Surprisingly Strong Case for Bayh as Veep (cause that is not the direction in which I was leaning)

[FrenchieCat]

Not that I have a choice in the matter.....but reading at the following link,
a poster was pretty damn convincing....if you ask me.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6627833&mesg_id=6628042

[WatchWhatISay]

1. Number one reason it won't happen

His conservative record doesn't fit with Obama's promise of change

[FrenchieCat]

2. But did you read the reasons at the link?

[WatchWhatISay]

3. Yes, and now I've reread them

And still think my point supercedes them

[FrenchieCat]

4. Still a good case, wouldn't you say?

Prior to this, I couldn't really think of quite as much of a reason......on the positive side that is.

[depakid]

5. That posters 1st premise is wrong

Obama doesn't have a reasonable shot at winning Indiana in the first- so it would stupid to handicap saddle the ticket with Bayh for that reason.

[FrenchieCat]

6. I'm thinking 50 state strategy.........and 8/9/08 polls doesn't seem to put it out of reach......

Indiana poll
Added: 8/9/08

John McCain 40%
Barack Obama 39%
Bob Barr 7%
Unsure 10%
Other 3%
Source http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/indiana.html

[depakid]

7. Indiana requires an over 20% swing on election day from 2004!

That doesn't happen- no matter what some cheap poll might say.

Now, forcing the GOP to spend money in otherwise safe states isn't always bad strategy, but it's foolish to do much more than that- particularly where, as here, it adversely affects your chances in more winnable states.

[FrenchieCat]

9. The beauty of it is that we shall see, won't we?

different candidates, different times. I'm not 100% convinced that we can win Indiana, but I'm convinced that Obama/Bayh would certain up the ante on a 20 point swing versus Kerry/Edwards '04....that's for sure.

[Egnever]

8. Please god no

There are very few that he could pick that would make me completely lose faith in Obama.
Bayh is one of them.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Did you read at the link? Just checking.

What I'm saying is that I'm keeping my mind open on every single person that Obama could/will pick...even, heaven forbid, Hillary. That's the kind of individual Obama is, and am trying to be a better person by following his example on this open mind concept.

[Egnever]

11. I would take Hillary long before Bayh

No amount of propaganda on him is going to make me like him one little bit. Might as well make Harold Ford your running mate.

Bayh is everything I dislike in politicians personified. There must be people in this country somewhere that like him but I aint one of them.

[Egnever]

12. From the link

"will be seen as someone who could assume the presidency on the first day"

Sure if you say want to bomb Iran or something.

http://firedoglake.com/2008/08/04/why-bayh/

" Bayh is well to the right of both Obama and the party at large. He not only voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq in 2002, he was an honorary co-chairman of the Committee to Liberate Iraq, along with Joe Lieberman and John McCain. If those associates weren't bad enough, the group's non-Senatorial members included Bill Kristol, James Woolsey, and McCain foreign policy guru Randy Scheunemann. Even in this Congress, Bayh voted for the relatively weak Levin amendment calling for redeployment but against the more hard-hitting Feingold amendment, which Obama and Clinton both supported.

Going through the rest of his voting record, it's clear that Bayh sticks out like a sore thumb in the Democratic caucus. He has a 50% NARAL rating, he voted for a flag-burning amendment and bankruptcy reform, he's "undecided" on a school prayer amendment, he supports John McCain's proposal to boot Russia from the G8, and he supported the Kyl-Lieberman amendment that Obama made a key part of his critique of Clinton."

[Benhurst]

13. Exactly. The campaign slogan would have to be revised to

Change Nobody Takes Seriously.

Surely, Bayh is not being considered.