Campaign 2008

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

The Democratic nominee will either be Ed Rendell or Evan Bayh.

 

The Republican nominee will either be Mike Huckabee or John McCain.

 

These predictions are invalidated, of course, if none of these people run. I'm certain at least 3 of these 4 will.

 

And Smitty sits out an election...

[snuffbox 0]

Evan Bayh will get no further than a Dick Gephardt. The Dems should have seen what a charisma-vortex from the Senate is capable of in 2004. Ed Rendell has about as much chance as Jim Doyle...which is none.

[SuperJerk 0]

Evan Bayh will get no further than a Dick Gephardt. The Dems should have seen what a charisma-vortex from the Senate is capable of in 2004. Ed Rendell has about as much chance as Jim Doyle...which is none.

 

Yeah, nothing shows you're a uncharismatic loser like getting elected 5 times in a place your party hasn't carried since 1964. Evan Bayh was the extremely popular tax-cutting, budget-balancing governor of Indiana for 8 years. He's also been a good senator, with vast experience in foriegn policy from working on the Intelligence and Armed Services committees. In addition, he's supported teachers and has been critical of the mistakes of the Iraq War. He's a family man with no ties to lying spouses, extramarital affairs, or multiple divorces. And most importantly, he won't get painted as a far-left looney the way Russ Feingold and Hillary Clinton inevitably will.

[snuffbox 0]

I didnt say he was an 'uncharismatic loser'. Hes proven himself as a succsseful candidate for Senate, seems like a handsome enough gent, and does ok for himself on the stump trail. Unfortunately, he has only slightly more charisma than Gore & Kerry...he just exhudes 'regular', and that is not a trait that ever fares well on the national scene. There are many potential '08 Dems that have less charisma than Bayh, and several with more, but his pure vanilla image simply will not resonate with voters across America.

 

Bland Senator with a dynasty to build upon makes for a poor Presidential candidate.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Evan Bayh will get no further than a Dick Gephardt. The Dems should have seen what a charisma-vortex from the Senate is capable of in 2004. Ed Rendell has about as much chance as Jim Doyle...which is none.

 

Yeah, nothing shows you're a uncharismatic loser like getting elected 5 times in a place your party hasn't carried since 1964. Evan Bayh was the extremely popular tax-cutting, budget-balancing governor of Indiana for 8 years. He's also been a good senator, with vast experience in foriegn policy from working on the Intelligence and Armed Services committees. In addition, he's supported teachers and has been critical of the mistakes of the Iraq War. He's a family man with no ties to lying spouses, extramarital affairs, or multiple divorces. And most importantly, he won't get painted as a far-left looney the way Russ Feingold and Hillary Clinton inevitably will.

 

What are you, his pimp?

[Guest Felonies!]

Too bad Mark Warner isn't running; I wanted to see the battle of blandly handsome centrists who are sure to take back our White House.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

hey you went back to the Oprah picture that I thought was Lil Bow Wow

[SuperJerk 0]

I didnt say he was an 'uncharismatic loser'. Hes proven himself as a succsseful candidate for Senate, seems like a handsome enough gent, and does ok for himself on the stump trail. Unfortunately, he has only slightly more charisma than Gore & Kerry...he just exhudes 'regular', and that is not a trait that ever fares well on the national scene. There are many potential '08 Dems that have less charisma than Bayh, and several with more, but his pure vanilla image simply will not resonate with voters across America.

 

Bland Senator with a dynasty to build upon makes for a poor Presidential candidate.

 

 

HELLO?????

 

Seriously, though, Bayh is enough of an unknown that his current image is irrelevant. If his campaign emphasizes his time as a successful governor and his expertise in national security, he could easily take the lead as a reasonable alternative to the polarizing Hillary or the inexperienced Obama. Bayh has something the Democratic frontrunners are sorely lacking: ACCOMPLISHMENTS. This job's too important for learning curves and on-the-job training. Bayh might not fire up the liberal base the way Jerry Brown or Howard Dean could, but I actually want to win for once.

[Art Sandusky 0]

Bernie Sanders in 2012. I don't give a shit about 2008.

[snuffbox 0]

That could happen if the Right continues to refuse admit that the Democrats got votes on Tuesday.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I think Russ Feingold's chances are improving. He can say "I didn't vote for this war, and now that the American people have exerted their will, we're finally getting out", etc.

[Guest Felonies!]

Yeah, he can say that, but "Hi, I'm Russ Feingold" would negate that.

[snuffbox 0]

Obviously he wont get the support of people that get their 'news' from Fox, Czech. But I fail to see how Americans with a functioning brainstem will automatically link Feingold with the terorists.

 

He has the most integrity & political courage of any Dem candidate, and is probably only surpassed by Obama for personal charisma.

[Guest Felonies!]

Where did I link Russ Feingold with terrorism? I just don't think he's going to get out of the primaries, even though I like his ideas every now and then.

[snuffbox 0]

The GOPtoadie crowd tends to suggest Feingold is in cahoots with the terrorists, it is the image of him that they try to put forth. It seems to be the only negative idea that people might get instantly from a "Hey, Im Russ Feingold" introduction.

 

He'll be bringing his office-hours tour to a nearby town in a couple weeks, Ill probably stop in to let him know that The Czech Republic likes some of his ideas.

[Guest Felonies!]

I'm not a GOP toadie, so the idea that a Jewish guy from Janesville is trying to bring down the United States by assisting Islamic radicals has never crossed my mind. I just figured people will see him as too liberal, even though he does seem to display more fiscal responsibility than most.

[snuffbox 0]

As far as liberal spending goes, I really think that the past decade has changed the perceptions in the minds of Americans of Democrats/Republicans. The GOP tried lying about tax cuts & spending, and the voters werent buying it this year. I'm not sure the 'liberal' tag will work as well in 2008. All this can change easily in the next two years, of course.

[gWIL 0]

Evan Bayh will get no further than a Dick Gephardt. The Dems should have seen what a charisma-vortex from the Senate is capable of in 2004. Ed Rendell has about as much chance as Jim Doyle...which is none.

 

Yeah, nothing shows you're a uncharismatic loser like getting elected 5 times in a place your party hasn't carried since 1964. Evan Bayh was the extremely popular tax-cutting, budget-balancing governor of Indiana for 8 years. He's also been a good senator, with vast experience in foriegn policy from working on the Intelligence and Armed Services committees. In addition, he's supported teachers and has been critical of the mistakes of the Iraq War. He's a family man with no ties to lying spouses, extramarital affairs, or multiple divorces. And most importantly, he won't get painted as a far-left looney the way Russ Feingold and Hillary Clinton inevitably will.

 

QFA

 

From Wikipedia, "He was re-elected governor in 1992 with the highest percentage of the vote in a statewide election in modern Indiana history."

 

I didnt say he was an 'uncharismatic loser'. Hes proven himself as a succsseful candidate for Senate, seems like a handsome enough gent, and does ok for himself on the stump trail. Unfortunately, he has only slightly more charisma than Gore & Kerry...he just exhudes 'regular', and that is not a trait that ever fares well on the national scene. There are many potential '08 Dems that have less charisma than Bayh, and several with more, but his pure vanilla image simply will not resonate with voters across America.

 

Bland Senator with a dynasty to build upon makes for a poor Presidential candidate.

 

This totally untrue. I met Bayh the week before Election day (he was in South Bend supporting the now Congressmen elect Joe Donnelly

whose campaign I was working for) and he give the keynote speech at a fundraiser dinner and was quite simply awesome. He hit Bush really hard but came across as regular guy instead of "some crazy liberal".

 

A Bayh/ Obama ticket would be a sure fire wnner.

 

I like Russ Feingold a lot, but he stands no chance.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

[Russ] Feingold's 2003 income tax return showed two home mortgages and ownership of an $8,000 1998 Buick.

 

Uh oh. Looks like Feingold may have some skeletons in his closet.

 

He's gonna have to prove that that LeSabre wasn't a lobbyist gift, and prove it fast...

[Dobbs 3K 0]

[Russ] Feingold's 2003 income tax return showed two home mortgages and ownership of an $8,000 1998 Buick.

 

Uh oh. Looks like Feingold may have some skeletons in his closet.

 

He's gonna have to prove that that LeSabre wasn't a lobbyist gift, and prove it fast...

 

Being that he's from Janesville, which basically exists due to a GM plant, he'd better own at least one GM vehicle.

[SuperJerk 0]

I'm just amazed he's owned the same car for 8 years.

 

I'm not totally anti-Feingold, because I respect his positions on a lot of issues and he's probably a swell guy, yada-yada-yada...but I'm not terribly interested in losing another presidential election. Just as stubborn as the "Republicans loose when they're not conservative enough" there's also a "Democrats loose because they're not liberal enough" crowd. Neither is correct. People on the extremes of politics usually alienate more voters than they win over, and Americans who don't vote usually hold the same views as those who do.

 

Beyond the fact that I think Bayh stands a better chance of winning than Feingold, I just think Bayh represents my views better and has more, more relevant experience that would help him run the country. The fact that I think he's more electable is just one of many reasons I will support his candidacy.

[snuffbox 0]

Yeah, a ticket with two Midwest Senators will really go far.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I just think Bayh represents my views better and has more, more relevant experience that would help him run the country. The fact that I think he's more electable is just one of many reasons I will support his candidacy.

 

You're probably right that Vanilla Bayh stands a better chance of being elected...but what about him "represents your views better" than Feingold? Just curious.

[gWIL 0]

Yeah, a ticket with two Midwest Senators will really go far.

 

They'll get the usual blue states plus a huge chunk of the midwest, more than enough to win. Obama on the ticket would also help bring out the minorities. Name a better ticket.

[snuffbox 0]

Any ticket that doesnt featuere all Senators (who havent been elected to the Presidency since 1960, and before that 1920) and represents more than one region of the country.

[gWIL 0]

One region of the country doesn't matter that much, because they both appeal to vastly different population segments. Bayh could turn some of the reddest of the red states, blue and Obama would be great for keeping the Democratic base. Again, let's see a better ticket.

[snuffbox 0]

Politically speaking, not necessarily my preferences...Feingold/Clark, Obama/Clark, Clinton/Schweitzer, Feingold/Richardson, Gore/Feingold, Gore/Clark, and many other combinations of these and other names.

 

Republican pairings that would dine upon the bizarre pairing of two Midwest Senators...McCain/Giuliani, Romney/Frist, McCain/Huckabee, Giuliani/Huckabee, Romney/Rice, McCain/Thompson, etc.

[gWIL 0]

There's no way the religious right would allow Giuliani or Romney on the ticket. Frist is too much like Bush. McCain would match up well against them, though.

 

Feingold will be no where near the ticket, having two divorces kills any shot because of the kind of people who vote on 'family issues'. Clinton is to polarizing to end up on the ticket and Gore's not running.

 

A "bizarre pairing of two Midwest Senators" would easily capture the normal blue states and get quite a bit of the midwest including Ohio. Again enough to win pretty easily.

 

Edit: Plus: the media LOVES Obama so a Democrat would get some postive media coverage for once.

[snuffbox 0]

Yeah, I just dont see my discussing politics with someone that thinks a two Midwest Senators ticket will win on the national level going anywhere productive.

[gWIL 0]

Just refute this statement: A "bizarre pairing of two Midwest Senators" would easily capture the normal blue states and get quite a bit of the midwest including Ohio. Again enough to win pretty easily.