Bayh & '12 & '16

by Jerome Armstrong, Mon Feb 15, 2010 at 07:01:31 PM EST

Yes, for Evan Bayh, its always about the Presidential calculation. He's running for re-elect in 2010, and then running as an incumbent Senator, and defending his votes between now and 2016?  He doesn't like the way that looks. Much better to be out of DC, position from the outside agitator for the 'change' vacuum, and why he's the one to fix the broken system in DC.

Uniter not Divider

We're All In This Together

"I don't want to spend the next year or the next four years re-fighting the same fights that we had in the 1990s. I don't want to pit Red America against Blue America, I want to be the president of the United States of America."

Now, as an aside, those fights were some of the few times that we've actually gotten some progressive change around these parts in the past few decades, but that's another entry.

The notion that Evan Bayh, who was #2 on Obama's short-list for VP, could challenge Obama in 2012? 

Let it never be forgotten that Bayh is a perennial Democratic golden boy, the keynote speaker at the party’s 1996 convention, scion of a political dynasty, proven vote-getter in a red state and, in his own mind, prime presidential timber. For him, then, the question was: even if I win, who needs six more years of dealing with these people, after which I might be 60 years old and trying to pick up the pieces of a damaged political party brand?

And don’t get him started on the Republicans! I think we have to take Bayh at his word when he quite justifiably expressed disgust not only with the jobs bill fiasco, but also when he lashed out at the Senate Republicans who opportunistically voted down a bipartisan budget-balancing commission they had previously endorsed.

Quitting the Senate was a no-lose move for the presidentially ambitious Bayh, since he can now crawl away from the political wreckage for a couple of years, plausibly alleging that he tried to steer the party in a different direction -- and then be perfectly positioned to mount a centrist primary challenge to Obama in 2012, depending on circumstances.

The idea that Bayh could run a primary challenge to Obama from the center must strike the fear of John Glenn into Barack.

No, this is about Evan Bayh jumping out of the gate, a short three years from now, running for the '16 nomination outside of DC. He's read the conservo-populist tea leaves and will have a new jingle for us by then too.

That said, I don't advise it be out of mind that Bayh would be open to a great centrist uprising that nominates his self to take ahold of the Presidency through a nonpartisan National Unity party draft. You've heard about them, right? He would.


Tags: Evan Bayh (all tags)

Comments

41 Comments

4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
I know

I know, MyDD is really slow right now compared with all the other sites that zing on the tubes. Its' a real pain, and is an issue that's going to be dealt with soon. So thanks to all of you that come here and put up with it in the mean time.

For those of you that want more info; its basically a database issue, which has more to do with the scaling and lack of yet-done optimization of database queries for dashboard and profile page, than it does with anything else. You log in, and the db calls begin. It will be optimized, and then we will move to Ruby 1.9 and things will vastly improve.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 07:15PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: I know

Testing.

by bruh3 2010-02-15 08:42PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Would you be interested

in a new engine ?  

 

Being developed by a friend who assures me that he knows how to scale (he has a software company, so I take him for his word; I can barely spell scaling myself).  He showed me a beta version ~ looked very nice!

by Ravi Verma 2010-02-15 11:16PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: Would you be interested

No, but thanks!  I am sure that once the attention gets placed on the optimization, it will do fine.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 11:22PM | 0 recs
Partido verde
I don't understand

your last paragraph.

<blockquote>That said, I don't advise it be out of mind that Bayh would be open to a great centrist uprising that nominates his self to take ahold of the Presidency through a nonpartisan National Unity party draft. You've heard about them, right? He would.</blockquote>

I think you're missing a word. Are you suggesting that Bayh would be open to a 1864-esque National Union candidacy as long as he's at the top of that ticket?

by Charles Lemos 2010-02-15 08:02PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: I don't understand

Are you suggesting that Bayh would be open to a 1864-esque National Union candidacy as long as he's at the top of that ticket?

I didn't have that specific election in mind, just the general use of the term to describe the sort of unity ticket that nations try at times to get beyond partisanship. I don't think its even that remote a possibility.

But, have you read "Relecting Lincoln"?  A terrific book I finished while down in CR.

 

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 10:52PM | 0 recs
Partido verde
RE: I don't understand

Well, we in Colombia are taking another route - trying not to elect politicians but rather non-traditional political actors. It's worked well on mayoral level but not above that level though granted the second most important post in the country is the mayor of Bogotá and that office has been held by progressives or the center-left since the mid-1990s. And two of the four mayors come from non-traditional political backgrounds.

Colombia is a very technocratic state (Uribe has post-graduate degrees from Harvard & Oxford) and you'd have to go back to the 78-82 administration of Turbay Ayala to get a President who didn't have at least a master's degree but now we are seeing numerous non-traditional political actors with advance degrees running for office. But unlike in the US, where you get people like Bloomberg, Perot, Whitman, Romney and Fiorina (i.e. non-traditional political actors but all from business world and very wealthy) we are seeing people with say the profile of a Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren running for office. Sergio Fajardo's candidacy which is picking up steam is a case in point. He's an university professor with a PhD in Mathematics who was a very successful mayor of Medellín. He was elected as part of civic movement, independent of political parties.

In Peru, Jaime Bayly who is an openly gay TV talk show host is considering a run for the Presidency there in 2011 at the head of a civic movement.

I suspect that's the change that needs to happen here. Al Franken is an excellent example of the sort profile I'd like to see more of run for office. Not just his politics (which I adore) per se but that profile. Not a lawyer, not a traditional politician but a successful and informed citizen. I'd love to see Elizabeth Warren run for office.

I suspect you're right that a National Unity government is unlikely in the US though Bloomberg might be able to lead such an effort. The problem in the US is that you all still debate issues that elsewhere have been settled. No where but in the US is a evolution even a matter for discussion but here in the US social conservatives are very different and primordial beast. They don't just derail policy, they derail conversations.  It is sort of stunning say on gay rights how quickly Latin American society moved from one of outright discrimination to a more open and accepting stance. Yes there are critics but politically speaking the centre in Latin America is larger and encompasses a more progressive stance. And as such, the consensus on an issue can move quickly. In the US, the religious right seems to be an immovable anchor weighing down the country on social issues. They won't budge and their numbers are too large and too concentrated in certain areas to allow a more progressive view to coalesce. 

I think the Senate is also a problem. The institutional has its own internal flaws but ultimately the problem remains that it over-represents rural interests. 

Nope, I haven't read Re-electing Lincoln. Thanks for the tip though. Almost done with Rifkin's The Empathic Civilization and I have Sorkin's Too Big to Fail to still finish.

by Charles Lemos 2010-02-15 11:59PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Unrelated question

Have you read "The China Study" by Colin Campbell.  I was very impressed by the book, and the implications of it's conclusions on HCR.

by Ravi Verma 2010-02-15 11:19PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: I don't understand

I found that sentence really confusing, too.

by marchingorders 2010-02-15 11:19PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: I don't understand

I concur, after looking at it again; but if there's a gist, go with it.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 11:23PM | 0 recs
Partido verde
or

you could clarify it because I think your point is an important one.

by Charles Lemos 2010-02-16 12:01AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Out on a Limb

I don't dispute that this is Bayh's thought process... but I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking "good luck with that" - it's hard to see how this plan is going to play out anywhere successfully, even if Obama winds up a sad one-termer (another prospect that I think has been inflated more than is likely to occur). Bayh's hallmark - in combination with his telegenic qualities and generally uninspiring attempts to take center stage - is an inability to make the leap to national powerhouse. That, among other reasons is why being #2 on the Veep list is as telling as it is... and I think, still, he has no idea how to move from 2 to 1... on any list.

It's possible that, with the right talent behind him, he can repackage his message and his style for 12 or 16... but he'll be stuck with 2 to 6 years of holding pattern on his resume and a general perspection that he can't outrun himself. I bet he thinks packaging - and being associated iwth problems in DC - is his problem. It's not, and he's probably about to spend a lot of time fixing the parts that weren't the parts needing fixing. I'm as much or more of a sucker for a pretty face as anyone... but Bayh is a good reminder that we need more than looks... and he's never delivered that other part. I can't see him starting now.

by nycweboy1 2010-02-15 09:28PM | 2 recs
Shadow_head_small
Pure Fantasy

As someone who was interning in Gov. Bayh's office during the summer of 1996 under the man who eventually became Bayh's Senatorial Chief of Staff (Tom Sugar), I can say that the Keynote Speaker credit only looks good on paper.  For anyone who remembers that speech, it was florid, whiny, and absolutely unmemorable.  Sugar didn't want him to do it because he knew it would be a disaster.  It was.

With all that said, Bayh has to be living in a fairyland if he thinks there are people out there clamoring for an Evan Bayh Presidency.  As a Hillary supporter during the primaries, I would develop a pronounced tic every time someone mentioned Bayh as her running mate, and I almost went off the deep end when he was mentioned for Obama, too.  What a disaster that would have been!

Evan Bayh does not have the qualities needed to be president.  He blew with the politcal wins, and he happened to make a pretty successful career out of it.  As far as legacy goes, he really wasn't a very good Governor, and I don't think he's going to be remembered as a great Senator, either.  He needs to fade away to some job that gives him some sort of fulfillment.  After the outright betrayal I feel about his actions today, I hope he never runs for anything again.

by FitnessNerd 2010-02-15 09:55PM | 2 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: Pure Fantasy

fade away... well put. In order to be a candidate for '12 he needs to go the Palin route. But he ain't got "it".

That dosn't mean we won't see him on Fox or CNN as a talking-head and some point.

by vecky 2010-02-16 03:54PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I don't see it

By 2015 he'll have been out of office for a long time. What's he going to do, join a think tank and write a book about cutting Social Security? I don't see his base for a presidential campaign. He's not a charismatic speaker either. He would have zero political career without the family pedigree, which means nothing outside Indiana.

I sure hope Obama wouldn't entertain the thought of replacing Biden with someone like Bayh.

by desmoinesdem 2010-02-15 10:07PM | 1 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: I don't see it

I always figured if Biden was replaced it would be with someone like Clinton or Schweitzer.

by FUJA 2010-02-15 10:25PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Wow

I didn't think it was possible but your article made my dislike and disgust for Bayh increase exponentially... and this is from someone who will never vote for Bayh.... not even for dog catcher.   

 

Bayh....  Indiana's golden douche.

by FUJA 2010-02-15 10:22PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Not likely

I think its unlikely Bayh runs as an independent or anything else in 2012. However I will say this, if the November elections of 2010 result in very large GOP victory as I suspect it will, if the economy doesnt rebound by early 2011, Obama is done. He wont have a chance....barring the GOP putting up some nut.

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-02-15 10:24PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
like Palin?

Midterm losses are natural. I'm still not convinced the GOP will take control of either house. The mood has shifted back from the Scott Brown victory.

The problem for the GOP is they can only win a little on being the party of no. Sure, it will help this midterm. But after a while, they will have to produce their own ideas. And so far, they can't, as the country still blames them for putting us in this hole.

Regan suffered losses in his forst midterm and won reelection in a alndslide. Clinton lost control of both houses in his midterm, the worst loss yet, and won reelection in a landslide.

Everybody likes to count Obama out, but the numbers don't support such a conclusion... three years out.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-02-15 10:56PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: like Palin?

Did you look into the recent NYT's poll?  I haven't had the time to blog it, but it lays out clear what is going on with Obama and his top line numbers. Basically, issue by issue, he does very poorly, and his general re-elect is also very low-- numbers in the low 40's (except the military-related ones). But, when asked whether Obama is to blame, the number is single-digit. Basically, a year is too early to throw a President under the bus. That said, he's not making the case yet for re-election.

The predominant mindset among his fans is that the Republicans will nominate a terrible, Palin-Romney like candidate; or maybe even Gingrich. I think this is a sort of lullaby of sorts, and its better to expect they nominate someone like Thune or Daniels, because they likely will.

If you want to believe that they will go down the route, then I've had enough of Palin, I'm rooting for Gary Johnson to win their nomination; that would really make the day.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 11:06PM | 0 recs
Partido verde
Gary Johnson would be interesting

But the guy that worries me is Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels.

Frankly if there is a Republican whom I admire in terms of competency (not politics) it is Jon Huntsman but he was sent into exile in China. 

Daniels isn't well known but I think he could take it if he wants it. Pawlenty strikes me as a fool and I think Huckabee's moment has come and gone. Romney has cash and that makes him dangerous but his flaws to those inside the GOP are still the same. David Brooks likes John Thune but I suspect the mood of the country is someone not currently in Washington.

Marco Rubio is the other character I watch. He actually frightens me. Rubio might be better served to run for Florida Governor. Go to DC and you get painted as part of the problem. 

by Charles Lemos 2010-02-16 12:13AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: Gary Johnson would be interesting

Huntsman was a real threat. But now he's on the A-team.

Daniels might be a threat, but his lack of charisma along with is term in Bushs OMB should be enough to sink him.

Brown and Rubio are real threats too... granted we won't know until early 2011 how the GOP feild shapes up.

by vecky 2010-02-16 04:04PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: like Palin?

Did you look into the recent NYT's poll?  I haven't had the time to blog it, but it lays out clear what is going on with Obama and his top line numbers. Basically, issue by issue, he does very poorly, and his general re-elect is also very low-- numbers in the low 40's (except the military-related ones). But, when asked whether Obama is to blame, the number is single-digit.

Yes, I saw the article. For those reading along, the full results are here. I share the conclusion of the article that the numbers give a mixed message... at best. People give Obama subpar approval on the economy, but nary a single one blames him, and he remains likeable, which is key. But my question is one of context: are these number what we would expect? What are the categorized approval numbers of other popular Presidents during their difficult times who succesfully sought reelection? It has long been noted that Obama's approval has been eerily paralleling Regan's. But I have no breakdowns on Regan's approvals. Do you? I don't think any conclusions can be drawn without historical context. Gallup has similar numbers. And note in the CBS poll the near even split between more spending and deficit control.

More than a lack of context, I fear we are losing perspective so far away from the midterm. I cannot make any substantive conclusion about these CBS numbers and Obama's reelection chances any more than I can look to the latest Gallup numbers and note Obama's sudden and substantial rebound in approval to 53% (+13 spread) these past two days. In other words, I feel the Gallup numbers don't mean Obama is saved any more than the CBS numbers mean he is doomed in 2012. As long as the economy is in trouble, and there is strong evidence that it will persist in trouble for a long time to come, Obama has a fight on his hands.

The predominant mindset among his fans is that the Republicans will nominate a terrible, Palin-Romney like candidate; or maybe even Gingrich. I think this is a sort of lullaby of sorts, and its better to expect they nominate someone like Thune or Daniels, because they likely will.

If you want to believe that they will go down the route, then I've had enough of Palin, I'm rooting for Gary Johnson to win their nomination; that would really make the day.

You make (the awful lot of) "us fans" sound so third person. Anyhow, no, I realize that the GOP nominating an unelectable candidate is not a blessing we can count on. Nor can we count on them running an awful campaign even with a viable candidate.

But again, I feel like 2012 is an eternity away. Right now, I feel like my efforts are best spent helping Obama succeed.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-02-16 01:05AM | 1 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: like Palin?

I don't have a reference for the Reagan numbers, and really think that its only with Clinton and Bush that we get any sense of comparison. And from what I recall about Bush, his numbers the first 9 months, prior to 9/11, were in a very similar situation. Overall likability up still, 50ish favorables, and not being blamed/held accountable.

'96, and reversing Clinton's slide, was all about the improving economy. If we have that same sort of turnaround before '12 that we did before '96, Obama will win.

Its probably between year 2 to 3 that the accountability takes hold.

My take on the 'fans' are those that lack the critical disposition to separate their adoration of Obama the person (mostly from their campaign experience) from what they express on these boards.

Maybe, maybe, the GOP is ready to repeat something like Goldwater in '12, but what they've done in the near-term, with VA, NJ, MA statewide races points to the opposite conclusion, as does their '10 recruiting.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-16 10:03AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
The GOP circus meme

I'd like to note that you hear that eminating from Daily Kos and MSNBC. I've never heard it coming from the White House. I agree that portraying the GOP as weak and hapless is self defeating.

Yes, the WH pursued a quixotic quest for bipartisanship. But I think it is hard to argue that the strategy of the WH and Congress are not shifting away from bipartisanship.

* * *

As for being a fan...

My take on the 'fans' are those that lack the critical disposition to separate their adoration of Obama the person (mostly from their campaign experience) from what they express on these boards.

the counter argument could just as easily be made:

My take on the 'fans' 'detractors' are those that lack the critical disposition to separate their adoration dislike of Obama the person (mostly from their campaign experience) from what they express on these boards.

I think we are all doomed to allow our personal opinions of Obama to get in the way of our analysis. All we can do is try.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-02-16 03:56PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Two years out

Clinton and Reagan both had an economy that was exploding with growth and fast bringing down the unemployment rate.  Obama will likely be stuck with a 9% unemployment rate as the 2012 campaign season heats up.  No President in modern history has been reelected with an unemployment rate that high.  The closest was Reagan in 1984, with 7.2%, but he was credited for bringing inflation down from 18% in 1980 to around 3% in 1984. 

by Kent 2010-02-16 02:48AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
I thought you were going to say something intelligent

I was surprised. I was going to ask what you did with the troll Kent. Here was an a prima facie normal, non-trolling comment. Then I got to this part:

No President in modern history has been reelected with an unemployment rate that high.

Um... FDR?

FDR was reelected, like all four times, with unemployment much, much higher than currently faced by Obama. And before you cry that such was in the past, the economy hasn't been this bad since then.

In fact, FDR was never able to bring unemployment down until WWII.

 

by NoFortunateSon 2010-02-16 03:45PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: I thought you were going to say something intelligent

That's an interesting note. Do you know what the numbers were, or where did this info come from?

Also, they have adjustd unemployment calculations, so I'm not sure its a straight up comparison.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-16 04:00PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: I thought you were going to say something intelligent

I don't know if it will ever be possible to make a straight up comparison, but if it is not, then there are too few data points, and any assessment of electability based purely on a U-3 or U-6 statistic must be tossed.

In fact, the last time unemployment was this high since the Great Depression (10.8% during Regan), Regan had no trouble getting reelected. So there are even greater flaws in the theory that a specific number will spell doom.

U-3 and U-6 unemployment during the Great Depression.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-02-16 05:29PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: I thought you were going to say something intelligent

That's in '82, and there's a 4% drop by the time of the '84 election rolling around too.

 

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-16 07:25PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
Reagan had an economy that exploded with growth

and had several key accomplishments like fundamental tax restructuring to tout.  Obama has nothing like this. 

by Kent 2010-02-17 07:49AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
FDR created key programs that linked millions of voters to him

and the Democratic party for years.  The voters remembered what he did for them despite high unemployment.  Obama has given us nothing but a big dose of "uh, uh, uh, uh".  FDR led and got things done.  Obama is just a loser. 

by Kent 2010-02-17 07:43AM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: like Palin?

What your ingonoring is the fact that voters are pissed at Washington and those currently in office. It stands to reason that voters will look to vote aginst incumbents this fall. If one actually believes that the current mood and economy favors the incumbents and the controlling party, that woudl jsut be a display of ignorance.  Voters dont have to like the GOP. but the fact is, if they are pissed at the guy in office now and they feel that the party in general is irresponsible, they will vote them out.

 

 

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-02-16 01:08PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
A primary challenge for a popular President?

What a peculiar line of thinking.

Let's look at the present situation: HCR in peril and stalled, unemployment at 9.7%, and some notable missteps and wobbles in this first year. Yet the current presidential approval (not favorability, approval) is at 53% in gallup.

53% approval is a benchmark of sorts, as it was a 53% popular vote win that gave Obama the landslide electoral victory.

So matters would have to deteriorate far worse before any legitimate challenge (i.e., not Kucinich) would have to be taken seriously.

Strange things have happened in politics.

I understand it's entertaining, but I find the notion a bit... distatseful. Maybe I'm missing the point of the diary.

In the mean time, I'm busy helping and hoping this president succeeds, and worrying about whether Joseph Biden will be up for reelection in 2012, rather than hoping he fails and lining up primary challengers.

by NoFortunateSon 2010-02-15 10:48PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: A primary challenge for a popular President?

Maybe I'm missing the point of the diary.

It wouldn't be the first time.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 10:54PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
We're still processing this

here in Indiana.  At first I was really angry.  But honestly, this isn't a huge shock.  Bayh wanted to announce retirement in 2008 but held off.  He doesn't want to be a senator.  By waiting until the day before petitions are due to drop out, Democrats will not have a primary for the seat.

Which leads to the good news.  Republicans already have one person who has submitted enough signatures to get on the ballot.  Dan Coats and John Hostettler, the two Republican "front-runners," are both having trouble getting signatures.  They may not be on the primary ballot.

This means the Indiana Democratic Party will potentially get to choose their strongest candidate (one of our southern Indiana blue dog congressmen) while the Republicans are stuck with a third-tier candidate.  Had Bayh announced retirement two weeks ago, Mike Pence would likely have run and been a shoe-in for the seat.

This could work out well for us.

by Vox Populi 2010-02-15 11:04PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: We're still processing this

By the way, my guess is that Bayh runs for governor again in 2012, a post from which he hopes to run for president in 2016 as a DC outsider.  He's not staying out of politics.

by Vox Populi 2010-02-15 11:05PM | 0 recs
4a2fab88-ed3b-47a4-8f14-3ec8a24504ac_normal
RE: We're still processing this

I'm sure he's been calculating it for some time. His going for Gov makes sense.

by Jerome Armstrong 2010-02-15 11:08PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
RE: We're still processing this

Hostettler does not have enough signatures? Any link?

Obama made two big blunders..nominating Biden to be his VP..now the Senate seat from Delaware is lost...the second blunder was Salazar's nomination, and the Dems likely are loosing that seat too! Obama should have picked a governor as a running mate, and left Salazar alone. Those two blunders are probably the margins between a Dem controlled and GOP controlled Senate, and with the selfish and greedy Ruth Bader Ginsburg still hanging on as though Bush is still in the White House, it may be a margin of difference between a right-wing court and a balanced court..the greedy geezer will likely retire or croak when Sessions is the Senate Judiciary Comittee Chairman or when we have a GOP President! This perfect storm began in July 2008!

by Boilermaker 2010-02-15 11:46PM | 0 recs
Shadow_head_small
From Politico

Now Bayh finds himself the subject of scorn from Democrats, who accuse him of abandoning his party and his colleagues at a time when they desperately need him to help save their suddenly imperiled majority in the Senate.

 

“He’s finished,” said one Democratic political consultant active in national races. “His party needed him to stay and fight, and he ran away. People won’t forget.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33006.html#ixzz0ffvHW7Fx
Evan Bayh's political career is finished, folks... He might get to be governor again, but national office?  Forget it!
by LordMike 2010-02-16 12:50AM | 2 recs
97250_45
Good bye, bluedog!

The powerful and all-knowing left wing of the Democratic Party is flexing their muscle, killing bills and frightening off Democrats. We're SO awesome!

by QTG 2010-02-16 07:21AM | 1 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------