that gives you that impression? What has he really said of substance in reference to this war and our reputation in the world? What has he had to say about economic issues that would make you think that there's gonna be a line outside of the voting booth all itching to pull the lever/push the button for "Bye"?

Here's what I think the GOP will do with his "national Security" credentials....make him out to be the wind blowing wimp that he truly is.....



The silly grin is cute on the kid. Looks kinda Stoopid on Bayh though!

However, since you chose to opine here, "DUers" is what your audience is.

The majority will do what they want, but if this is any indication of how the next selection process will go then we're dead in the water as far as making any changes, we will, as usual, cut our most prominent candidates to shreads before the general election even starts...

But maybe thats what some here are counting on...

FOCUS

ON

2006

your right PiTA, I got carried away...

I'll see you in the states forum... ;)

Maybe "They're shallow. They're superficial. Just like YOU! Bayh/Obama 2008!"

If all we cared about was being on the winning side we could all have just declared ourselves Republicans in 2000. It's about more than simply winning though, it's about ideas, principles, and a clear vision of a Democratic future. Those two don't have that. No thanks.

:thumbsup:

over the gop

These threads drive me crazy and some of that has to do with who people select. Most of it doesnt come from reasons that effect the political landscape wholisticly. The right has figured out that the way to electoral success is to strike political reallignment; in other words, moving the bar in the center.

That makes the center the worst place to be in politics.

Democrats as a whole haven't figured that out. It's something that FDR unknowingly acheived and I don't think the rest of the party has ever picked up on that. THere is also the effect that lobbyist have on the system. Which makes politicians appear disengenous whenever they claim they are acting out of ideology.I don't think the public is stupid as many of them have picked up on that fact.

I don't see this party getting anywhere in 08 as they have yet to figure out their mistakes on the 04 election. I think with Alito, Roberts and the Bankruptsy bill this party is in deeper shit than many choose to realize.

thats kind of why I started this thread...

Our winners in the recent past have been governers.

If I had to choose anyone in the dem party right now, the one with the experience to get the win is VP/Pres. Gore.

Obama is really green, but I think he has a bright future if he doesn't sell out to corporate America. Bayh seems too far right for me personally, and I don't like moving the dem party to the center. I don't think that is effective.

Not to defend Bayh, but this "Senators are unelectable" myth is based on a small sampling of elections and ignores the many mitigating factors.

Clinton and Carter did not win because they were Governors. They won because they ran good campaigns. Clinton escpecially.

So if we cant elect Senators then I guess JFK shouldn't have run.

Screw Conventional Bullshit Wisdom. Run the best, I don't care if his last office was Lieberemans jock sniffer.

It was for me, and I really don't want to go through it again on 11/05/08.

Bayh has the personality of a wet noodle. Yes, that's simplistic, but so are many American voters. I watched him on one of the Sunday a.m. talk shows and in addition to practically putting me to sleep, he seemed waaaay out of his league on matters of "national security."

He's also a DLCer:

"Bayh also served for more than four years as Chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), a national group that offers support for Democratic elected officials and community leaders with a progressive approach on issues. He helped establish the New Democrat Coalition, a new and growing group of senators who are committed to sensible bipartisan progress."

http://www.senate.gov/~bayh/about.html

For the DLC to claim "progressive approach" is highly amusing and many of us have HAD IT with "sensible bipartisan progress," so no.

And if that's not enough, governors, not senators (with voting records), seem to get elected Prez. But let's first focus on 2006, with a vengeance.

Care to elaborate on why you support Bayh in 2008? Be specific.

are at hand.

Who we run in 08 is going to mean SHIT if we don't show some fucking balls in 06.

Bayh?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Do yourself a favor and go down to the Indiana Forum and ask the good people there what they think about Evan Bayh.

a recipe to lose in blue states, 2 republicans

There aren't many posters in the Indiana section.:rofl: :rofl: So you won't get a very good sanpshot of what Hoosiers are like there.

if that is our team. I want the constitution restored and the neocon "full spectrum dominance" plan to be scrapped (if we aren't already bankrupt by then).

Bayh telling Democrats that they need to be more hawkish about the Iraq War is not what we need.

Feingold is the leader we need. He stands on principle and fights for true American values. I'd be happy with Obama as a VP candidate.

Gore, Richardson, Edwards, Clark are also names out there on my radar screen.

www.russforpresident.com

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I don't mind Obama though.

Who's we?



Keith’s Barbeque Central

ERROR: There were errors. Please correct them below:

* You are blocked from changing your signature. Please contact an administrator if you have questions regarding this.

You do what you want or think what you want, free country...
It's not going to do a damn bit of good for whoever it is if we still have a Republican congress for them to contend with...
Someone explain all this hostility towards this guy. I'd substitute Edwards for Obama, that makes a good ticket too but why all the hatred of Bayh? True I havn't been around DU alot, I've had other things to deal with, but I don't see Bayh as the vile choice you all do. Educate me...
The nations not going to elect a super liberal,not while we are at war. This guy is electable. If he were to get the nomination would you not vote for him?

you think Bayh is electable in 2008.

Nor that of the oh-so-enlightened "Tulip" below. (Are you one and the same? Honestly, John Lennon and Birkenstock avatars? LOL Were Volvos and lattes not available?) I've explained above why I do not support Bayh. To answer the question you've posed a number of times, I would NOT vote for him in 2008. I've asked you repeatedly (as have others) to articulate why YOU support him. Cutting and pasting links for various websites (Bayh's official website - are you serious?!), does not advance your argument. Nice try though.

... McCain might put either Bayh or Obama in his cabinet, 'cause they're so much like Republicans in the first place?

now I'm thinking it wants Feingold v. McCain. Co-sponsors of the campaign finance reform bill battling it out for Prez!

Bayh is trying to get to the right of Hillary Clinton. He will not resonate at all with the democratic primary voters. I can see him considered for vp, although I would not support him, but that is all.

Sorry, being a veteran I like Wes and think he has a place in the cabinet but he's not electable...you have to get in office to effect change...so you'd vote republcan if Bayh were nominated?...

Obama is one helluva a campaigner, and unlike McCain a straight shooter. In the debate with Keyes, after Keyes channeling God for an hour, he just looked at Keyes and said, look I'm not running for minister of Illinois. If only Kerry could have done that.

I am also right next to Indiana and when I talk to people about Bayh the consesus is, like him personally, but on the issues, not so much.

They saw your post advertising this one get locked by admin there.
You are trying to get folks started, and you sure did. LOL

:rofl:

that you have managed to keep this going for so long. And no one seems to be catching on.

I don't find it laughable funny at all. Sorry.

No DLCers.

Feingold/Clark--Clark/Feingold.

Only sane way to go so far.

I've been to a number of them lately, and from what I've seen they act more like right wing than left wing sites to me...
There has been but one person who has given me a substantial reason why Evan Bayh shouldn't the nomination for the Democratic party. I am not convinced by what they said just grateful for their input, it will give me something to research...
The rest have been just pure insults to me personally, my carracter, and my politics. Just because I made a statement of some very fine Democrats being a good ticket for us to run on...
If this keeps up we'll be in the same shape in three years, that we're in right now...
Can't say I didn't warn you though!...

He voted for the IWR; he voted for the Bankruptcy Bill; he also has not said anything of any consequences in reference to Iraq that wasn't just a parroting of what others have said; And he has a bad habit of putting down other Democrats when attempting to make himself more appealing.

Folks have given you plenty reason....you just didn't read them.

Tell "Bye" to get his ass out there to campaign for other Democrats, and give some of his money from his PAC towards that endeavor.

To close: You have an opinion....and that's fine. Problem, your opinion ain't the only one.....

It's about time the Democratic Underground took the time to discuss Senator Bayh. Instead of berating our Hoosier Democrat it's nice to see someone finally speaking intelligently about Senator Bayh. I like him and I support his bid for 2008. Being from Indiana I was really out of the loop about our state senator. After the 2004 election I decided to focus on Democrats in my own state. What I found was that Senator Bayh was nothing like what I had read here. I'm glad I have an open mind. One of the best attributes we have, being liberals.

I hope to see more posts like this. Just hate the "I hate mantra" that so often happens on this forum.

Thanks Acebass.

by anyone else here...why would you suppose that is?...

Some people are far less tolerant of others. It use to be liberals valued tolerance. Some posters here are open minded, some have already made up their minds and others are just angry.

Is it real or is it memorex...

I don't give a crap about these GOP-lite candidates.

Warner/Bayh, or the reverse would be good. Also Bill richardson would be good.

had the guts to nominate him, this guy would clean every clock in Washington. Clark is the real deal.
My sister in-law, the chief of staff for the Democratic Minority Leader in a blue state did not like Clark. Her excuse. He did not have party credentials. It is for this reason we suck as a political party.

One very interesting thread to me, as I have met a lot of the
people being discussed. Five years ago, after an especially
interesting speech, I even told Evan Bayh I expected to see him
on a National ticket some day. He laughed and told me I was very
brave.

He is likable and smart, but has a LOT of baggage in his voting
record under the Bush administration. At this point, I think it is too
heavy to fly as our nominee in 2008, although speculating about the
nominee in 2008 is like tossing dice at this point--WAY too early.

Wes Clark is indeed the real thing. What he says is what he thinks.
He is a very sharp guy, and extremely bright. Unfortunately, he is
also very stiff in public forums, and not a great public speaker. In
a non-TV age, he would be a shoo-in. Like Eisenhower was. I don't think
he would survive the talk show circuit, much as I like him personally,
and think he has more guts than maybe any other candidate.

Although I don't know Obama, I get the impression he wants to complete
his first Senate term before being shoved into the national limelight
any more than he is now. Edwards is photogenic and progressive, but he
had his chance to attack Cheney when it mattered, and opted to play nice.
The right wing does not play nice. Nor should we.

Al Gore should not be counted out for the reason that he has already won
a presidential election, and has positions that appeal to a broad spectrum
of the party. He also knows better than any other candidate, with the possible
exception (for obvious reasons) of Hillary, how to do the job.

Hillary has a LOT of baggage, but has the smarts, the personality, and the
funding. What many of her detractors ignore is that she still has time to shed
a lot of her excess baggage. Whether she opts to do so or not is another story
entirely. Some of her votes in the Senate could justifiably seen as opportunist
and she needs to atone for them to appeal to a broad spectrum of the party,
before she can even consider the nation. My gut feeling? If she wins re-election
to the Senate with more than 60% of the vote in NY, then she starts her run in
earnest. If not, then she hangs back for a year to see what's what.

And lastly, after all this speculation..........
Paininthearse made the most important point of all:

FOCUS ON 2006!!!!

Not only would Dems get blown out of the election, they would single-handedly cure insomnia in our country. :)

:puke:

Personally, I think it's a bit :crazy: to waste energy on this sort of speculation now...I'm beginning to wonder if these threads belong in the lounge until after November.

Let's focus on this year first!