WA-Gov Ras. poll - Gregoire by 6

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...

Gregoire (D)- 49
Rossi (R)- 43

Numbers are almost identical to last month's poll.  Numbers sound good to me.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 14:31:06 PM CDT

Good to see

Gregoire is solid.

She probably had the smartest endorsement of the year when she came out for Obama the day before the Washington caucuses.  

---

by: Ron @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:19:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not Lyda Green

Green announced she isn't running for re-election this year.

---

by: TXObserver @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 14:53:13 PM CDT

Alaska Succession

Apparently, the third in line is appointed by the governor.  From a 1997 opinion from the Alaska AG's office: "Under the Alaska state constitution, the Lieutenant Governor succeeds the Governor. If that is not possible, then the Alaska statutes provide for a third person previously appointed to fill the office of Governor until a special election is held. Governor Knowles has selected Attorney General Bruce Botelho as that person."

---

by: TXObserver @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 14:57:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Interesting

Thanks; I never would have thought of (nor had the time or energy for) searching AGOs. I wonder if Palin already has a designee, or if she would do so in that interim period between November and January. If the AG still gets the nod, the current AG is Talis Colberg (appointed by Palin, so assumedly an R).

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:11:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Google search

I just Google searched "alaska, succession, governor".

---

by: TXObserver @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:20:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yep, it's Colberg

From what I have read, Talis Colberg was indeed designated by Palin as the sucessor to Parnell should he leave (which is looking likely)

---

by: Adam Brickley @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:02:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Missouri

The Governor made the appointment of Jean Carnahan in 2000 after the Mel Carnahan/Ashcroft election.

Has it changed?

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:08:10 PM CDT

Nevermind

Open seat. ok.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:08:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think it's likely going to be...

Biden. And even though Gov. Minner (D) is term-limited, either Lt. Gov. Carney or Markell (Treasurer)--both Dems--will probably win in November. But the Dems in Delaware don't have that great of a bench. I'd guess Biden's son at this point.

For me (and I think most Dems), Hagel's completely unacceptable. Bayh isn't much better, in my opinion. Rendell and Richardson are decent enough picks. Rendell is term-limited in 2010 anyway, and Baker-Knoll is up there in years, so I can't imagine she'd run for a full term.

I agree with the trading odds that Mittens is the slight Republican favorite at this point. I'd love for McCain to pick Fiorina--it would enrage the Moonie-Evangelicals and she was a total disaster in the corporate world. Really, the only worst choice from the business arena would be the corpse of Ken Lay.

---

by: greg91020 @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:34:24 PM CDT

I think it's likely going to be...

Sorry, meant to say that the new Delaware gov is likely to appoint Biden's son to the Senate seat...

---

by: greg91020 @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:35:44 PM CDT

Connecticut

Both state houses have veto-proof majority so they can pass legislation forcing her to pick a Democrat.  Thank God, they really could've screwed over a possible filibuster proof majority.

Biden or Dodd would be excellent.  Richardson, Rendell would make me happy.  On the fence on Hillary...  She simply cannot run for president in 2016, she would never win so giving her the VP spot is only inviting her to run then.

---

by: Andrew @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:53:03 PM CDT

Dodd

would be a terrible choice. Why would you pick a VP from the most Democratic region of the country? And from a state relatively certain to go Democratic easily. Plus, Dodd is too old to be a future Presidential candidate. Biden is also too old to be a VP candidate, though Richardson seems like a good choice. I'd like to see Biden as Secretary of State, not VP.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:56:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well

I guess I'm judging who I want based in terms of who I like, not what would be best election wise.

But Obama, in my opinion, has it in the bag.  He could pick my cat and still win.

---

by: Andrew @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:36:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm also looking at

future presidential candidates.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 22:46:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I dont think

we have to. Obama is young and needs more of an elder statesman. Perhaps he picks Nunn or Hamilton for his first term and then a potential future president for his second. There comes a governor to mind who is term-limited in 2012 (begins with Sch and ends with weitzer)...

---

by: micha.1976 @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 05:45:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Schweitzer

would be 66 in 2016, and his views on the environment are way off. I'm also skeptical about his ability to move from small state governor, to national government, with foreign policy, and national and international economics.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 18:00:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Personally,

I would prefer Obama to pick someone unlikely to run for President (If the person who can best help Obama win is someone likely to run for President in the future, I would not have a problem with it.) Fostering an heir apparent on us takes away our ability to decide who should represent our party. I think a competative Presidential primary in 2016 would do little harm, but would allow us to select the best candidate for that year.

---

by: publius2481 @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 10:51:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Will they do that though?

I don't know anything about CT politics.  Is a move like that likely?

---

by: wmlawman @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 16:09:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I really don't like these laws

that bind the governor to appoint someone from a specific party.  

The Massachusetts legislature solved that potential problem in 2004 by passing a law that requires the governor to call a special election.

---

by: NHabroad @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 16:55:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I like Dodd

I only watched one of the early Democratic debates, and I thought he was by far the most reasoned, intelligent person on stage.

Obama needs a Lyndon Johnson type, someone who can help push his agenda through Congress, and especially the Senate. A 27-year veteran like Dodd would be a better choice than one of these nebulous "he can swing State X!"/"he can run in 2016!" choices.

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 12:19:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I gotta agree with you on this

I liked Dodd after watching him in the debates, and Dodd's good for actual governing purposes.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 13:38:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Bayh's

not that conservative, and I found him very interesting to listen to. He was so knowledgeable on national security, and economics, which he spoke on numerous times. He gives Obama experience to balance the ticket, and he's someone, who, with ten years in the U.S. senate, can talk about national security and foreign policy with a great deal of candor, knowledge, and experience. In addition, he insures Indiana goes Democratic, as, along with Lugar, the he is the most popular politician in the state, and comes from a politically famous family. The state's already close, with a five point generic lean to McCain, it would swing 11 electoral votes, and help Obama in Kentucky, Ohio, and Wisconsin.

But, again, back to my original statement, Bayh's not that conservative. He's pro-choice, pro-stem cell research. He normally stakes a centrist position on national security issues, which goes over well with the general electorate. He's also pretty good on economic issues. The VP really isn't important in many areas, the main job is to swing votes, and break ties in the U.S. Senate, and Bayh would do both of those things for Democrats. The other possible job is as a policy advisor, and Bayh, with thirty plus years of experience as a state representative, secretary of state, Governor, and U.S. Senator, brings plenty of experience and ability to the table in that regard. I've always been a big proponent of a Bayh VP, behind Edwards and Webb, but now that Edwards and Webb have dropped out of consideration, I would definitely go with Bayh.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:53:26 PM CDT

Edwards' name is still in the hat

And was a consesus choice among the CBC and CHC, but although he'd strengthen the Obama ticket significantly (see: SUSA polling), I doubt he'll be picked.

---

by: KainIIIC @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 16:57:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Weirdly enough

he isn't in the Top 10 at InTrade (despite his statement a few days ago that he'd be willing to do it). Personally, I'd pick him over any of the ones in their top 10, although I wouldn't call him the 'likeliest' pick. Anyway, anyone feeling confident that he will be picked might take this opportunity to go make some money off it at InTrade.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:03:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why do people care about intrade?

What does it tell us?

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

---

by: Glenn Magus Harvey @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 21:23:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good question

From what I've heard from people extolling the value of free markets, InTrade should accurately predict the outcome of an election because of some stupid invisible hand crap. I really don't buy it. InTrade did predict the 2006 Dem takeover but was not able to predict the Dem primary as far as I know (it showed Clinton winning big time). But, like gambling, when I try to choose something as complicated as a probable Veep pick for Obama, I look at InTrade. It at least gives a view of what other people are thinking.

---

by: nrimmer @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 21:30:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

In 2004 InTrade wasn't exactly spot on

The odds for many races that republicans won was heavily in our favor due to faulty exit polls.  I recall Kerry as high as 80% on InTrade and many races we lost handily like the open NC-Sen race having us heavily favored.  

I'm going to keep a close eye on InTrade this election.  Not to judge races on it, but to make a quick buck if I see an easy money making opportunity.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 21:56:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It has zero predictive value

But since you can't poll the VP race, it at least lets you quantify the mass-mediated conventional wisdom (and potentially also people who think they have some insider information who are trying to make some money off it).

---

by: Crisitunity @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 01:48:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Edward's

said he would accept a nomination as Vice President, and took his own name out of the running.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:36:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I really hope he does not pick JRE...

There's so many reasons not to pick Edwards and let some one else have a go. I don't see how this strengthens the ticket significantly either. He couldn't put NC in play in 2004, he's cultivated a much more aggressive persona from the Southern moderate of the Kerry campaign, and it's not as if he adds any of the gravitas a pick like Biden, Dodd or Jack Reed could bring to the ticket.

I think I saw those SUSA polls and Edwards was the only one of the VP candidates tested with any name recognition. I think one could explain the somewhat better showing Obama had in states with Edwards' name on the ticket had more to do with name ID than anything else.

---

by: NCDem @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:49:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

2004

Edwards kept Kerry from losing more ground in North Carolina.  North Carolina was pretty much the only Southern state where Kerry didn't do significantly worse than Gore.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.

---

by: TheUnknown285 @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 18:58:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Edwards would be an Al Gore pick

rather than a Joe Lieberman or Dan Quayle pick. He complements the ticket much more than he 'balances' it. And from what the polls have said since day 1, he's widely liked by America, and is seen as to have more experience than Obama despite having served only 2 more years. But remember back to the debates, notably to Iran, it was Edwards who came out looking the smartest on Foreign policy. I worry that if he picks someone like Nunn or Clark, the sentence immedietely after will be "who Obama picked to help him out on national security" will almost cede the point that Obama isn't better than McCain on foreign policy and national security.

And as for NC in 2004, like the other commenter said, it was one of 3 states in the country where dems didn't lose their vote % from 2000, and the only one in the South. Besides, Kerry didn't even campaign in NC, nor did Edwards after his first week of being selected. How the hell can you win an unfriendly state if you don't campaign in it? And him being aggressive would be a plus from the '04 campaign, where (it is widely percieved) that Kerry kept him on a leash, especially during the crucial moments in August where the Kerry camp needed a response the most.

In addition, in the the SUSA polls, Edwards outperformed EVERYONE listed... outperformed Ed Rendell significantly in Pennsylvania, Webb and Kaine in Virginia, tied Sebelius in Kansas, and was the only one who could deliver Minnesota against a McCain/Pawlenty ticket. Now, ultimately Obama (like Kerry) will have to seal the deal with all of these voters (which Kerry failed to do), but empirical data, even where ID is around equal, states that Edwards has the strongest "brand" of any veep candidate.

In any event, I think Edwards, Sebelius or Biden would all be solid choices (despite Biden being branded as a balancing person, he is an interesting guy). Dodd and Reed would both be horrible, as they don't bring a state or region that we need, are boring and forgetful, and would largely be regarded as purely balancing, not to mention Dodd's little ethical woes, or Reed being the most liberal senator, which as much as I'd love that to be the case, it just won't play with the media.

---

by: KainIIIC @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 19:58:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Edwards is just not comparable to Gore...

Gore had been in the Congress for almost 20 years and accomplished a great deal legislatively before he was WJC's vice-president. I think it's worth acknowledging that a lot of voters question Obama's foreign policy credentials. While I don't think voters generally vote for presidents based on a VP nominee, having some respected, progressive foreign policy voice (like Biden or Clark, definitely not Nunn) on the ticket compliments an Obama ticket more than a retread of Edwards.

True, Kerry did gain in vote percentage in NC over Gore's performance in 2000, but the gain was negligible. Gore/Lieberman lost to Bush/Cheney 56%-43%. The Kerry/Edwards ticket still lost the state 56%-43.5%. To me, that isn't exactly a solid example of Edwards' electoral strength.

My point re: SUSA's polling is that at this early stage, none of the other veep contenders are seen as national figures. Edwards outperforms them based on name recognition. Now, re: the Webb/Kaine situation in VA and Rednell in PA, I think you'll find in many states that citizens are often reluctant to the idea of their homestate politicians (even popular ones) joining a national ticket as veep. A similar situation was found in polling Ohioans on whether they thought the popular Gov. Strickland should be a veep nominee.

I know a lot of segments of the netroots still has an infatuation with John Edwards, but he has only won two elections in his career (the SC primary '04 and his initial '98 Senate election). Edwards is a "been there, done that" kind of pick and I don't think he adds anything new. Like Kerry, I think his time as a national candidate has passed.

I have to ask though, if Jack Reed or Chirs Dodd are problematic because they don't bring a state or region, how do can you champion Sebelius, Edwards and Biden in the same post? We will surely win Delaware with or without Biden on the ticket. No way Kansas will be flipped. I doubt Edwards could even be elected statewide again in North Carolina.  

---

by: NCDem @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 21:05:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't know, I saw

his favorables were pretty high in North Carolina.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 22:50:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I haven't seen any polling...

I would be very interested to see polling on Edwards' favorables/unfavorables in the state. I doubt he ever plans on running statewide ever again though unless he surprises us all and decides to run against Sen. Richard Burr in 2010 to reclaim his Senate seat.  

---

by: NCDem @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 02:07:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Complementing vs. Balancing

Clinton chose Gore because he was similar to him, and added on to his strengths, not because he needed his foreign policy credentials against the uber foreign policy H.W. Bush. Gore chose Lieberman because he wanted to distance himself from Clinton, and I guess wanted a northeasterner that would carry a (currently) unknown state, which proved to be safe anyways. I think, by the way, that Clark may have cost himself consideration because of the pseudo-gaffe of his, sad as it is, I would've thought he would be a decent choice.

Kerry got 43.58% in NC, Bush 56.02%, while in '00, Gore 43.2% and Bush 56.03%. While on the surface, it's rather unimpressive, consider that not only did the country become 3 points more Republican from 2000 to 2004, but the effect in the South was more like 5 or 6 points, so the effect of Edwards on the ticket helped out by about 5 points of what it otherwise would have been, of course without a dime spent. That's around what one considers a decent margin for a vice presidential candidate to offer to his home state, and with North Carolina in play this time around, that 5 point gain (if it is replicated) could make or break a victory in the state.

and the politician in homestate arguement is pretty bunk, because they all outperformed the rest of other non-national figures, and the McCain/Pawlenty ticket beat all non-Edwards tickets despite McCain losing modestly in the base numbers. Edwards' numbers were very consistent and strong across the board, even against Huckabee / Romney tickets who are also national figures as well.

Kerry's problem is he's old, and he, not John Edwards, was responsible for losing the 2004 election (indeed, Karl Rove claims to have tried to get the Democratic base to consolidate with Kerry in order not to face Edwards in the general), while Edwards is only 54.

Again, if North Carolina is in play this time around without Edwards on the ticket, Edwards' prescence will help there too, even if you don't like him. Biden doesn't bring any electoral strength, but he's a good speaker even if he's full of himself, while Dodd and Reed are about as interesting as a rock. I do have a bit of a worry with Sebelius that she may be uninteresting, but I wouldn't completely discount a possible Obama victory in Kansas if Sebelius is his running mate.

And for those 2, there's also the consideration that with Veep coattails and (actual) campaigning and organization in these states, they might give the shot for Hagan and Slattery to win statewide. Reed and Dodd just simply offer nothing.

---

by: KainIIIC @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 00:20:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

JRE

While I respect your argument, my main issue is the need to give someone different a chance in the national spotlight. Edwards had his chance in 2004. As much as I'd like to think that everything that happened in 2004 was Kerry's fault, I don't think Edwards is entirely blameless. His debate performance against Cheney was underwhelming.

As a North Carolinian, I honestly don't think Edwards would help Obama out here. I know it's hard for some to believe, but Edwards is not terribly well-liked here. It's a strange situation where Edwards is certainly a national figure, but not necessarily a force to be reckoned with in his own home state. While the post-'04 Edwards has certainly been more passionate and seemingly at ease with himself, I think his time in national electoral politics has come to an end (for now at least). I like Edwards fine, but one of my main problems with him is that all the progressive issues he highlighted in his 2008 campaign were never issues of concern when he served in the US Senate. For the most part, Edwards toed the DLC line. I think Russ Feingold made comments to the same effect during the primary season.

He'd be a great attorney general, HHS or labor secretary, but I strongly believe it's somebody else's chance this time around.  

---

by: NCDem @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 02:03:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Progressive Punch

gives him a current rating of 72.6 for this session, 3rd worst among Dem senators, ahead of only Ben Nelson and Tim Johnson, and behind Landrieu, Pryor, and, um, Lieberman. Not unreasonable for a senator from Indiana, I suppose, but, still, not what I like to see.

Still, he does have the advantage of being one of the few people who could single-handedly nudge a lean-GOP state by a few points to the other side of the blue line. (Mark Warner's about the only other one, and he's already busy. Maybe Bob Graham in Florida, although he's already starting to recede in history's rear view mirror.)

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:19:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Bayh? ..

Are you sure you aren't talking about the old man?  Evan Bayh is a DLC Democrat .. he voted for the Iraq war(not good!!) ... and how is he good economically?

---

by: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:45:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

no...

Bayh's about 50, and comes across young and telgenic.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 15:19:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sebelius would be a good pick for many reasons

One would be elevating the heir apparent Parkinson to KS Governor and giving him an incumbency advantage in 2010 when the seat would have been open.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 15:58:04 PM CDT

i love this question

i even think i asked it last week -
here are the answers i've gleaned:

First off, I don't think it can be Hagel who is a by-the-book republican in every way except the war (the mirror image of Lieberman) or Rendell, who is a loose cannon and has zero foreign policy experience and helps in a state that Obama doesn't need help in.

Hillary Clinton 15.4 Appointment by David Paterson (D) ANDREW CUOMO OR CONGRESSMAN BISHOP
Kathleen Sebelius 14.0 Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson (D)
Evan Bayh 8.0 Appointment by ??? (lean R) IF DEM THEN TIM ROEMER, IF GOP THEN PENCE OR BUYER
Jack Reed 7.9 Appointment by Don Carcieri (R)
Tim Kaine 7.8 Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling (R)
Joe Biden 7.0 Appointment by ??? (safe D) I don't like giving it to Biden's son - who has very little experience.  I would think that the loser of the Dem Governor's Primary would be a good uniter for the DE dems.
Claire McCaskill 6.5 Appointment by ??? (lean D) ROBIN CARNAHAN
Bill Richardson 6.5 Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (D)

Bill Richardson's rumors and lack of campaign discipline make him a risky choice.  Claire McCaskill's thin resume is also a problem.  Tim Kaine's lack of foreign policy experience and handing the VA gov to Bolling are not pleasant prospects.

The rest seem like pretty good choices in different ways.

As one who has recently gotten a ticket on the Bayh bandwagon, I will quibble with your quibbles with him.

1) He's on the conservative side of Democratic politics (like LBJ, Clinton and Gore), but by no means conservative.  And Obama has successfully said that he's post-partisan - able to see both sides and not be a knee-jerk liberal.  A choice like Bayh will communicate that message much better than awkward positions on FISA.

2) Boring?  He better be.  This is the VP we're talking about.  He is to be seen and not heard.  Every VP since Agnew - with the notable exception of Quayle, has been boring and that's the way we Americans like them: Ford, Mondale, Bush 1, Gore (I believe that if someone had suggested Gore in '92, he would have been called "soul-paralyzingly boring" as well), and Cheney.

He's a great looking moderate with a great resume - the perfect VP candidate in a swing state.

---

by: st paul sage @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 16:15:14 PM CDT

The upside

(if you can call it that) of Bill Bolling becoming governor of Virginia is that he would have the job for only one year. He isn't planning to run for governor in 2009 (and may not be able to; I don't know if that one-term rule in VA applies to interim governors too); the current AG is slated to be the GOP candidate for governor, and Bolling was actually planning to run for Lt. Gov. again (no term limits on that post, apparently), so Deeds or Moran or whoever wouldn't be disadvantaged by going up him as an incumbent.

As for Bayh, I guess I'd rather take a page from the GOP and have the VP be more of an attack dog, chomping McCain's leg while letting Obama keep above the fray, rather than having the VP be just a pleasant middling presence. Clark or Webb would've fit the bill for me, though they seem unlikely now. Good point about Gore 1.0, though... maybe Bayh will become VP anyway, lose the hotly contested 2016 election, grow a beard, and re-emerge from the wilderness several years later rebranded as a progressive.

---

by: Crisitunity @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 16:32:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm looking too far

ahead into the future. I looking at a REaganistically popular Obama, and the who should carry the Democratic banner in 2016, who can carry on a strong Democratic governor, with the support of a popular outgoing president. Bayh is the best candidate, he's the only candidate that could win, and would not be too old for my tastes at that time.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:40:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

My huge problem with Bayh

I really worry we'd be able to keep that seat.  And if that causes us to lose a filibuster proof majority, well, then Bayh would be a completely wrong choice.

---

by: Andrew @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 17:45:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I have that feeling too

Senate seats are FAR too valuable for allowing an open seat dem being replaced with a republican.  Indiana would be especially difficult.  Bayh is still young and a good fit for that seat.  Then eventually when Lugar retires we should have Rep. Ellsworth as a very strong candidate to run for his seat.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 19:38:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

nah

then we'd lose the house seat. Joe Donneley, or Baron Hill. We could appoint Hill. Hill could win statewide, and he's not too old to run a few terms. Indiana is really trending Dem, I saw that McCain won 55+ by like thirty points, and Obama won the under 35 vote by something like thirty-four points. The way I see it, Indiana will inevitably start leaning Democratic, if Obama wins the under 35 by 38 or 39 points, in the future, these voters should swing the state, along with the deaths of the current older and solidly republican voters die. The same is true across the midwest, though not so much in the south.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 22:58:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You make a good point, except . . .

Should this be Lugar's last term (as I suspect), he'd retire in 2012.

2012 Would be the first year a new map is placed into effect and IF we lose the Governor's race this year you can bet the move by he redistricting board would be to combine the democratic areas of IN-8 and IN-9 together thus eliminating Elsworth or Hill. However, if Ellsworth is running for the open senate seat . . . well, Hill is clear for re-election in the new seat and we lose nothing we weren't going to lose anyway.

This should be re-examined once we know who will control Indiana redistricting.

---

by: trowaman @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 23:50:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You are correct except that...

You seem sure we're going to win the IN Governor's race this year.  I'm not so sure about that.  It's 50/50 at best.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 13:25:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Mixed feelings about Evan Bayh

As someone who has been represented by (and voted for) Evan Bayh for all of my 16 years of living in Indiana, I have mixed feelings about him.  He is certainly on the conservative side of the party, but not as conservative as many think he is, and has cast at least some important liberal votes over the past few years (against Condi Rice, against Justices Roberts and Alito -- despite the fact Roberts is originally from Indiana).  I think he would be very comfortable moving to the left as VP, especially as he would not have to face an Indiana election again.

Is he boring?  In a word, yes.  He comes off best giving a serious policy speech, but not so well in a more fired up campaign setting.  I'm not sure that's a huge deal, though, as this is going to be a "Rock Star" campaign, and I think that alone will make anything or anyone associated with it exciting.

One big question I have about Senator Bayh is how good of a campaigner is he?  Other than his first election as governor, way back in 1988, he hasn't really had to fight for an election.  Especially in both of his runs for the Senate, he was so popular and raised so much money, the Republicans ran token candidates against him, so he's a bit untested in terms of how much of a political fighter he is.

All in all, I'd be fine with his selection from a national perspective, although I'm not sure he'd be my first (or fifth or sixth) choice.  From a statewide one, I'd be thrilled to have the added attention this would give our governor's race.  

---

by: IndianaProgressive @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 18:13:52 PM CDT

They ran the mayor

of Fort Wayne, which has about 200,000 citizens in 1998, and Bayh still won with 64% of the vote. Also, in 1986, he won a very close race for Secretary of state.

Another good reason to pick Bayh would be he could then, as part of the ticket, I believe, transfer the nearly 10 million dollars in his senate campaign account to the federal account. What other candidate instantly brings ten million dollars to the table.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 23:02:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why can't ...

we have our cake and eat it too ... and have Birch be Obama's running mate   ;-)

---

by: Calvin Jones and the 13th Apostle @ Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 16:51:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I know I'm jumping in late but

I've got to put in my two-cents in the VP.

A couple of days ago my office made a betting pool for the winner. I choose Wesley Clark for Dems and Huckabee for GOP.

After choosing Clark, I immediately regretted the choice and wish I could have picked Clinton. Now, I'm not sure how to look at the rumors going around but Hillary is definitely looking like a possibility. I not sure how I feel about this but I have run into at least 10 people who have said that they will only vote for Obama if Hillary is the Veep. Usually they are older, blue-collar Hispanics. I'm not sure if I believe them though. They could show up and vote for Obama over McCain.

I don't really trust the In Trade. Aren't 40% of the "shares" in the "Other Candidate" category? From what I can tell that really throws off the remaining value for the other Veeps. I'm also pretty sure that Clinton was leading the primary on InTrade big time. In other words: free market equals B.S.

(Sorry for rambling, its just been one of those days.)

---

by: nrimmer @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 19:02:00 PM CDT

Clinton

That is one of the main reasons why I'd be okay with a Hillary VP pick, that unity ticket really would be powerful.  The Hispanic population is a demographic we need to start winning by larger margins.  I don't know how they currently vote but we need to get it to at least 60-40 if not more.  It is such a rapidly growing demographic and having them solidly on our side would help us turn Texas into a blue state, and also bring Arizona to our fold as well.

God, I'm so glad I dont have to be the one to pick the VP, way too many excellent, yet tough choices.  There a lot of advantages and drawbacks to each person.

McCain seems to have it easier.  With all of his choices, there is nothing to lose (no seats that would then be in danger) and he doesnt seem to have as many great choices.  Romney, Huckabee, Pawlenty, Sanford, Fiorna I think pretty much sums up his choices.  I hope he picks Pawlenty, then when us Minnesotans get our 5 state house seats we need to have veto-proof majorities (it's a pretty decent possibility, I'd guess 50-50) we can completely kill his political career.  Lost the presidential race by historic margins and now completely irrelevant in his own state.  He'd probably beat Franken in 2014 so gotta nip that in the bud.  (Klobuchar would kick his ass if he ran in 2012.)

---

by: Andrew @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 12:08:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Some thoughts on the top picks for Obama...

I think it's imperative that Obama avoids picking a Senator or Governor whose immediate successor is a Republican or could well be appointed by one. We need every Senate seat and Governor's mansion we have. I think this would automatically rule out Dodd, Bayh, Kaine, Jack Reed and McCaskill.

Also, I really don't think he needs to pick Chuck Hagel or any other Republican. As much as I respect Hagel for bucking his party on Iraq, he's still one of the most conservative members of his party on economic and social issues. Hagel would be fine for SecDef or SecState, but I really don't want a Republican to be a heartbeat away from the presidency.  

---

by: NCDem @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 21:21:00 PM CDT

why,

he was a voting machine manufacturer. He shouldn't be made Sos or SoD just because he opposes the iraq war.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 23:05:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Chuckles

It's not just because he has grown to view the war as a mistake. I don't think being the CEO of a voting machine manufacturer automatically should veto Hagel holding some sort of position in the Obama administration. I don't think he twirled his mustache a la Snidely Whiplash while he ordered machines programmed to automatically award votes to Republican candidates.

I think Hagel's views on foreign policy/defense policy are enough in line with Obama's that he successfully could serve in some capacity in the cabinet.  

---

by: NCDem @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 02:13:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

you completely

miss what I was saying. My opposition to Hagel has nothing to do with his being a voting manufacuturer, how do you get that out of what I said. I oppose the Iraq war, does that make me a good candidate for SoS or SoD. Hagel has no kind of foreign policy experience to merit such an appointment.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 17:53:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Apologies...

I misunderstood your comment. I thought you were saying his past associations with a corporation that produces voting machine should automatically disqualify Hagel from serving as a cabinet secretary because of the evil of voting machines. My sincerest apologies.

As for Hagel's qualifications to serve as Secretary of State, he's served on the Foreign Relations Committee in the Senate and I think been a positive voice for bipartisan, proactive diplomacy in these troubling times.

---

by: NCDem @ Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 05:05:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

perhaps,

I was looking forward to having possibly Joe Biden, or Bill Richardson, as Sos, people who have experience in a leadership position on foreign policy, experience neogiating etcetera. And, Wesley Clark would make a great SoD, former Surpreme Commander of NATO, he would be a choice from an international point of view. He would help strengthen relations with the countries of NATO, and I like his ideas on modern warfare. He's a very intelligent man, brilliant, really, when it comes to modern warfare.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 19:54:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Evan Bayh

I am a hard working pary Democrat in Indiana and you are 100% correct about Senator Bayh.  He would probably by replaced by the republican governor unless we pull an upset and elect a Democrat governor in November.  Very Unlikely.  He is so conservative that he is almost republican and votes with Bush much of the time.  He also is very very boring.  I hope Obama looks elsewhere.

---

by: demdemdem @ Fri Jul 11, 2008 at 22:54:49 PM CDT

this guv's race is very close

last independent poll was 50-45 for Daniels - and JLT hasn't started the general yet.  Hell, one could argue that we should add Bayh to the ticket just to help JLT win - given how important those congressional seats are.  Obama is 2 points back and spending money and organizing in the state while McCain sits tight.

---

by: st paul sage @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 00:18:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

..

The list of Dem candidates on the potential VP list could very well be appointed as cabinet members in an Obama presidency too.

---

by: blueandwhite31 @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 01:28:49 AM CDT

The two

     I would be pleased to see are Tim Kaine and Joe Biden. Biden is a foreign policy expert who could help Obama in the administration, plus having a long time Washington hand could be valuable in helping pass legislation. At the same time, unlike some other picks, Biden does not look like he was just picked to improve Obama's foreign policy credentials, a story we need to avoid. In truth, I think picking someone hoping it will improve voters' opinion on Obama's foreign policy is a mistake. Voters will judge Obama, not his VP. Biden can help in the administration and is a good speaker on the campaign trail. If Biden is VP, I think the loser of the Democratic gubernatorial primary would be the best selection.
    Since A VP will not improve public perception about Obama's ability to handle foreign affairs, I do not consider Kaine's lack of foreign policy experiance a negative. He would swing Virginia to us, compliments Obama's outsider image, and may help us in our efforts to attract faith voters.
     

---

by: publius2481 @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 11:01:59 AM CDT

Kaine's not presidential material, quite frankly.

He's just not a heavyweight. I'll give him points for betting the farm on taking control of the state Senate in 2007 and winning, but he hasn't really had any significant accomplishments in his 2 1/2 years in office. Granted, that's mostly thanks to the House of Delegates, which won't pass anything with the letters "t", "a", and "x" in them, but Mark Warner was able to corral them enough to fix the state budget.

Kaine would make a good Secretary of Transportation, but VP? No thanks.

---

by: Johnny Longtorso @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 12:15:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

exactly what I thought,

Kaine for Transportation Secretary, Clark for for SoD, Biden for SoS, Lincoln Chafee for Secretary of the Interior, Mike Moore or John Edwards for Attorney General,.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

---

by: ArkDem the Ragin Cajin @ Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 20:00:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Senators facing 2008 elections

I know that Reed and Biden are up this cycle and others may be too. Do you think they'd pull a Lieberman and run for Senate anyway, or would they be able to drop out, be replaced by another candidate and concentrate on the VP race? That would be a good way of making sure the seat is secure.

---

by: Englishlefty @ Sat Jul 12, 2008 at 15:01:11 PM CDT

Obama should insist that they drop out.

I want someone who is in this 100%.

---

by: davybaby @ Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 10:31:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

For Biden it wouldn't matter

We're guaranteed to hold the Governorship of DE this year.  As for Jack Reed I'm sure he would drop out fr another candidate.  Reed is a team player, and unlike 2000 we have a significantly better than 50% chance of winning the Presidential race.

---

by: ChadInFL @ Sun Jul 13, 2008 at 14:02:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]