by hilzoy
Steve Clemons writes:
“Word has reached me that at Barack Obama’s Hawaii retreat, Evan Bayh’s chances to find himself the next Democratic VP candidate have moved to better than 50/50.”
With any luck, Steve is wrong. If Bayh’s votes for the Iraq war, for the bankruptcy bill, for the horrible FISA bill, and against the amendment that would have stripped telecom immunity from it, aren’t enough, consider this quote from 2007:
“You just hope that we haven’t soured an entire generation on the necessity, from time to time, of using force because Iraq has been such a debacle. That would be tragic, because Iran is a grave threat. They’re everything we thought Iraq was but wasn’t. They are seeking nuclear weapons, they do support terrorists, they have threatened to destroy Israel, and they’ve threatened us, too.”
Ugh.
And besides all that, he’s boring.
Just in case, you can contact the Obama campaign and join this Facebook group, which aims to get 100,000 members opposed to Evan Bayh.
don’t forget the likely loss of a Senate vote!
I understand that people have some serious reservations over Bayh, but I’m not sure I understand all of the hysterics. People seem to be acting as though there’s a perfect choice for Obama to make here.
The fact of the matter is, there isn’t. He has several good choices. None of them are perfect. With any of the good choices he does have, there would likely be many such issues to focus on as negatives.
In my opinion, he could do a lot worse than to pick Bayh.
I’m going to have to change my handle.
I understand Bayh is pretty good for an Indiana senator, but I don’t like losing a Dem senator from Indiana, and he’s not good as a national Dem. And, perhaps just as important, his Iraq vote hurts the judgement narrative. Please, no.
P.S. “The Artist Formerly Known As Ugh” has a certain ring to it …
you see a boring hawk, someone else sees a jumping cow
I tend to agree with Jake a bit.
That, and I’ve been telling people for weeks, if not months, that my money is on Obama taking Bayh so I’ve sort of resigned myself to the choice.
But as Jake said, there is no clear alternative.
For example, there has been some talk about Janet Napolitano or Sebelius, but I think putting a woman on a ticket with an African American might be a bit too much to ask of the American people at this point in time. It’s going to be hard enough to get Barack in, despite all the advantages the Dems have.
Other than Bayh, who would the ideal choice be?
Reed? Kaine? Dodd? Webb? Biden? There are issues with each. I might prefer some more than others, but I don’t see it as that big a deal.
Now, if I thought for a moment that Obama would be brave enough to tap someone like Feingold, well then, I’d be pushing with all my might. But I don’t see that happening.
I guess to phrase my post another way, if you’re so down on Bayh, hilzoy, who’s your favorite? Aren’t you at least a little bit obligated to say so?
If you already have and I just missed it, my apologies in advance.
Let me see if I’ve got this straight: Bayh demonstrated a spectacular amount of bone-headed stupidity on the most important foreign policy issue of the day. He has made no apology and has given no indication that he was grievously mistaken. He has refused to take responsibility for his massive errors in judgment.
And you want this idiot to be one heart beat away from the Presidency?
I really don’t understand this. Our country went off and brought about the deaths of a million people for nothing. And instead of punishing those responsible, we want to make them Vice President. Is there no frack up big enough to make us say “Gee, maybe you don’t get to have a major role in foreign policy without some indication of learning and contrition”? I mean really: if you think Bayh is a good candidate, where is your red line: how big of a policy disaster can one advocate for while still being a good VP candidate?
And you want this idiot to be one heart beat away from the Presidency?
No. Speaking for myself, I very clearly said that I didn’t.
I mean really: if you think Bayh is a good candidate
See above.
My sense of all of this worry over Bayh is that it is really overblown. We are talking about the Vice Presidency here. Why should anyone care if Bayh gets tapped to take a position as an essentially powerless bureaucrat for the next 8 years? If one is satisfied that he helps Obama strategically – of course I understand there are arguments that he might not – that ought to be enough really. The notion that he will hurt Obama’s messaging is not entirely unfounded but I doubt it would ever be as much of an issue as some people seem to think. If Bayh is on board, he will do and say all the right things. His reward will be that he gets to attend State gunerals and wait for a tie in the Senate for the next 2 cycles. I don’t particularly like his politics but I find it hard to get so worked up about whether he gets to be VP or not.
If there is one thing I’ve learned about the Obama camp is that they RARELY (if ever) leak to the press. My guess is that Clemons’ source has no idea what s/he’s talking about. We’ll know soon enough.
Eric, why not Richardson? He has exec experience, he helps w/ the Hispanic vote and the Rocky Mountain/Southwest vote while not alienating any whites not already disturbed by Obama’s race, he doesn’t lose another Senate vote, and he’s neither terribly boring nor overwhelming.
Hilzoy, I don’t really care about Bayh’s policy stances, they’ll matter about as much as Hubert Humphrey’s did — even if Obama uses him to run foreign intelligence, I don’t see Bayh wanting or Obama allowing a Cheney-esque chop-shop. And I can see the pluses for Bayh: he’s tight with the Washington Democratic establishment, which regards Obama as an uppity /cough/ outsider, and whose support he will desperately need to govern. He has executive experience. He’s on the right Senate committees for our current problems: banking/housing, armed services, and intelligence. He supported the Iraq war but not Rumsfeld, much like John McCain.
But here’s the thing: he’s a national unknown. People don’t even know how to pronounce his name (and let me add that Birch Bayh is one of the sillier names in American politics and will add to the “wuss” image that haunts Democrats). He won’t bring in independents, because anybody still undecided has never heard of him.
If I were choosing, I would choose someone who helps the ticket. If Obama chooses Bayh, it will be because he is looking ahead to governing. That’s actually pretty typical of him, but I suspect he should focus a little more on the here and now. But like others said, I don’t see any perfect choice out there, and it’s Obama’s call.
Call my a cynic but if Obama chooses a white male conservative hawk then he is inviting even more people to assassinate him (and I bet there will be serious attempts in any case).
On the bright side, the Veep actually has less power to guide policy than a Senator. (Cheney aside.) If Bayh is removed from the board, maybe Indiana will elect someone a little less right-wing.
I know, it’s Indiana. But I can dream, can’t I?
Crafty Trilobite — Rumor is Richardson’s had … zipper problems. Just sayin’.
I’m not sure who I support for VP. I do think that Bayh is well down my list. Partly it’s the Iraq vote, partly it’s the fact (see the quote about Iran in the post) that I don’t think he’s learned from it, and partly it’s things like the bankruptcy bill.
I also think he’d be politically bad.
I’d prefer Sebelius, for instance. Or Clark, or Dodd.
Slightly off-topic but do the same limitations concerning born (not naturalized) citizenship apply to the VP? If not, what would happen if a president with an ineligible VP dies (think of an Obama/AHnold ticket)?
Clark! Clark! Clark! Clark! Clark!
My other preferred choice is Sebelius, but I’m pretty sure that’s not going to happen.
Hartmut, Veep was originally the runner-up for President, and so by implication ineligible unless qualified to be President. The Twelfth Amendment changed that provision and made the implication express: “no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
there’s only one possible VP candidate who rejected and opposed the Iraq War from the start, is a former Clinton supporter, is outside the Washington mainstream, has impeccable military and foreign policy credentials, actively supports the grassroots Democratic movement, looks good on TV, is white, male, southern, Catholic, half-Jewish, and has no reservations playing the “attack dog” to Obama’s “above the fray” new politics stance.
and that’s Wes Clark.
Re: Sebelius, see my comments above. Do you really think now is the time to try for a two-fer ticket? I think Obama is going to have a tough enough time getting many Americans to accept the notion of an African American, but you want to push them on gender too. At the same time?
McCain would be happy with that choice.
Eric, why not Richardson?
He’s just not charismatic. He fails to life the pulse at all. And you could run into similar problems with pushing too many bigot buttons on one ticket.
I know that I might sound like a timid, cynical soul on this, but I honestly think that a white male is probably what Obama needs to reduce the irrational fear factor on the part of voters.
I mean, there is no reason that Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida should be as close as they are now. If anyone out there thinks that the closeness is due to anything other than race/religion (Muslim!), there’s a bridge not far from my apartment that I’d like to sell ya.
Speaking of which:
But here’s the thing: [Bayh’s] a national unknown. People don’t even know how to pronounce his name (and let me add that Birch Bayh is one of the sillier names in American politics and will add to the “wuss” image that haunts Democrats). He won’t bring in independents, because anybody still undecided has never heard of him.
Ah, but he is not unknown in Ohio and Michigan and western parts of Pennsylvania. His neck of the woods so to speak. And if Obama can sew up that triumverate, the White House is his. That’s kind of big.
If Bayh is removed from the board, maybe Indiana will elect someone a little less right-wing.
I think they’re likely to elect a republican- at least, that’s a pretty significant possibility. ie someone considerably more right-wing. This is Indiana, even if they elect a Dem it’s going to be a Baucus, not a Feingold.
That’s my primary argument against Bayh (losing a Senate seat). Secondary is that I dont see what he brings, other than a)some baggage and b)a better shot at Indiana.
I like Clark- foreign policy & military experience, plus his ties to the Clintons make him something of an olive branch. Downside to Clark is not having a lot of regional play, he won’t add points in any of the major swing states the way that a Kaine might.
I know that personal considerations make it impossible, but I have long thought that Obama’s best VP choice is the obvious one: Hillary Clinton.
First, Dems don’t lose a Senate seat.
Second, PUMA types get to choose whether they are actual Democrats, or Lieberman-style ‘independent Democrats’.
Third, Hillary as COO to Barack’s CEO may be the most effective way to get good policies actually implemented.
Fourth, an Obama-Clinton victory would make Fat Rush and Little Sean’s heads explode.
Too bad it won’t happen.
— TP
Not to be too superficial, but Obama/Bayh just sounds wrong.
Obama/Bayh just sounds wrong.
and way too easy to make pun of
Even assuming Sibelius and Napolitano are too female to be palatable with those fearing the new, there’s no reason to go with a Iraq-hawk, Iran-Hawk, Bankruptcy-Bill-promoting, Wall Street DLC hack like Bayh – or like Clinton.
Not to mention that Clinton isn’t interested in opening the books on the Clinton Library, or on facing accountability for the many real and recent scandals that Obama refused to pursue. Or that Clinton cut an ad for McCain to use against Obama, which would be insupportable from a veep nominee. (Two words you didn’t hear from anyone on air this spring, and would: Hugh Rodham. He’s Roger Clinton with a law degree).
What’s wrong with Strickland?
Or Clark, assuming the Dems can face the inevitable Mau-Mauing from the media because he once used the same phrasing in his answer as was posed to him in the question?
Or Tester, or the Montana Governor whose name escapes me?
Richardson may be a human charisma vacuum, but Obama has a charisma surplus, and at least he’s worlds better on the issues than Bayh.
I’m sure I’m missing a dozen good choices, none as dumb as Bayh – or Clinton.
Oh yeah, Bayh would be just great. A twofer in fact: 1) Fatally blur Obama’s message by putting a conservative warmonger on the ticket. 2) Give up a Senate seat that may not be won by another Democrat for a long time.
C’mon, Barack, you’re smarter than that.
Clinton would be OK- IF Bill could somehow be disappeared. Any ideas on how to accomplish that? (Oh, and somebody can actually promote her as a person who can “get things done” after she ran a mind-boggling trainwreck of a campaign? Wow.)
I write this as someone whose actual name was something of a burden in middle school: how did he survive all the Bye Bayh jokes?
Heck, maybe it gave him tremendous reserves of inner strength, a la ‘A Boy Named Sue’. Or, more realistically, made him like promoting wars with Iraq and Iran.
Re: Sebelius, see my comments above. Do you really think now is the time to try for a two-fer ticket? I think Obama is going to have a tough enough time getting many Americans to accept the notion of an African American, but you want to push them on gender too. At the same time?
Speculation is high at 538 that the speaking schedules being announced for the convention suggest it might be Sebelius.
She brings a number of strong advantages to the table:
1 – Midwestern moderate able to appeal to voters in a Red State, heading off possible attacks on a theme of “San Francisco values”. Not that Fox News and the GOP won’t try to portray her as the most librul governor evah, but meh.
2 – Very good working relationship with Obama if you believe what you read on blogs.
3 – No loss of a Senate seat.
4 – If Obama announces before McCain’s VP pick, he pre-empts any cred + media buzz that McCain might try to obtain by choosing a female VP.
The long-shot pick I keep reading about is Brian Schweitzer. It would be kind of interesting to have a VP who speaks Arabic. You never know when it might come in handy, like say when Iraqi politicians are giving interviews with German magazines.
It would be kind of interesting to have a VP who speaks Arabic
Obama/Arabic Speaking Guy = Dhimmitude!!!!
But seriously, what about Reed? He seems, to me, to be the best compromise. But I’m not privy to the dirt dug up by the vetters.
Obama/Bayh just sounds wrong.
Obama/Kaine sounds even worse.
— TP
I have no doubt that Obama is losing some voters because of race (at least partly offset by some he’s gaining because of race), but I seriously doubt that a significant number of those voters can be regained simply by having a white male as VP. I also believe there’s a huge overlap between people with race-based misgivings and those with gender-based misgivings, so picking a woman won’t make things worse.
As for the PUMAs, do we have any evidence that they really exist in numbers corresponding to their visibility in the media? And how many of those we do see are actually McCain supporters?
*sigh* I’m listening to NPR, and they’re talking up the anti-Obama book, complete with referring to the author as “Dr. Corsi”. Maybe things are hopeless.
I have no doubt that Obama is losing some voters because of race (at least partly offset by some he’s gaining because of race), but I seriously doubt that a significant number of those voters can be regained simply by having a white male as VP.
Considering that Obama himself is 50% white, I suspect you are correct. I think there used to be something called the “one drop rule” which explains the logic behind this kind of thinking. Apparently it applies to tickets, not just individuals.
*sigh* I’m listening to NPR, and they’re talking up the anti-Obama book
of course they are. there’s nothing the media loves more than controversy, and the GOP is great at supplying it.
a pity that the Dems won’t step up and supply a little controversy of their own. there’s plenty of fodder out there.
a pity that the Dems won’t step up and supply a little controversy of their own. there’s plenty of fodder out there.
Unfortunately, we saw what happens when the Dems aren’t even trying to kick up controversy in the Clark fiasco- statements will be taken out of context and wilfully misinterpreted, and then attacked by the media and GOP as divisive our out-of-line.
Im trying to imagine the media crapstorm if a major Obama surrogate and possible Veep said that McCain hadn’t always put his country first…
I’m kind of partial to Biden.
Anybody but Gephardt.
Considering our experience with the Obama FISA group, a hugely popular anti-Bayh online group will be just the thing to seal Obama’s decision to select Bayh as his running mate.
I have no doubt that Obama is losing some voters because of race (at least partly offset by some he’s gaining because of race), but I seriously doubt that a significant number of those voters can be regained simply by having a white male as VP.
It depends. I’m not talking about the overt racists that say stuff like, “I’ll never vote for a n****r” – which I have, unfortunately heard more than once. Those people are unredeemable. This election cycle at least.
I’m talking about the people whose racism is softer and more subterranean, and leads to a vague sense of unease with Obama – the foreign sounding name and all (and no, these people aren’t swayed because his mother is white, that has never really worked in America).
I do think that a plain vanilla white male would help to calm those anxieties.
I also strongly disagree with the notion that the sexist and racist sets sufficiently coincide. What was it that John Lennon said about women?
“the Montana Governor whose name escapes me” = Brian Schweitzer. I still have my fingers crossed for him.
Bayh is too colorless, Kaine too untested. I love them both to death, but not as veeps.
But I like Biden. Or, why not Hillary? She’s hard working, smart, very knowledgeable. She proved willing to man the phone lines at 3 AM.
Perhaps she can work an agreement with Barack then, and take the night shift.
That’s it, if I were Barack I would signal to everybody that Kaine, Bayh are on the vp short list, then at the last second pick Hillary.
How much time have we got?
Less flippantly, I firmly believe that there are many excellent and substantive reasons that Clinton would be a terrible choice. I won’t go into them here, because it just gets tiresome and divisive and because I don’t think she’s being seriously considered – nor is she putting on the full-effort ‘Gobama’ push I’d expect if she wanted the nod, or thought she had a chance.
I will limit myself to briefly noting that Senator Clinton is about as bad on the issues as Bayh, and with all kinds of problems of her own as a candidate to boot. And I repeat my assertion that there cannot exist videotape of the veep nominee saying McCain is more qualified than Obama.
Schweitzer !!
*hoots and hollers*
And he’s a soil scientist to boot.
Dirt First!
I am praying for Sebelius. I seriously can’t find anything wrong with her, and she perfectly compliment everything Obama is about. As they say, history favors the bold…
Thanks, Eric, I didn’t know Bayh was popular in the Rust Belt beyond Indiana. You’re right about how important that could be. And frankly, it’s a region that has been underrepresented at the top of the party for too long.
BTW, the word is “triumvirate,” and it means “three people” (well, literally three men), so I’m fairly sure you want “triad,” or “threesome” instead. “Trifecta,” if you’re in a playful mood, or even “hat trick.” 🙂
TP: “. . . an Obama-Clinton victory would make Fat Rush and Little Sean’s heads explode.”
We can always hope.
I think the polls would have to be even closer than they are for him to pick Hillary. (Obama just doesn’t want to deal w/ Bill — and hard to argue w/ him if that’s so.)
Obama may pick Bayh for the very fact that he is boring and safe — unlike my senator, Joe Biden, who has his Loose Cannon Moments. The Big O has also shown that he’s not afraid to upset his base.
Finally, if he weren’t so confident in himself, I think Obama might lean toward Biden after the Georgian crisis has shown how quickly and unexpectedly shit happens.
Clark, dipshits.
obamaclark.com
All this BS about Bayh voting for the Iraq War. First of all, they voted for Bush to use force if necessary-having been told a bunch of lies. But most important, Obama never voted against the war because he wasn’t even in national office at the time. It was easy for him to speak out against the war from his secure liberal base in Chicago. However he never had to make the tough decisions or stick his neck out. In fact at every turn he has taken an easy out (voting present, flip-flopping, etc.) Obama is a lightweight pouff, as they say in England. Bayh or anyone else, would look presidential next to him.
It was easy for him to speak out against the war from his secure liberal base in Chicago.
And yet so few did, from any district.
he never had to make the tough decisions…In fact at every turn he has taken an easy out
More than I’d like, but let’s not forget that he refused to join the gas tax holiday pander during the height of the primary battle, and refused to disavow Wright until Wright directly attacked him personally. Others here can doubtless give other examples. Americans say they like politicians to show integrity and consistency, but in practice pandering and flip-flopping are rewarded, and people like Kucinich and Paul who take principled stands poll in the single digits. Obama has shown more guts and consistency than most serious contenders, which may be damning with faint praise, but that’s the world we live in.
Certainly he has flip-flopped a lot less, and on fewer serious issues, than McCain, even just comparing their last few years.
bedtimeforbonzo you’re so lucky to have biden as your senator. i’m stuck with alexander and corker. woo hoo. i wanted biden as president from the moment i saw him back in 2007. and i haven’t given up hope that obama will pick him as veep. yea biden has a mouth but he sure knows what he’s talking about and people listen. without biden i don’t think obama has a chance. the world can change on a whim and obama is gonna need someone who knows his/her stuff. who better than biden? no one. speaking of which…why obama? i’m a democrat who is wondering what the heck the dems were thinking when they picked this guy. do they wanna lose in nov? i went for clinton in our primary which she won handily. granted i am from one of the most conservative states (i.e appalachia) in america but still, she won. picking biden would assure my dem vote in nov (or if he picks clinton and makes biden secretary of state.) otherwise i have my oppositions and am strongly considering mccain. the scariest scenario: mccain/lieberman or mccain/pawlenty vs. obama/kaine or obama/bayh. i hope none of those four are picked. i’d have to write in myself. hey maybe i can let my voice be heard and write in joe biden.
“I’m sure I’m missing a dozen good choices, none as dumb as Bayh – or Clinton.”
Chris. Dodd. Chris Dodd. ChrisDodd. Chrisdodd. Chris the Dodd. The Doddster. Dodd, Chris. Senator Dodd. Senator Chris Dodd. That dude, Dodd.
Jimmimy Christmas, why so little mention of Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut?
Gary — I like Dodd too.
Interesting commentary on the Democratic party that we have such a hard time making a list of good (from a progressive POV) VP choices. Gee, I wonder why? Even Dodd has problems.
I like Sebelius, still. You know there will be obligatory ‘We Demand You Show Us Your Cookie Recipies’ type stuff from our fabulous Press, but I have the feeling that she would be hard to humiliate in the customary way – she seems terribly self-posessed and dignified, and she is, after all, a successful pol from *Kansas*.
A Western pick would make a lot of sense. I don’t know that much about Schweitzer, but maybe him. The Dems need to moult, and looking West makes sense ideologically.
Bayh is just about the most boring, inappropriate, and mediocre person on the short list. Obama is not going to win IN anyway, and besides, I don’t think a pres. candidate’s VP is so important-reigonally in how people decide to vote for for pres. I don’t have data to back that up, but I just get the feeling that it’s a overrated factor.
Actually, Obama should choose Colin Powell. It would blow everybody’s mind, and they would win.
Obama should choose Colin Powell.
You heard it here first!
Or Sam Nunn of Georgia.
Or Sam Nunn of Georgia
Not just no, but hell no. Not only was he one of the driving forces behind that Unity08 nonsense, but he’s almost as old as McCain.
NOT Bayh! No one who voted for the Protect America Act of 2007 — look it up — is fit to serve as VP. (Which also rules out Webb and McCaskill, if anyone is still supporting them.)
I am a strong Sebelius supporter, mostly because she seems to think, act, and govern more like Obama than any of the others. Particularly she has the ability to reach across party lines to win support WITHOUT compromising her own positions, one of the things I like most about Obama.
But there are other good choices, all with more weaknesses, but bearable. (Some are not. Nunn is not just too old, he was the architect of DADT — which rules him out.)
I’d go along with Biden. Okay, he talks too much — so do I, btw — but he is solid and has been a very effective surrogate. Put him second.
Dodd and Clark are tied for third. Dodd has two weaknesses — his father’s corruption, which would be used against him, and that he would be replaced by a Republican Senator. (Our margin will probably be strong enough to overcome that, but its still a concern.)
Clark isn’t exciting to me, but the only weakness I know of is that picking him seems to concede the myth that Obama is weak on foreign and security policy.
Richardson would be a GREAT choice — on any other ticket. He’s experienced in every branch of government, is intelligent, and has an ‘aw shucks’ charisma. But — for those who worried about a ‘two-fer’ ticket — he’s Hispanic and proudly so, despite the name and appearance, and while I think Obama will overcome racism, that combo might make it explode. (I HATE to say that, but I think it is true.)
Another “I hate to say it” involves Napolitano, whose appearance and unmarried status has given rise to questions about her sexual orientation. As a bisexual I’d love to see our second gay VP (the first was Sen. Wm. King before the Civil War, who was the long-time lover of our only gay President, Buchanan) but I think this would be a problem — as Crist would be for McCain.
I keep hearing Schweitzer’s name mentioned, but never with any reasons except he’s a Westerner and pro-gun, but he might have good qualities that I don’t know about.
And while I’ve never liked the idea of a Republican ticket-balancer like Hagel, what about — for a real long-shot — Lincoln Chaffee, who renounced the Republican Party and who is a centrist liberal?
Just a few suggestions. (I didn’t mention Hillary because space does not permit to give the reasons why not.
Prup and all,
There is no mention of Chet Edwards after a mini boomlet in his stock. Did something happen? Here’s a link about him
Someone mentioned Richardson has potential problems with women and Steve Clemons has run a couple of posts asking questions about certain situations.
I think Schweitzer is mentioned not simply because he is Western and pro-gun, but because he created the strategy that got people like him and Tester elected, so it’s not that he has these characteristics, it is that he seems to know how to use them in an effective way.
I’m curious, is there a potential African-American candidate out there (disregarding the far fetched possibility of Colin Powell)
Here’s a link to a OpenLeft/Chris Bowers piece that has a number of possibilities. Interestingly, here is the CNN piece on possibilities and the overlap between the two lists is rather small.
We don’t need to lose a Senate seat.
The obvious candidate for Veep! The man who was made to be Vice President??
ALBERT GORE
Think about it “Vice President Al Gore” Doesn’t it sound just right?
And he’s perfect. He’d be an electric choice but he’s so boring personally he won’t overshadow Obama.
And he’s smart, not mistake prone, and we probably know just about everything there is to know about him.
It would be an Obama landslide with Al Gore. Please, Barack, at least ask him!!!!
Another reason Biden makes sense: We have a Democratic governor in Delaware, and she’d pick a Dem to replace him.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Biden’s son, Beau, who is currently Delaware’s attorney general, winds up replacing his dad in the Senate in the long run.
Also, with McCain and his crew throwing as much anti-Obama crap up against the wall and seeing what sticks, I think it would help to have a media-friendly, been-there-done-that, nothing-would-faze-him surrogate as Biden.
Finally, and this might be too much tea-leaves reading, but Biden almost seems to be in hiding right now.
I don’t know the first thing about Beau Biden, never heard of him before. Maybe he’s a legislative genius and a liberal firebrand. But dynasticism is a trend that worries me even when it is the express will of the voters, and the phenomenon of
Dodd need not be replaced by a Republican. Democrats have a veto-proof majority in the Connecticut legislature and could pass a law like a few other states have (Wyoming, for example) requiring senatorial replacements to be of the same party. Don’t know why they haven’t yet, especially with the earlier speculation about Lieberman taking some administration post.
Sorry about that – my comment appears to have gotten cut off. The rest of it was supposed to be “appointing a dynastic heir doubly so.”
Speaking of Bayh, this from the afterview piece on the Clinton memos
For years, Penn and his wife, Nancy Jacobson, have been close advisers to Indiana Senator Evan Bayh. Jacobson put together Bayh’s finance team during his aborted presidential bid, and previously served as national finance chair for the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). Penn was the DLC’s longtime pollster and worked for Bayh during his last Senate race. The couple has also been associated with Third Way, the centrist think tank Bayh helped organize in 2005 that many in Washington viewed as a vehicle for his presidential run (the DLC obviously belonging to Clinton).
Bayh gets major play in today’s New York Times for being on, and possibly even atop, Obama’s vice-presidential short list. He has many attractive qualifications. But in choosing Bayh, Obama would be pairing himself with someone awfully close to Mark Penn. Would it bother Obama’s people to have Penn whispering in their vice president’s ear? The official answer, conveyed by Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor, is “We aren’t commenting on the VP selection process.” The unofficial answer is, “You bet it would!”
Taylor Marsh makes the case for Biden here.
Given Bayh’s close ties with Mark Penn, why would anyone consider him acceptable for the VP slot? Penn is really really bad at his job and has already torpedoed one major Democratic leader’s candidacy despite considerable advantages. If Bayh wasn’t smart enough to figure out over the past several years that Penn is really bad news, how could he possibly be trusted to make good decisions? If he’s gullible enough to buy into Penn’s sweet talk, won’t he be vulnerable to other sweet talking idiots…you know, like the idiots who pushed for the Iraq War and are pushing hard for a war with Iran right now? Oh, wait, I guess he is…
Bedtimeforbonzo, I never heard of Taylor Marsh until she attracted attention for her reprehensible proto-PUMA behavior in the primaries, so I for one am hardly likely to click that link unless you at least clarify that she makes a compelling case for Biden at the link. Because, for me, her name just conjures bitter memories and a reputation for political judgement that’s distinctly sub-par.
I think that’s the first time in months I’ve been to Taylor Marsh’s site. I’m glad she retreated from the “No Quarter” path of craziness she was on.
Warren,
To be honest, despite her strong pro-Clinton stance, I was not familiar with Marsh until clicking on a link provided by Real Clear Politics today.
Seems like being provocative is her schtick.
Evan Bayh appears on Face the Nation this Sunday with Tim Pawlenty, who I’m pretty sure has been McCain’s secret choice for months now.
I’d like to watch it and see how he performs. If Bayh stays true to form, it’ll be like Pawlenty and Kaine appeared side by side on Fox News: Pawlenty in attack-dog role, Bayh refusing to criticize McCain and even complimenting him at times.
I’m curious, is there a potential African-American candidate out there
Oprah … wait for it… Winfrey! (I don’t think she’d be interested, but that combo would make Hannity/Limbaugh AND PUMA heads explode! A boy can dream….
“If Bayh stays true to form, it’ll be like Pawlenty and Kaine appeared side by side on Fox News: Pawlenty in attack-dog role, Bayh refusing to criticize McCain and even complimenting him at times.”
Which is why I’d rather see Biden opposite Pawlenty.
Excuse my ignorance.
But somebody please catch me up on what or who PUMA is.
Party Unity My @$$ — “We’d rather destroy the Democratic Party than vote for Obama!”
Thanks, Jeff.
Geez, as someone who still wishes Hillary Clinton had won the nomination but will now vote for Obama, I really don’t think there are that many PUMAs out there.
Hell, I even voted for Dukakis (my first presidential election).
Someone asked for potential black veep prospects: Haven’t been able to think of any but I’d like to see Harold Ford resurrect his career somewhere along the line.
If Obama loses, it will be because he and his base distance themselves from positions like that of Evan Bayh. Obama turned out to be right on Iraq because there were no WMD and because Bush obligingly fought pointlessly and with no discernible progress until the eventual surge, producing justifiable fatigue and dissatisfaction across the board. If there had been WMD and if the war had been adequately staffed and prosecuted from the beginning, the current paradigm would be completely different, the debate would now be between Hillary and McCain as to who would have fought the better war with the Kos-Left out on the fringes, hanging with the Religous Right and Obama would be a footnote. The progressive left is the beneficiary of Bush’s incompetence, just as the Reagan Right benefited from Carter’s equally poor judgment and incompetence.
If Obama loses, it will be because he and his base distance themselves from positions like that of Evan Bayh.
I find this point interesting because I generally don’t have a notion of the base moving. Its position is fixed and the candidate moves to or from it.
mckinneytexas,
There are two problems with your assertion. First, there was a great deal of evidence that indicated that going to war with Iraq made no sense before the war began. Much of this evidence was available to the public and even more so was available to Senators like Bayh.
In addition, the assertion that the war would have gone much better if only Bush hadn’t been so incompetent has been refuted in The Incompetence Dodge.
The idea that Obama is in thrall to the “Kos-Left” would be news to the Kos-Left.
Does anyone think there is any truth to the speculation about Obama picking John Kerry as his running mate?
Right now, I don’t think I’d be surprised by any choice he settles on — Clinton, Bayh, Kaine, et. al.
But Kerry seems like a confounding back-to-the-future prospect.