Classified ad: Looking for a Dem for Pres in 08

[caretaker1]

First off, relax, this is what it is. Ok, now on to the discussion ...

[ QUOTE ]
Just forget about the south. Focusing on retaking the south has been a huge mistake for Democrats in the last eight years (citation?). The much smarter electoral math is simply to hold the Kerry states and attack in Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and Missouri.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indiana does not border Ohio and Iowa (ok one over)? Bayh would also take Indiana (see below).

[ QUOTE ]
This is why Richardson, Obama, Edwards, and Harkin (as a VP only) deserve much more consideration than you are giving them. Richardson would carry New Mexico easy and perhaps get a boost in Nevada and Colorado. Edwards is not from these battle-ground areas, but campaigning strength - optimistic economic populism - plays well to the electorate of the midwest. The same is true, probably even more so, for Obama, although he obviously has other issues. Harkin might be an intriguing gbottom of the ticket choice for his popularity in Iowa and pretty high regional profile.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think Obama or Edwards would make any of your battleground states go Blue? Maybe Richardson for NM/Col/Nev.

[ QUOTE ]
Bayh has some nice qualities but is simply a crappy politician who might not even carry his own state (Indiana is really red).

[/ QUOTE ]

"Bayh was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1998 to the seat that was once held by his father. He won with 64% of the vote, the largest victory margin ever by a Democrat in a U.S. Senate race in Indiana, defeating former Fort Wayne Mayor Paul Helmke. He easily won reelection in 2004, receiving 62% of the vote." - Wikipedia

[ QUOTE ]
The other guy from Tennessee is a total non-factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

"On November 7, 2006, Bredesen won re-election by an historic margin. He swept all 95 counties in Tennessee while defeating State Sen. Jim Bryson." - Wikipedia

Still more of the $.02

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


MODS!!!!

Please change Grey's title to "Master of Correctness". PLLEEEEEEAAAAAASSSSEEEEE!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

You are a powerful man apparently

[/ QUOTE ]I have powers too.

Whoever changed it should reference the thread in the mod forum on doing that unsolicited.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
First off, relax, this is what it is. Ok, now on to the discussion ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody is getting out of line here. Just stating my point of view...

[ QUOTE ]
Indiana does not border Ohio and Iowa (ok one over)? Bayh would also take Indiana (see below).

[/ QUOTE ]

Indiana electing Bayh is anything but a sure thing. This is a very red state that is atypical for the midwest in many ways. It has not gone Democratic in a presidential since 1964.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think Obama or Edwards would make any of your battleground states go Blue? Maybe Richardson for NM/Col/Nev.

[/ QUOTE ]

They have a much better chance than Bayh, because they are better politicians and campaigners and becuase their style plays much better to the blue-collar economically downtrodden base that the Dems need to mobilize to win the midwest.


[ QUOTE ]

"Bayh was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1998 to the seat that was once held by his father. He won with 64% of the vote, the largest victory margin ever by a Democrat in a U.S. Senate race in Indiana, defeating former Fort Wayne Mayor Paul Helmke. He easily won reelection in 2004, receiving 62% of the vote." - Wikipedia

[/ QUOTE ]

This is kind of meaningless. The senate is filled with guys who are impressively entrenched in their home states but would make terrible choices for a presidential candidate.

[ QUOTE ]

"On November 7, 2006, Bredesen won re-election by an historic margin. He swept all 95 counties in Tennessee while defeating State Sen. Jim Bryson." - Wikipedia

[/ QUOTE ]

That's an impressive victory for sure, but that doesn't just translate into national qualifications or any kind of presence in the larger political landscape. This guy has been a governor for three years and was just a mayor before that. He has no standing within the party, no connections, etc. That's why I called him a non-factor.

[caretaker1]

It's not "meaningless"; both Indiana (by your admission) and Tennessee are Red States, where two Blues dominated, indicating they have at least some resonance with traditionally Republican voters. This is exactly what the Dems need to get those battleground states.

Do you have any citations/evidence for Obama/Edwards being "better politicians" or anything about their style that would turn on the blue-collar workers (whereas a Bayh-Bredesen would turn them off)?

[Grey]

As I mentioned earlier, Bayh would probably not win Indiana. The state is just way too conservative. He's my Senator and he only goes against that conservative ideology on issues that aren't in the public eye. The one time he went against that strategy, and halfway opposed Alito, his disapproval rating jumped 10-15 points.

And your focus on independents and crossover votes is too simplistic. Only about 25% of independents are actually independent. The others vote as reliably for one party as those who admit they identify with a party. Motivating your base is a very important factor to take into account. If Reps have 60% turnout and Dems have 50% turnount it won't matter what the independents do.

Now I'm not saying he's not electable. But don't assume Indiana will go to him, or that he has any name recognition in Ohio (because he doesn't).

[caretaker1]

[ QUOTE ]
As I mentioned earlier, Bayh would probably not win Indiana. The state is just way too conservative. He's my Senator and he only goes against that conservative ideology on issues that aren't in the public eye. The one time he went against that strategy, and halfway opposed Alito, his disapproval rating jumped 10-15 points.

And your focus on independents and crossover votes is too simplistic. Only about 25% of independents are actually independent. The others vote as reliably for one party as those who admit they identify with a party. Motivating your base is a very important factor to take into account. If Reps have 60% turnout and Dems have 50% turnount it won't matter what the independents do.

Now I'm not saying he's not electable. But don't assume Indiana will go to him, or that he has any name recognition in Ohio (because he doesn't).

[/ QUOTE ]

Out of the last 10 Presidential elections, how many candidates did not carry their home state? OTTOMH I don't know the answer, but I bet it's low. Also, why would a Bayh ticket "motivate" Dems any less than any other ticket?

Lastly, I was checking your responses, but can't tell who you think would be the most promising choice, Edwards?

[CharlieDontSurf]

Polls right now are meaningless...its all name recognition.

Edwards seem like a nice guy...he does the whole two americas...blah blah blah

There isn't much else there. Nobody wants another GWB..ie. a lightweight with little expierence and not a big grasp on world issues/topics.

They want someone who will be a good wartime president who has lots of expierence and is or appears moderate/centrist.

Even Wesley Clark would be better than Edwards.

Edwards is not viewed as moderate/centrist. He's lumped in with Kerry,Gore,HClinton etc.

Of course Edwards could win the nomination...but thats only because the dem party is really awesome when it comes to nominating canidates in the primary who are terrible national canidates.

You have to look at his possible opponents and put up someone who can take them on and beat them.

Guliani vs. Edwards...easy GOP win
McCain vs. Edwards...easy GOP win
Romney,Frist?,jeb bush, cant think of anyone else...close Gop win.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not "meaningless"; both Indiana (by your admission) and Tennessee are Red States, where two Blues dominated, indicating they have at least some resonance with traditionally Republican voters. This is exactly what the Dems need to get those battleground states.

[/ QUOTE ]

Winning on one stage is not the same as winning on another. Max Baucus and Robert Byrd won Montana and West Virginia respectively by a gazillion votes last time they were up for election, but this doesn't make them good presidential candidates.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you have any citations/evidence for Obama/Edwards being "better politicians" or anything about their style that would turn on the blue-collar workers (whereas a Bayh-Bredesen would turn them off)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what kind of evidence you are looking for. Obama and Edwards are both notoriously good campaigners who have high approval ratings and have had signature moments pushing meat and potatoes democratic issues that have a strong class orientation. Bayh is well known in political circles for being wooden and uncharismatic, and has little name recognition among the electorate at large. Bredesen is just some unknown, and I have no idea about him.

[caretaker1]

[ QUOTE ]
Winning on one stage is not the same as winning on another.

[/ QUOTE ]

On the face of it I agree, but why would there be any reason to believe it would be different in this case?

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know what kind of evidence you are looking for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Start with this: [ QUOTE ]
Obama and Edwards are both notoriously good campaigners

[/ QUOTE ]

and this: [ QUOTE ]
Bayh is well known in political circles for being wooden and uncharismatic

[/ QUOTE ]

Also why either of those two would bring Red votes to Blue when Edwards already lost nationally, failing miserably in the South, and Obama has the problems I mentioned above, which I believe would doom Dems in the south once again.

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
Polls right now are meaningless...its all name recognition.

[/ QUOTE ]No, when compared to other candidates with similar name recognition they are not meaningless.[ QUOTE ]
Edwards is not viewed as moderate/centrist. He's lumped in with Kerry,Gore,HClinton etc.

[/ QUOTE ]You have no evidence of this.[ QUOTE ]
Guliani vs. Edwards...easy GOP win

[/ QUOTE ]Wrong. Not only will Guliani's social liberalism depress turnout in his base, but he does worse in head to head matchup polling than McCain (i.e. Edwards and Hillary both tie with him)[ QUOTE ]
McCain vs. Edwards...easy GOP win

[/ QUOTE ]McCain would be favored, but polling has it close, and it would be fairly easy to tie McCain with Bush in an election[ QUOTE ]
Romney,Frist?,jeb bush, cant think of anyone else...close Gop win.

[/ QUOTE ]Now you're just pulling it out of your ass. Jeb Bush has high name recognition and he gets CRUSHED by everyone in polling.