Evan Bayh in 2008--Recieves more votes than Bush in IN in 04!

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

If you ever need a reason to think about him, guess what? Evan Bayh actually recieved about 20,000 more votes for his reelection to the senate in 2004 than Bush recieved for his reelection.
1,496,512<~~~Even Bayh
1,477,704 <~~Bush

He won FIVE straight elections in this very red red state (Sec of state, 2 terms as governor, and 2 terms as senator).

He is pro-choice but voted for the partial birth abortion ban, (the same position as middle america) the PATRIOT act and voted for the Iraq approprations bill and the war resolution. He supports the Defense of Marriage Act (Bill Clinton signed the DOMA into law in 1996). This is not about bending over in submission but making concessions to win red states. He still is pro-choice, pro-gay rights but not to the point at which he will lose votes in red states. He wont scare southerners and rural voters like various northeasterners.

Oh and he held the same job as Bill Clinton, chairman of the DLC. As much as DU doesn't like the DLC, they did give us Clinton and offer a better way to win red states.

[robbedvoter]

1. Woopty doo! Another IWR co-sponsor!

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:SJ00046:@@@P

[iwantmycountryback]

2. He's got no backbone, too much of a DINO for me

Might as well let the Republican win if we nominate somebody like this. There would hardly be a difference between him and his Republican opponent.

Feingold for president.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

7. so lets nominate hillary as if we don't care to win

we don't need another northeastener. good lord. the point is not to run a, as howard dean would say "real democrat" why? because those democrats are not appealing to the southern bloc, the southwest and the rural voters. kerry did quite well in the urban and suburban areas, in states such as OH and FL, in some cases better than gore. but his gains were offset by rural losses. we also cannot write off half of states. the point is to win.

[w4rma]

10. WTF?

Wisconsin isn't in the northeast. It neighbors Iowa and Michigan. It's in the midwest. It also was a battleground state.

[demwing]

49. No, the point is not "To Win"

We could run a Republican and win.

The point is to fight for what is right, find a battle ground and defend it.

Its not that people like moderation, not at all. People like bravery, idealism, and brashness.

We run a candidate who is 100% not afraid to be whomever he/she really is, people will respect that and vote accordingly.

How do you think Reagan ever won? Answer - he knew who he was and he liked himself that way.

[Telly Savalas]

135. Actually we can write off half the states.

I agree that the point is to win. However, if our ground game in Ohio was a bit better, we'd all be getting ready for Kerry's inaugeration, so why should we be obsessing on why we lost Alabama? It stands to reason we should focus on places where we lost by a very narrow margin, instead of pandering to states where we're losing by 20 percentage points.

In 1992 when the GOP got their asses kicked (by a guy that supported liberal agendas like universal health care and gays in the military) did they get all up in arms about how they need to move to the Left so they could appeal to urban voters? No. They stuck to their game plan of building their organization and sticking to their message. Whatever disagreements one might have had with their 1994 Contract on America, at least they stood for something. That can go a long ways toward winning votes.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

34. I cannot figure out all the finegold support since 911

maybe because he was the only senator to vote against PATRIOT?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. You've got something right for a change!

That's exactly why I support him.

The damned thing was written up (at least in outline) before 9/11, and the Bushies were just waiting for an opportunity to pawn it off on Congress.

If you don't think that voting against the Patriot Act was a good thing, then it's obvious whose side you're on: those who would give up freedom for the illusion of safety.

[fujiyama]

58. What do you think

of my avatar?

I like Russ a lot too, and unlike Indiana, which likely isn't going to the Dems even with Bayh at the top of the ticket, WI is a very vulnerable state, where Feingold showed can be won (and by a very comfortable margin), if you speak clearly and honestly about your principles.

[nickshepDEM]

92. Indiana would go Blue if Bayh gets the nomination.

I dont see how it couldnt. The guy served 2 terms as Governor and now as a senator. He is winning by large margins too when he runs.

[mstrsplinter326]

111. It would be close. If he wins Indy, he wins the state

But it would be within about 5k votes

[IndianaGreen]

128. Kerry won Indy in 2004

and he even won Gary and Bloomington. However, Kerry lagged far behind Bush in the State overall, unable to come close to Clinton's spectacular 1996 numbers (Indiana almost went Dem in 1996).

[Dinger]

112. I Agree, But I Have A Question . . .

I plead ignorance . . .

What is a DINO?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

113. "Democrat in Name Only"

Someone with a "D" after their name who votes and talks like a Republican.

[Dinger]

115. Thanks. Now I Know

:)

[Prodemsouth]

3. I am not a Bayh basher around here like most - but he has a rather dull

speaking style, but they said the same thing about Clinton at one time. HE is a Senator but at one time he was a Governor also. Don't look for much support around here look for DINO and Repug Lite in response to your post.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

4. he seems charasmatic

and as gov cut taxes and presided over surpluses (sound like another certain former gov of VT?)

[salin]

32. where does he seem charismatic?

been in the state on and off through out his terms. He is attractive. And certainly better verbally than he who beat his father... but charismatic? Nah. Bland and cliche - sure... from time to time (when he wasnn't going around IN THE SUMMER suggesting that WMDs had been in Iraq just not found yet) he even sounds intelligent.. but Charismatic? Have heard him in person. Have heard Bill C in person and Al Gore - Clinton - phenomonal speaker; Gore - intelligent speaker; Bayh - decent speaker but not in the ball park, even of Gore.

[elsiesummers]

52. Yeah he can be dull - esp remember him on MTP on Bush's first tax cut.

It was a really interesting interview, even more so in hindsight.

I was swept away by John Edwards' forceful speaking style and unenthused by Bayh.

But now I look back at that interview - Edwards was all no, no no the tax cut is wrong.

Bayh mildly suggested that he was proposing a trigger ammendment that would cancel further tax cuts (remember the lowest brackets were cut first) if the surplus was gone/budget not balanced.

If Dems had rallied behind the Bayh ammendment they would have been golden - they would have voted for the Bush tax cut - which would have stopped after year one - thus having their cake (politically) and killing the Bush tax cut for all but the poorest, simultaneously.

But I have to tell you, I totally loved the red meat Edwards was delivering. (I volunteered for Edwards in the primaries - in large part because of my memory of this particular group interview).

Bayh is dull, but in hindsight, pragmatic. I could get behind him in the GE, easy, but I'll still back a red meat Dem in the primary, cause I'm a sucker for loud liberals.

[AntiCoup2K4]

5. Evan Bayh in '08 - for the 'Pukes

No fucking way in Hell will he ever be on a Democratic ticket.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

12. you can cosign our party to permanent minoirty status

you would you run? dean??? hillary??? oh yes they would play well in rural WV (which a moderate democrat just sweeped such rural counties in his governor bid and won the election)

[iwantmycountryback]

23. Why bother running a Democratic candidate?

If they're the same thing as the Republican? If people see 2 Republicans, they're just gonna vote for the person with the R next to their name. I'd rather be a minority than the same thing as Repukes.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

31. you might want to look through the DU archives

we had these same discussions last time (2000-2004). moderates are good. they win. clinton was a moderate. liberals scare america, I hate to say. moderates can win in southern states and rural areas. and please, no 2008=KERRY STATES+OH WHAA HOO! like last time.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

40. was clinton "repug lite"?

what about ginsberg and bryer?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

74. Yes, he was Repug lite

He was the perfect Rockefeller Republican.

[Hippo_Tron]

33. If you want Rural WV support how about Jay Rockefeller?

My point being that he'd be a much better candidate than Bayh. See post #26.

[ISUGRADIA]

99. Rocky is getting a bit old - 69 or 70 in 2008

[Hippo_Tron]

106. Didn't stop Reagan or Bush I (n/t)

[dogman]

6. How would he win the Dem Primary?

By the time he satisfied the Dems in the primary he would have a hard time in the red states.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

14. in 2004 the IA voters choose realism over ideology

they are not all wingnuts, they are likely to pick whoever they think will win as they did in 2004. the post-clinton party is much more pragmatic than it used to be

[dogman]

20. They didn't go with Lieberman.

I think they want a candidate they recognize as a Democrat. His next challenge will be what he shows in the next few years in the Senate. I believe that will determine how he is perceived. I think Kerry had the backing of Vilsak and that is why he won in 04.

[usregimechange]

8. The MO AG recieved more than Bush in MO as well, nt

[n2mark]

Yes,

I do like him especially I have a picture of his father and wife and myself taken at the Carter Inauguration.. My brother who was alive during that time fought for Bayh in Indiana. If we want to win any red states, we might consider him. His dad was wonderful and his dad's wife. Yes, he could take the red states without a problem, I like him. I say support him for Pres.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

17. bayh/warner anyone??

how about this?

[salin]

29. er... no thanks

and don't give me the ridiculous dichotomy of bayh or hillary - as if there are only two democrats in the universe who could possibly run next round :eyes:

[fujiyama]

60. What about Clark?

He has spoken clearly and forcefully about the issues. He seems to be pretty pricipled. Ideally, I'd go with a Clark/Feingold ticket (though I'd like Feingold at the top of any ticket).

I know little of Warner. He's a possibility, but I hope he makes it clear what he stands for.

I'm more impressed with the republican, Richard Lugar's criticisms of Bush over the war, than Bayh.

Bayh is dull as hell. And Bayh doesn't have even a fraction of the charisma, charm, and communication skills Clinton had.

[w4rma]

9. Sen. Feingold got more votes than Bush (and Kerry) in WI (nt)

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

16. WI voted dem the last 5 straight elections

since 1988, it even voted for dukakis. it is a blue state, if not narrowly. we need someone who can win in red states

[iwantmycountryback]

24. Kerry won WI by less than 12,000 votes

While it leans blue it's hardly a safe state. He would make WI safe and he would do much better in Minnesota, Iowa, and Michigan, and maybe Ohio. I don't know how you got that it was in the northeast, check your American map.

[fujiyama]

59. As the other poster said

Kerry carried it by around 12k votes.

Gore carried it by around 5k votes.

It's a battleground state and Feingold showed that being clear and honest about your principles can win.

I have nothing against Bayh. He's a dull red state senator. That's fine. That's all I'd expect from a Dem in Indiana. I'd hope he would have got more votes from Bush in that state. He's been elected to statewide office several times now. The people know him there. Fine. He can stay there.

As a national party we must make it clear WHAT we stand for. Political sincerity, honesty, and yes, a willingness to stand for these principles CAN be political assets.

I'm not completely sure that Feingold is the ABSOLUTE best candidate available. I'm still open to Clark, but Feingold has the great sincerity that most politicians lack nowadays.

That's why I'm a supporter of his and if he decided to run, I'd likely work my ass off for him.

[demwing]

11. Please understand my question

What good does it do to have the Democratic candidate win the Presidency if that candidate acts just like a Republican?

Isn't the point of winning supposed to be that it brings the opportunity to promote our platform, including nominating fair judges?

How will Bayh be any different than any moderate Republican?

He may be able to win, but it won't be a win for Progressives. Not at all.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

18. we had this discussion late time

did no one take notes? ronald reagan nominated two moderate conservative judges who turned out to be liberals on various issue. it is very hard to find a real conservative for the SCOTUS. there are only three currently on it (soon to be two, and then three again). clinton was a moderate DLC "new democrat" and I would say our causes made pretty good headway

[salin]

30. so... we should vote for ronald reagan's ghost and hope for "moderate"

judges?

[demwing]

50. And I reject it now

as I would have then, if I had been part of that conversation.

BTW - what exactly are "our causes"???

Your "causes" may not be the same as mine.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

13. Here's the important question:

How is he on economic issues--protecting Social Security from the Republicanites, universal health care (NOT by "market methods"), restoring the kinds of workers' rights that the Republicanites are destroying, penalizing companies that outsource and rewarding companies that don't?

If he follows the Republicanites on any ONE of these, he doesn't get my vote in the primaries.

Besides, it's too early to talk about presidential candidates. Let's reform the party, get rid of electronic voting machines, and win some more Congressional and Senate seats. THOSE are the important issues now, not which DLC-approved Ken doll should be the sacrificial lamb for 2008. The primary season is too damned long anyway.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

19. eh

universal healthcare is a killer. no candidate wanting this will win. and outsourcing is a good thing, for everyone (except the IT nerd whose job gets shipped to india)

[salin]

36. "Out sourcing is a good thing, for everyone"

right- moving from a manufacturing base (higher wage - more consumer) economy to a service economy (two tier, higher and lower wage - now with some higher wage getting shifted off shore) is good for the economy how? It is good for mst folks how? And what is with the hostility to IT workers?

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

39. why is outsourcing good?

simple economics. say an american is paid 20 and an indian is paid 10 for the same job in which the indian probably does a better job. the company pays 10, which means that their costs are contained and thus they keep more money, which means higher profits (and if you don't like that invest in the company, because it means higher returns to shareholders). the company gives 5 to you the shareholder and uses 5 to invest in another indian, which means higher productivity. in the end productivity increases, profits increease, you the shareholder have more money in your pocket to spend and invest. in india this worker making 10 when all his friends at indian based companies make 1, means that he is rich, has a higher standard of living, and pumps more money into the indian economy. a million people doing this pump so much money into the indian economy they grow and develop and become less improverised and pump out more of the worlds wealth.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[demwing]

47. Thanks!

I feel so much better about my last job being sent to India, my being unemployed for two years, and having to go on foodstamps and visit foodbanks just to feed my kids.

BTW, my kids appreciate the logic as well, and now understand why we had to buy them used, worn out clothing that didn't fit.

You've made us all so much more clear on this issue. Yay for outsourcing!

I almost feel guilty that I have another job. In fact, I hope my job gets butfuc..er..outsourced again.

Happy happy joy joy...

[salin]

96. the supposition is that everyone in the US has enough $ to

invest in these companies. So - all those folks working for minimum wage - shame on them for not having enough extra money to invest - given that this is the ONLY way this phenomenon benefits those folks.

[GRLMGC]

48. and people lose their jobs here

and aren't able to pump money into the American economy. It's not good for us.

[DaedelusNemo]

55. And if you don't make enough to invest, like most people ? /nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

120. So you think it's okay

for the Indian worker to make half of what his American counterpart earns? I don't.

[salin]

133. Not just okay - but "good"

because (if I read the poster's previous post on this correctly) then the investors get a better return and productivity increases.

That is, for those Americans who have enough spare $ to invest it is a good thing and apparently THEY are the only people who matter in the equation since the good for them outweighs the obvious negatives for others.

[fnottr]

142. OR

An American who makes $20 loses his job and it gets sent to Asia or Mexico or somewhere else. Now the average wage in there is $1, so the company creates new jobs that pay $1.1, barely raising the standard of living of anyone. Now there are extra cost associated with moving all those jobs oversees, so the actual cost of the new job might be around $5. The company then might cut it's costs by $2 so they can edge out the competiton and either drive them out of buisness or force them to outsource as well. So now, all together what once cost $20 for the company to produce now costs $5+$2+$1.1=$8.1, meaning that the executives then get to pocked the remaining $11.9, pretty neat deal.....if you happen to be in charge of everything

[Hippo_Tron]

38. Why is universal healthcare a killer?

Last time I checked people would rather have affordable healthcare rather than having expsneive healthcare or no healthcare at all. And no outsourcing is not a good thing for the guy who lives in a small town and has worked in a factory all of his life for $9 an hour and suddenly his job is outsourced to India. The big problem is that, that guy represents millions of guys without jobs and millions of families with no way to pay their bills.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

41. why is healthcare bad? dean, kerry, gephart, ect

healthcare almost ended clinton's presidency had it not been for his skill. affordable for everyone is nice but idealistic. it is a problem for some but the answer is not with the govt. you run on this, you will get swamped explaining how to pay for it. it turns out this doesn't tend to be a winning issue. that guy who was making minimum wage needs to go to a community college and get some more edcuation. we live in america, opportunity is everywhere

[Hippo_Tron]

42. Do you know how much healthcare premiums cost?

$7000 a year IF you have an employer covering half the cost for you. Do you know where that money goes? Into the pockets of insurance company CEOs. We do live in a capitalist society and most of our institutions should be left to the free market. Healthcare is not one of them. Healthcare is a NECESSITY, in a civilized society it should be a right, not a privilage. 50 million people don't have healthcare. That's almost as many people as those that voted for Kerry. Do you REALLY think that they want to hear "it's too expensiive". There are millions more who can barely make ends meet and are in danger of loosing their healthcare. Do you really think that they want to hear "it's too expensive". Not to mention the fact that public healthcare is in the long-run, cheaper than what we have now. Without CEOs profiting off of our healthcare, all of the money that we spend on private insurance now could provide public healthcare to all Americans. Add to that the fact that having somebody see a doctor to give them a heart screening and giving them the medication and treatment to prevent a heart attack is MUCH cheaper than open heart surgery which EVERYBODY with health insurance pays for when somebody without health insurance is rushed to the ER because of a heart attack.

And Clinton never proposed public healthcare and the healthcare plan that he did propose never came close to ending his presidency. The fact that it was destroyed in congress angered people thus prompting them to vote Republican in 1994 because the Democrats didn't deliver on their promise. But even that wasn't why Newt and co won. They won in 1994 because they bought the "family values" issue of gays in the military to center stage. That's how the GOP ALWAYS wins.

I'm not going to respond to that bullshit about how the guy needs to go to a community college because I argue that crap with Republicans all the time.

[DaedelusNemo]

56. Disagree

Not all healthcare plans are equal. People do tend to shy away from overbearing and complicated total-control government programs - properly, i think - but that's not the only option. Are you aware of the plan Kerry proposed? EDIT/ By the way, the Greenberg exit poll reported 78% of the voters calling affordable health care a priority. Done right, it'll go over fine. /EDIT)

Minimum wage doesn't really fit that well with continuing education these days. (You seem pretty blithe about the working poor. Even so, it is cheaper to give them preventive medicine, in the long run, than to deal with them in the emergency room. Affordable health care would in fact save a lot of money all around.)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

64. Healthcare almost ended Clinton's presidency because of his

LACK of skill, not to mention lack of guts and pathological desire to be liked by Republicans.

His plan was too complicated and too buddy-buddy with the same corporate CEOs who are currently ripping off the American people for billions per year.

[greenohio]

91. Clintons "LACK of skill"

Fascinating.

[Hippo_Tron]

95. Clinton arguably has more skill than any living American politician

But Clinton didn't use his talent to accomplish what he was truly capeable of, thus when I look back at his presidency, I look at it with disappointment. Clinton did good things for the country. He could have done great things.

[eridani]

143. What the FUCK do you mean, how will we pay for it?

WE ARE ALREADY PAYING FOR IT, WE JUST AREN'T GETTING IT!

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Geek_Girl]

100. I don't think so

No Bayh for me you just pissed me off. I'm an IT Nerd and my job is in jeopardy as it has been for the past 4 years of being outsourced.

It sucks but I doubt you could understand that judging by your compassionate remark. As far as I'm concerned you can go cheney yourself.:grr:

[DaedelusNemo]

53. Second that motion on all points /nt

[tritsofme]

15. I would support someone like Evan Bayh

or Mark Warner in a heart beat.

It seems some Democrats have a hard on for losing elections.

[CRYINGWOLFOWITZ]

21. it is the dean "democratic wing" thing

once again. fortunatly in the end, moderation and realism will speak. I also think possibly kathy blanco, mike easley, and brad henry

[iwantmycountryback]

25. I'd support Mark Warner

But no way Bayh. Warner's popular in a red state and has made real accomplishments. I don't know what Bayh's done, other than pretend to be a Republican. Indiana's Repub Senator Dick Lugar is more critical of this administration than Bayh is.

[Hippo_Tron]

28. I'd support Warner as well, he's proven himself

Warner pushed a tax hike through a very Republican dominated legislautre, that isn't easy. His abortion stance is acceptable and I think that all of the anti-abortion legislation that passed in VA was with a veto proof majority so there wasn't shit that he could do about it. Of course, I'd prefer to support the man who's picture you display in your signature, but if he doesn't run then I will definately consider Warner and I will definately support him if he's the nominee.

[salin]

35. From what I know of Warner - I would be more supportive of him,

than I am of my own dem senator from Indiana.

[greenohio]

105. Well put.

[w4rma]

22. Where does Bayh stand on these issues?

Free trade with slave wage countries
Gun rights
Control over women's reproductive systems
Corporate welfare
Social Security
Income taxes
Payroll taxes
Was he smart enough to know that the Iraq War was lost before it had begun? Or was he stupid enough to shore up Bush and support his lies?

[Hippo_Tron]

26. Bayh is a lightweight, he won't win

I think that you are sadly mistaken in your comparison of Bayh to Clinton. Bayh wins in Indiana from his father's legacy and by not running to the left on any issue that isn't popular, not to mention that he is loaded so he can easily outspend his opponents. If you look at his last senate campaign, you will see that his challenger had no money, no experience in politics, no help from the NRSC, and on top of it all he was black. Guess who all the bigoted Republicans voted for?

Clinton became governor of Arkansas and later president carrying several "red states" because he was a brilliant man and an extremely talented politician. Bayh hasn't done a damn thing in his political career that's original, important, or that mirrors the brilliance of Clinton in any way. It's not Bayh's centrism that's the problem, it's his averageness. He's about 1/10th of the politican and the man that Clinton is. He won't win red states outside of Indiana (and I wouldn't be surprised if he lost there), because he simply isn't talented enough to convince red state voters to vote for him in a national election.

[salin]

27. woohoo...

Not.

Evan is supported (due to lack of alternative) by many dems in the two regions of Indiana in which I spend most of my time - and he is loved by repubs. Since he dove right (further right than he stood in his first FOUR elections)... just after bush was elected... many in Indiana have presumed it is just his naked opportunism in action.

Be a fan if you wish - but don't expect hoosier dems to necessarily jump on the bandwagon and work to get evan (the lesser bayh) through the primaries.

[Mojambo]

37. Another corporate DLC "Centrist"

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss... (Except for the lack of the imperialist foreign policy)

We could conceivably "get" another Clinton in Bayh, but do we really want one? We need a true powerhouse progressive candidate and an economic platform that SO clearly favors the working class in the red states that it makes it impossible for them to NOT vote for us.

In short, let's buy off their "moral values" concerns by running an economic populist and NOT by picking a candidate that talks like them.

[quiet.american]

43. LOL n/t

[T Town Jake]

44. My choice for 2008. See my sig line - a winning ticket.

(n/t)

[Guaranteed]

45. That's just one state. And he has a long history there.

That's why people re-elect him.

He takes his shit out of that state and he'll get torn down and exposed as a coward like every other DLC whore.

[latteromden]

54. Still wouldn't go blue - we control nearly all of Montana, and it's solid

red.

I'm sorry, it seems like far too many "concessions" for me. I like him, and I have ever since I first saw him speak in the Senate, but not for president. I won't compromise my civil liberties, my rights as a women (while a partial birth abortion ban might be a good thing, there HAS to be an exception for health reasons) or a lesbian (and that means I will not vote for any more candidates who insist on "marriage is between a man and a woman"), or, good lord, he voted for the war. I forgave that mistake twice this election season, and I don't want to do it again.

Then again, if he somehow miraculously takes action against the next, what, are there four now? Three or four wars for oil in the future, I'll rethink it.

[Radical Activist]

57. Anyone can get elected in a red state by being conservative

That doesn't mean you can or should be elected at the national level. What we need is someone with enough skill to get elected in a red state as a progressive. Someone who can have appeal in more liberal areas and moderate areas at the same time. Bayh doesn't have much appeal outside of places like Indiana. He wouldn't make a good national candidate.

[Tinoire]

61. In the DLC's dreams because it will be without my vote. n/t

[ShaneGR]

62. You expect a rational discussion?

Certainly you didn't believe that a rational discussion on the merits of picking a candidate who appeals to heartland voters would take place on this board!

This is DU!

:-(

[Lydia Leftcoast]

65. Candidates who appeal to heartland voters:

Russ Feingold, Jim Oberstar, Paul Wellstone, Tom Harkin, Barack Obama, Carl Levin.

Hmm, I guess you don't have a corporate butt-kissing DINO to win elections in the Midwest.

[ShaneGR]

69. lol

I'm not gonna bother responding.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

72. What, you're saying that these people didn't actually win

and I'm just hallucinating their presence in Washington?

NOTE: Add Mark Dayton to the list.

[greenohio]

85. Uhhh.

All of those are from blue states except Harkin who voted FOR the Iraq war...just like DLC Kerry.

[ShaneGR]

114. Exactly... nt

[proudbluestater]

63. So what. John Kerry beat Bush in a landslide. Gore won, too.

It doesn't matter till selection day when the exit polls get "adjusted" to fit the agenda in the government.

[The Gigmeister]

66. Evan Byah would be an outstanding "Middle America" candidate!

And he would WIN!! He's a good, solid, loyal, old-school Democrat.

But, that's why you'll see him ravished, demeaned, insulted, slandered, and marginalized here by the trolls, disruptors, Greens and kooks.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

67. And promoted to near sainthood by Lord knows whom?

:shrug:

[The Gigmeister]

68. Those who actually want to WIN?

Maybe?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

76. Win WHAT?

This isn't a football game but the future of our country.

Bush is driving this country off a cliff at 80 miles an hour. The DLC wants to slow down to 60 mph (as long as the corporations don't mind), which means that we'll reach the cliff later, but we'll still reach it.

Kerry wanted to slow down to 30 mph.

I'm looking for candidates who have the guts to say "We need to avoid the cliff entirely by changing our course."

[hippiechick]

84. 'Old School Democrat' ??

You ARE joking, right ? :eyes:

Bayh is a useless opportunist who speaks to whatever his audience of the moment believes. The only thing he stands for is himself.

I worked for State Gubmint after dear Gov' Bayh left and holy moly what a farking MESS of corruption and ineptitude. We're still suffering from it today.


:hippie:

[greenohio]

93. corruption and ineptitude

Why do we call ourselves Democratic Underground. Really?

[imabadman]

70. I suppose things could change

but the Senate does not seem like a very good presidential campaign launching pad.

[greenohio]

71. Good post.

Wont go over well here though. We're too busy looking for a cliff to jump off of.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

77. No, the DLC wants to follow the Republicans over the cliff

The rest of us are saying, "But there's a cliff there!"

And the DLCers and their interns are looking back at us over their shoulders and saying, "Don't you want to win?"

[greenohio]

79. Keep that winning, cliff jumping, attitude, .

Bash away on any Dem you don't agree with. Its obviously the winning strategy. Think small tent. Think small cliff jumping tent.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

81. Keep that winning, base bashing attitude

Bash the people who will actually work for and contribute to the Democratic party, the ones who sighed resignedly and supported Kerry despite misgivings, the ones who actually pay attentiont to what's going on.

[greenohio]

83. I haven't bashed them. I haven't said get rid of them.

I AM one of the them. I am far more progressive than the rest of the party. That said, I know that my views aren't the only ones in the party, and that we need a tent bigger than a folded napkin.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

87. Oh, so that's the reason you show up mainly to defend the DLC?

:shrug:

[greenohio]

90. Actually my other posts are ignored. If anyone defends the DLC

they stand out around here.

[Geek_Girl]

102. Then why every time a see a thread

that is criticizing the DLC you always seem to post in their defense?


:shrug:

[greenohio]

104. How did you miss the point?

I post on threads other than the "I hate the DLC threads."

Apparently you don't read those....like thats a surprise.

[Geek_Girl]

110. Your seem to like to put down

Democrats that don't agree with the DLC's platform. Your previous post just confirms that. If your trying to gain support for the DLC your doing a piss poor job.

[greenohio]

116. Who did I put down?

Do you feel "put down?" Really?

[Q]

118. And then he feigns innocence...

...as if he doesn't understand.

[greenohio]

139. Aren't there some Dems who need bashin right now Q?

Or are we on a break?

[MAlibdem]

75. It's NOT about posturing

It's about resolve. It's about a substaintive policy discussion to solve real problems. That's what we need, and that's what people will vote for. We need to run candidates who speak passionately about the issues, know what they believe, and offer solutions to problems.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

78. Thank you! Thank you!

Yes, this country has real pressing problems that the Republicans are only making worse and the DLC types either aren't mentioning or are simply making Republican-lite suggestions about: health care, affordable housing, the hollowing of American industry and the subsequent decline of the middle class, the need to reduce dependence on foreign oil and deal with global warming, media fairness, honest elections, and a host of other things that the DLC somehow doesn't bother with because it's too hung up on pleasing the corporate crowd.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

80. Walks like duck(R), sounds a like duck(R), votes like a duck(R).

But, some are convinced that he's a (D)onkey. I think he's an ass.

[ISUGRADIA]

101. Unfortunately for some people anyone to the right of

Noam Chomsky is a Republican. Have you actually looked at his ratings from interest groups?

People can keep on bashing moderate Dems and demand ideological purity - and we can have a whopping 35 Senate seats to boot.

[dolstein]

122. Here's my problem with Evan Bayh . . .

It's not that he's a moderate. It's that he comes from an elite background and has spent virtually his entire adult life in government. Sound familiar? Our last two nominees have fit this description to a "t", and it has hurt us among the blue coller voters who ought to be our base but have been voting Republican and increasing rates.

The last time we nominated someone from a modest background -- a guy from a town called Hope -- it worked out pretty well. And I think the fact that Jimmy Carter grew up in Plains, Georgia almost certainly helped him among rural voters in 1976.

So here's a thought -- how about nominating the son of a mill worker instead of the son of a senator?

[IndianaGreen]

129. Except that the mill worker in question was part of management

Edwards overplayed his father's "proletarian" background. No problem when he was VP running mate, but he will come under stronger scrutiny as a Presidential candidate.

[IrateCitizen]

136. Goddamn! I can't believe I'm agreeing with dolstein...

But I am in 100% agreement on the patrician thing. Bayh is in the same mold as Harold Ford, Jr. -- another conservative Democrat that people like to gush over on this site.

He's never had to truly "work" a day in his life. He was born into politics, and achieved early success based primarily on his name alone.

We don't need another elitist as the nominee. I'd much prefer that we nominate someone who actually understands the struggles of "ordinary folks", because they grew up with those struggles.

And I'm very taken aback hearing dolstein, of all people, saying something as populist as, "... how about nominating the son of a mill worker instead of the son of a senator?" There may be hope for you yet! ;-)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

124. Who's "we"? And, what do you have against Noam Chomsky?

Apparantly the "we" you refer to already has a majority. The Republicans(R) plus the Republicans(D). So what's your squawk?

[hippiechick]

82. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Jebus Golldarn Rice Crispies on a Pogo Stick ! :mad:

Evan Bayh is a friggin MORON.
Does the name DAN QUAYLE ring any bells ??

Pretty boy
Stuffed shirt
IQ of 12
Living off his daddy's name cause he can't get a real job.


NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO !!!!!!


:hippie:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

88. Hmmm, if that's true, you have to wonder if

the corporatists in the DLC are taking a clue from the Republicans and promoting an empty suit to act as an amiable figurehead for their machinations.

[bloom]

97. or if

it's all just one big corporation, anyway.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jsw_81]

89. "the same position as middle America"

It would seem that "middle America" is awash in ignorance and stupidity. It sickens me that we have to pander to these rubes in order to win a national election.

[WI_DEM]

94. Feingold got more votes than Bush or Kerry too

and is also from a competitive state. Wisconsin went only narrowly to the Dems in both '00 and '04 and I like Feingold's stands on issues more than Bayh.

Also, just because he got more votes than Bush in his senate race doesn't mean that Bayh would win it in a presidential election. Gore always won his elections to the house/senate in TN by big margins and still lost the state when running for president.

[Gloria]

98. UGH.

eom

[purduejake]

103. There should be no compromise on civil rights and equality!

Damn it. And... he does concede to the repukes on many issues. And, how is somebody pro-gay if they do not support equal rights for them? Ugh.

At least Kerry thought gays should be equal, except in what he called their unions (which I disagree with).

[sampsonblk]

107. I'll Never Buy Evan Bayh

Won't happen. I will never vote for him while I am still alive.

[dolstein]

108. If DU'ers hate him, that's good enough for me

I'm convinced that any candidate acceptable to the DU community will be unacceptable to the majority of the electorate.

But still, it's naive to suggest that Evan Bayh could carry his home state in a presidential election. I doubt he could.

My biggest gripe about Bayh isn't his moderate record. It's that he's a senator's son. He went to St. Albans. Sound familiar? Do we really want to nominate the third silver spoon candidate in a row?

[IndianaGreen]

109. I voted against Bayh in 2004

and I will not vote for that sorry piece of shit if he runs in 2008.

Bayh makes Kerry look like Mister Personality!

[greenohio]

117. Did you vote for the repuke?

[IndianaGreen]

126. I voted for the Libertarian candidate

there were no Green or Socialist candidates on the ballot running against Bayh.

[greenohio]

131. Dont they believe in itty bitty gov?

[IndianaGreen]

132. While I share the Libertarian's respect for the Bill of Rights

I reject outright the nihilistic views of many Libertarians and their influence by Ayn Randt's Darwinian philosophy.

[DaedelusNemo]

137. Yeah, there's a whole range

Lots of people say "live and let live" and "government off our backs", want the gov't to be as small as possible while still doing the things we need it for. Relatively few of them go for the (my)property-is-more-important-than-(your)life end of the spectrum. They just don't want to be over-regulated. Which is a good way to split them from the theocrats in their party.

[dolstein]

123. Are you trying to convince us to support Bayh?

Because the fact you voted against him makes him seem that much more appealing.

[IndianaGreen]

127. If you want to vote for a man that is not even liked by Hoosier Dems

and that the only reason he wins is because the GOP either does not run any viable candidate against him, someone like Lugar, or runs someone so extreme to the right that he scares even many of the GOP rank and file.

Our heartburn with Bayh is that he was a fairly good Governor, but once he went to the US Senate he was contaminated by the DLC Beltway filth, and he became the asshole that he is today.

Let me point out something you won't find in any of your voter guides. At the last Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, all the Democratic office holders and activists were upstairs rubbing elbows with one another. Bayh was all alone sitting at the bar on the first floor. Talking about someone aloof and disconnected! Bayh makes Kerry look like Mister Fuzzy Feelings!

[Hippo_Tron]

119. Bayh's Republican opponent was black

I have a feeling that every bigot in Indiana voted for Bush and for Bayh.

[IndianaGreen]

130. Blue eyes trumps brown eyes every day in America!

You are probably correct in that being Black is still a turn off to GOP voters even if the candidate is a Republican.

[LiberalFighter]

121. There is a difference in winning against a strong candidate vs a weak one

There is a difference between a candidate with finance vs one with not enough

There is a difference between a candidate with strong name recognition and someone from out of nowhere or only known within a smaller area.

There is a difference between a candidate that is the son of U.S. Senator and a candidate without a strong political background.

[salin]

134. One more....

there is a difference between a candidate who is actively backed and promoted by a party vs one whose most visible party support between Indy and Bloomington (eg across republican Johnson and Morgan counties) was a string of small signs along the highway going towards bloomington. I don't know that most republicans even knew who Scott was...

[LiberalFighter]

138. The Republican Party probably didn't want their voters to know

There is also a difference between a candidate that has 100% party support vs a split within the party due to a primary election.

[Clarkie1]

125. Another senator? Have you considered Wes Clark?

[Crunchy Frog]

140. I'm sure he'll do wonderfully when he runs in '08.

So well in fact, that my Green party vote won't be missed in the slightest.

I'm not "middle America" anyway so it's not like I actually count, but I have decided that I will no longer be voting for candidates whom I don't believe in.

[elshiva]

141. Please not Bayh

"He still is pro-choice, pro-gay rights but not to the point at which he will lose votes in red states. He wont scare southerners and rural voters like various northeasterners."-- Obvious dig at Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich and John Kerry's strong stand on these issues. Not promising to us queers.


"Oh and he held the same job as Bill Clinton, chairman of the DLC. As much as DU doesn't like the DLC, they did give us Clinton and offer a better way to win red states."
I'll answer with another quote:
"Bill Clinton didn't win because he moved to the center , he won because he was Bill Clinton."- Howard Dean
I like the big dog's charisma...but now is the time for us to be democrats, for land's sakes...