yeah. Think I personally need a buffer zone if it all goes down wrong again.
It's actually surprising more people on the Kerry board did not get really physically ill

The Obama boards aren't like this board.. it's those blog boards and a lot of them are divided up into issues that people will go post about - so I never bothered messing with it much after it first went up.

http://www.411mania.com/politics/columns/8...5Cs-VP-Pick.htm
Something To Think About Regarding Obama's VP Pick
Posted by Ashish on 08.15.2008

Someone who does no harm may be the top qualification...

Trapper John makes a good point about what Obama might be thinking about in terms of his VP pick. The dynamics of the election support Obama. And his entire campaign is about...Obama. Adding a VP pick who is at all risky in any way at all could change that dynamic. So what does that mean? Means that Obama could very well pick someone who isn't at all exciting or interesting because he wants to keep the race as it is now.

For example, Tim Kaine, who most consider to be the favorite, has a pretty conservative position on abortion (for a Democrat). So is he worth the risk? Evan Bayh voted for the Iraq war. Worth the risk? Kathleen Sebelius is pro-choice to the point where it could become material for attacks. Worth the risk?

Trapper John thinks Tom Daschle will be the pick. Nobody on the shortlist is as close to Obama as Daschle is. I'm not sure Daschle will be the pick, but the reasoning here does make sense.

Of course, it's becoming obvious based on the differing opinions going around the blogosphere that nobody really has any idea who Obama will pick and it is all just speculation.

Just to add my two cents. The idea of Wes Clark being the VP has grown on me. He isn't associated with Washington (which is important since Obama is, in many ways, campaigning against Washington), isn't a former Senator or politician so no old votes can be used against him, is very well respected in military affairs, and above all else, is a really good attack dog who outranks McCain and thus can go after McCain on war-related things that Obama can't.

Daschle or Kerry seems likely to me.

Indeed, Hillary is out of it. I would be interested in your comments regarding some of the post-mortems of the Clinton campaign that have surfaced.

Also, how do you feel about Barack's efforts to share the convention spotlight with the Clinton's as much as he has...do you have any complaints in that regard as a Clinton supporter?

He is taking a grave risk here to give your candidate the respect she and her supporters feel she deserves.

Never Daschle.

He is one of the worst Senate Majority/Minority Leaders we have ever had for the Democratic Party, perhaps the only worse one has been Harry Reid.

Pegatha -- what is your problem with Evan Bayh...

Daschle worked with what he had...

Only reason he lost was the repubs made him out to be the obstructionist devil

Now, that is a good thing in my mind

Taz-why your HATRED of every single person to the left of Joe Lieberman?

I have a strong aversion to ineffectiveness.

Daschle worked with what he had?

We suffered from incredible losses in the 2002 elections which gave the Republicans the majority in Congress largely because of Daschle -- as Senate Minority Leader - the senier spokesperson for the Democratic party...was largley responsible with his continuing acquiescenece to the Bush fear policies in the Senate. He was not a strong leader IMHO and part of the problem during that time period with the Democrats.

I like plenty of liberals --- Corzine and Lautenberg are two of my favorites... Bloomberg --- Dodd -- Kerry --- Feingold...

But I also ---- having spent much of my professional life dealing with political realities --- know what wins and what sells and what can get the job done IMHO --- and Daschle did not strike me as an effective leader. He did not demonstrate much political courage at all. I saw him as mostly weak and vacillating. Not my idea of a VP choice.

Graham you can try and suggest that I am some right wing neocon all you like -- but I provide reasons for my choices...as detailed as I can think of..

I do not like Daschle.

I do agree his loss was not all his fault. The Rs were out to get him. However, the fact that he could not even win reelection in his own state after being the chief Democrat in the nation kind of shows the people of South Dakota had had it with him as well...

This was part of my problem with John Edwards. He ran for VP becuase he knew it was unlikely he could win reelection in NC. I found that pathetic.

And Graham --- like you I do not hate anyone...I do dislike some people for certain positions...

Daschle has slightly redeemed himself on talk shows. He has become a much more effective communicator. However, this is tempered by the fact that he was so ineffective as a Senate leader --- I men you are supposed to win seats against the President in a midterm election and we were trounced...it was awful...and he deserves much of the blame IMHO.

If people here can dislike Reid and Pelosi why can't they dislike Daschle? All the better if they make a good case as to why they don't like that person, and Taz seems to be doing a good job concerning Daschle. I think Daschle is a decent guy but I hardly see him as a great leader, certainly no better than Reid and Pelosi (about whom I have similar feelings).

Max Cleland, it has been proven, had his senate race stolen.
Who knows how many others

And they were sabatoged by the Clinton's...remember Terry McAuliffe?

If you want someone to blame, blame Terry and bill and Hillary

blame them for shunning Al Gore and not letting him run in 2004

And Graham -- I dislike Joe Lieberman as well.

I did not know much about him when Gore selected him. I learned he was chosen since he had led the charge against Bill Clinton ethically in the Senate. I respected Gore's choice.

However, since then I have come to strongly dislike him. I have found him petty, disloyal and self serving.

If you recall I strongly supported Lamont, but I strongly disagreed with your assertion that the fact that Ned Lamont won the primary meant the race was over. That was not the statement. The statement would only be made if he beat Lieberamn in the general. And he did not.

Since then I have been no fan of Lieberman.

I think part of your problem is that you see a person's ability to work with someone in the Senate as a sign that they resemble that person --- and necessarily share their points of view. If that is true than you should really worry about Barack Obama who developed relationships with Tom Coburn and Dick Lugar and other Republicans in the Senate who he worked with to get things done.

The Senate is an amicable body --- and the relationships there have been quite cordial --- which does not mean that you have adopted their philosophies.

Whi knows, Bayh and Lieberman may be friends like Obama is with other people. This does not mean that they are clones.

What?

What does this have to do with anyting?

Al Gore ran away from Bill in 2000 which I thought was a stupid mistake.

Here you are --- a part of one of the best economic recoveries in US history and you run away from the CEO of that recovery?

It was stupid.

It was like GHW Bush running away from Reagan in 1988. It was not until he got Reagan out there shilling for him that he turned the campaign around.

Gore needed Clinton and if Gore had demonstrated more pride in Clinton he would have won Florida by a much bigger margin IMHO and been president.

BUt when he ran away from Clinton he made people focus more on Clinton -- and think why would his VP not want to be attached to him?

Gore WON Florida by over 60,000 votes and tossed the Clinton's in the garbage where they belong

Which is why Gore's personal friend Caroline Kennedy will NOT place the VP in the hands of a Clintonite

OBAMA/GORE 2008. end of story.

That is simply no more than a myth. I think that there is more proof that fairies exist. (There is a movie supposedly based on a true story about fairies in England.)



Seems like you and I don't know, which I think is an important point.



You don't know who was sabotaged, but you know the Clintons sabotaged them, and mentioning McAuliffe's name is your proof.



Soley because you don't like them. I think people can be excused if they don't think that to be a sufficient reason.



Al Gore is a big boy. He doesn't need permission to run for President.

Daschle handled the Republicans better when they were at their height in power and he was minority
leader than Reid does when the Republicans are down and almost out. Bill Clinton did some positive things but building the Democratic Party was not one of them. I don't think it is fair to place that blame on Daschle.

You've expressed your opinion. What supports it? I just don't remember Daschle making much of an impression. (BTW, the Republicans are hardly out with 49 members of the U.S. Senate. Now they are likely to come back in a worse position next year, but it is not next year yet.)

I do agree with you that Bill Clinton did not do much to build the Democratic Party. He did a lot of good things, a lot of politically smart things, but I think he was too focused on his own personal political situation.

As far as the post-mortems go, I take those with a grain of salt. I don't know that political operatives are necessarily completely honest in the wake of a defeat. Some interesting things have been written and said, but who knows how accurate they are.

I don't think allowing Hillary's name to be placed in nomination represents a grave risk to Obama. I think it was a nice thing to do though.

Overall, I'd say the treatment of the Clintons vis a vis the convention has been a mixed bag. It made it clear that Obama never seriously considered Hillary for VP, but it also managed to tamp down those expectations and speculation. They made it look like she was going to be the featured speaker on Tuesday night, then came along and put the keynote after her.

The convention may help bring some of Clinton's more ardent supporters into the fold, but I doubt it will have much, if any, impact on regular voters.

G4A was an all out Clinton lover until he perceived Hillary could beat John McCain in the general elections.

outright lies.

I have never liked the Clinton's.

Graham, Marine seems to have been joking.

But I do remember when you were something of a Hillary supporter about two years ago. A very reluctant one, your position seemed to have been Hillary was inevitable and there was no point in opposing her. And you did not take too well to some other posters who were vociferously anti-Hillary and promoting her defeat.

I state this from my memory, and if I am inaccurate here please correct me, and/or clarify and/or expand.

never liked her.

I said she would win as the fix was in

I predicted all of the campaign except for the fact she blew a sure shot
I predicted she would use the oh woe is me being a woman with all these men ganging up on me
I predicted she would use some as shields and none of the others would get any traction, which is what happened til Obama got in the race

doesn't mean I liked her or Bill. Never.

Hillary never even saw Obama on her radar. That is why she blew it big time.

But if she had been the candidate, I was the one who said she would win the electoral votes, but not as much as Obama will get.
But she would get 270.

at that point, the other posters (like indianhead and marine and the others said a woman would never get anywhere (same crap they spew now on Obama being black).

they are the ones that changed. That is why except for dgg and bigtom, all the other Hillary people are playing games, because they sure did not want her back then, til they felt Obama
was a worse choice for them personally. (not talking about dgg or bigtom here).

Okay Graham, it looks like I got it right. Remember I said that you were very reluctant about her. I never said that you liked her. But there were others besides Marine and IH who were very anti-Hillary whom you were very tough on. I am not going to say their names, but I think you could fairly say that they were considerably to the Left of Marine and IH, and you could not credibly accuse those others of playing such games. But I don't want to stir up that old argument, and bottom line I don't think anyone could have mistaken you for having any kind of enthusiasm for Hillary.

IH and Marine are of course entitled to tell their own stories on this.

Chris Cillizza in the Washington Post has moved Bayh to the #2 spot and elevated Biden from #4 to #1 in his latest predictions. He could be right that Biden is peaking at the right time, but who knows?

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/

The buzz for VP has definitely shifted from Bayh to Biden. Liberals in the blogosphere have spoken out against Bayh because of his support for the War in Iraq. So, Bayh’s almost-sure-thing odds have declined over the past several days. And, the progressives seem to find Biden acceptable even though he too supported the war in Iraq. Maybe because he was more publicly critical of the way Bush was running it. But Bayh was the first one to call for Rumsfeld’s resignation. I still think Bayh is a better match than Biden, despite the last minute campaign against him.

Sebelius was talked about a lot, then Sam Nunn, then Kaine, then Bayh and now Biden. Jack Reed has also been mentioned.

What I think rules Sebelius out is her lack of national or foreign policy experience, where Obama is seen as weak. Also, in a year where a black man is on the ticket for the first time, picking another first might be too much for the American people. I think the ticket would be seen as lightweight.

Sam Nunn has been out of politics for too long and is too cozy with the defense industry, in my opinion. The pick doesn’t make sense unless Obama just wants to get a foreign policy guru on the ticket.

Tim Kaine would be a good choice to emphasize Obama’s outsider against Washington strategy, but here again, we would have the same problem as with Sebelius – too little national experience – Although governors have always done well as presidential candidates. The fact that Mark Warner was given the keynote speech though sort of makes it less likely that Obama would choose another Virginian as his running mate.

Evan Bayh has seemed like the logical and best pick for Obama, and I like the image and the idea of the Midwestern team. They’re also around the same age and both very attractive for the camera. Bayh also brings executive experience as a former governor and national security experience from his service on foreign policy committees. He also brings Indiana into play. But, I did not expect the backlash from the liberal blogosphere to the possibility of Evan Bayh as Obama’s pick. They must have gotten word from someone close to the process that it was down to Bayh and someone else, and they wanted to influence his pick.

Joe Biden is a likable guy and I think his foreign policy experience and his ability to get tough with opponents while still seeming likable is a definite plus. I don’t know what he does for Obama electorally, although some people think he could help Obama in Pennsylvania. It’s the experience factor that the Obama people are obviously looking at.

I have always thought that Biden was a showboat and a name-dropper who liked to show off his experience and knowledge. He has become more self-deprecating recently though, which definitely makes him more likable. But to me, I would think it would be hard for him to be #2. And I think he would have a tendency to overshadow Obama when it comes to foreign policy. Everyone would want to talk to him about it. It would be a Cheney pick, but he’s totally different personality-wise than Dick Cheney. Would he be content to be a behind-the-scenes mover and shaker? Is Obama going to have to act like George Bush in order to remind everyone that he’s the one in charge? If Obama wants to pick an older guy with foreign policy heft, he should pick Jack Reed, who is more understated and still very respected.

Plus Biden is more old school. He doesn’t seem to represent the sweeping changes that the Dems need to emphasize that the country needs to make with regard to energy. He would be more suitable for Secretary of State.

If Obama chooses Biden, it would be sad for Bayh that a person with such potential would miss out again. Bayh has tended to play it safe, but that’s what people in his district have wanted. His dad was more liberal, but ended up getting beat by a young conservative – Dan Quayle! Bayh would be popular with national security Dems because of his hawkishness and his executive experience. It would give them less reason to look at McCain. He also looks REALLY good with Obama. The television image of them together would be almost impossible for McCain to top – no matter who he picks!

go to drudge and see the picture of Obama/Kerry

now that is a good looking twosome!
Same height too.

Indiana is ALREADY ON THE BLUE SIDE according to all current polls for the last three months

therefore Indiana is NOT need of help


Gore
Kerry
Biden
help with all the others

That blog obviously doesn't realzie how in the pocket of AIPAC and Israel Bayh is.
He was co-chair of a separate pac looking to promote the war (which Blayh seems to forget about).
How you beamer, who is anti-military in 99.9 percent of your posts, wants the #1 most
biggest a-kisser is beyond me.
Cuz you think he looks good? I for one think he is damn ugly. Because of his damn ugly
views.

Obama could demonstrate his leadership if he chose Evan Bayh bucking some party supporters --- or he could go with the safe choice -- Joe Biden which does nothing to strengthen the ticket -- but shows Obama caving in yet again as he did to the Clintons on the convention talks and the roll calls.

August 17, 2008

Bayh defends Obama, challenges McCain stance

By MAUREEN GROPPE
Star Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Sen. Evan Bayh aggressively defended Barack Obama and went after John McCain at the start of the week in which Obama is likely to reveal his running mate.

Interviewed on CBS' "Face the Nation," the Indiana Democrat said McCain is given to "bellicose rhetoric which has a tendency to inflame conflicts rather than to defuse them." He also said McCain should denounce a new book about Obama that Bayh said is full of "lies and allegations."

"The old John McCain would denounce that," Bayh said. "The new John McCain has embraced those kind of tactics."

With the Democratic National Convention beginning next week, Bayh is continuing to be talked about as a potential running mate for Obama.

One of the question marks pundits have raised is how tough an attack dog Bayh would be in that role.

On "Face the Nation," Bayh took his first chance to criticize McCain when asked whether McCain went too far in commenting on the conflict between Russia and Georgia in declaring, "Today, we are all Georgians."

Bayh said he had.

"We are not all Georgians now," Bayh said. "If we were Georgians and the Russians were invading our country and killing our people, we'd be in a state of war. And clearly that's not what we want."

In addition to criticizing McCain's "bellicose rhetoric," Bayh said that if "the president and Senator McCain weren't so obsessed with an open-ended commitment to Iraq, perhaps we would have paid greater attention to some of these issues."

"The Russians know we're bogged down in Iraq," Bayh said.

At the start of the interview, both Bayh and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty - a possible McCain running mate - were asked if they'd been told they will be the nominee.

"Does anybody have an announcement here?" asked host Bob Schieffer.

"I think the senator does," Pawlenty said.

But Bayh did not.

"We may make news this morning, but it's not going to be that," Bayh said.

Bayh was not the only potential Democratic vice presidential candidate appearing on the Sunday talk shows or criticizing McCain's foreign policy.

On CNN's "Late Edition," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson likewise accused McCain of "making a lot of rhetorical, bellicose statements but without any specific policies."

On NBC's "Meet the Press," Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine said the Bush administration's intensive focus on Iraq has caused it to take its eye off the ball in other places like Russia, which is one reason Obama wants to wind down U.S. involvement in Iraq.

Asked about his vice presidential prospects, Kaine said he thinks he's unlikely to be chosen, but will help Obama "in whatever way he thinks I can be helpful."

Sen. Joe Biden, the Delaware Democrat who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and also is believed to be in the mix to become Obama's running mate, headed to Georgia over the weekend at the request of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.

ABC New's George Stephanopoulos raised the question on his Sunday show of whether the situation in Georgia makes it even more important that Obama pick a running mate with national security experience like Biden's or perhaps Bayh's. (Bayh serves on the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees.)

Not commenting specifically about either Biden or Bayh, former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle, a national co-chair of Obama's campaign, said there's a difference between experience and good judgment.

"I don't think experience has ultimately given us a great deal of confidence these last eight years," Daschle said. "What Senator Obama has said from the very beginning is that he wants somebody with good judgment."

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...S0502/808170404

don't know if you know

BUT BAYH WAS ELIMINATED and 6 different democrats appeared on the different shows yesterday. Funny thing is, the most likely IMHO candidate was
silent as he has been

There are NO trials, no test periods. The answer is already known. And we now know it is NOT Bayh and NOT Clark.

and its so funny taz, you are left with nothing but to degrade the others (while you have denounced those who denounced Bayh...
just like in 2004, when no negatives were allowed on Edwards (and I was 100% correct then).

I predict that the VP will be Leiberman since we do nothing but fight.
McCain will pick Leiberman..

Biden makes a lot of sense given the events of the last 10 days... and the potential boost to McCain when military / foreign policy matters come to the fore.

Foreign policy identical twins...a good match....

Do they forget that Biden voted to go to war with Iraq too?



Now, I like Biden in one respect --- he was the first one to suggest that significantly more troops were necessary in Iraq before John McCain. On Meet the Press he said either 20-40,000 or 40-60,000 more troops were needed and McCain said another brigade which is 5,000...

But other than that on Iraq Biden and Bayh have little differences...

.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate


Vote Summary

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114
Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
Vote Counts: YEAs 77
NAYs 23
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State


Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Allen (R-VA), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Yea
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Carnahan (D-MO), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Chafee (R-RI), Nay
Cleland (D-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corzine (D-NJ), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Yea
Dayton (D-MN), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Yea
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Gramm (R-TX), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Helms (R-NC), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchinson (R-AR), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (I-VT), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Miller (D-GA), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-NH), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thompson (R-TN), Yea
Thurmond (R-SC), Yea
Torricelli (D-NJ), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wellstone (D-MN), Nay
Wyden (D-OR),

Frankly I do wonder why the race (In the polls) is still close.
I do not see a landslide at all.
It is not the time to be arrogant or over confidant.

I don't anticipate a landslide....I don't wonder why it's close....I'm just hoping Obama wins.

Graham your memory must be fading. I was right there with you (if you were on the Kerry site) in urging against the selection of JOhn Edwards right up until he was selected. And then I fell into line.

I have since spoken against Edwards too. But I do say he had the politcial courage to come out saying he made a mistake on the Iraq war vote -- something many others have not done...

You know nothing Graham -- we know nothing -- until the candidate speaks and makes his announcement.

Politics is funny Graham.

You speak in absolutes all the time, but its a fluid process.

I always reserved my right to comment on all the candidates for a position, but once the choice is made, I fall into line behind my candidate respecting his choice as I would hope you would as well if he should choose Bayh.

There are plenty of news reports which still note that its between Biden and Bayh --- which likely means neither will get it.

Yes, we have Biden who was for the Iraq war before he was against it just like Kerry -- and the fact that he is an admitted plagiarist, Northeast liberal elitist...

How will that play in the midwest?

I object equally to Bidden and Bayh, for different reasons. I wish he would pick Boxer from Calif
and I would be satisfied with Kerry.

Well, the choice is much more important for the republicans than it is for the democrats. McCain has stated he's in this for one term only so the republicans have got to come up with an heir apparent. That will rule Lieberman out. It don't really matter much who Obama picks, the losing VP candidate has never made a serious bid for president to my knowledge.

I got a nice letter from a group of Hillary supporters this weekend urging me to vote for McCain to insure Hillary get's the opportunity to run in 2012. I think they have an idea but they neglect the fact we'd have to endure 4 years of John McCain. I still don't see how Obama thinks he has a prayer of winning when between 40-50% of the folks who supported Hillary will cross over or just not vote at all.

McCain is riding the wave of hidden racism... and it is a pretty big wave.

Hillary rode it and now it's McCain's turn.

NOTE: I'm not saying either is a racist... you don't have to be a racist to play the racist advantage. Hillary played it to perfection in the last several weeks of her campaign and McCain and the GOP will do likewise.

It won't necessarily.. but Biden will appeal to a much different demographic.

To me the choice will come down to demographics and not the man.

Advantage ? Who knows.

Yes he is.

And that is sad.

But people in middle America have been conditioned to trust Democrats -- northeast liberal elitists about the same as they treat race...

So selecting Biden does not learn from the Clinton Gore example that two middle America people are the best choices...because they can talk the talk.

I would just like to win and I think Bayh offers the best chance to win in 2008.

Yep.

Its nice that they are listening to their candidates public statements.

I wonder if they are really Hillary supporters or its just a Republican dirty trick posing as such.

BUt Hillary supporters in the important states already 70-80% of them have gone over to Obama Marine...you must not have been reading the last month or so...

Nice to know that many women are so sexist that they put gender above their country.

They cry gender bias and, yet, are the biggest practitioners.

That falls in line more with what I've heard...

Well, ya know; I loved the answer Obama gave on who he wouldn't a nominated for the Supreme Court, especialy Clarence Thomas. So Thomas didn't have the experience, huh buddy? Sort a like you, eh?

I believe that racism is a bigger obstacle in this case. I'd venture that there are more who will vote against him because of his race than will do so because of his experience.

Given race and experience McCain should have a strong double digit lead...

Even with those numbers it puts Obama 6 to 10 percent in the hole behind McNasty.

The democratic party is heading for a disaster of epic proportions.

I think you'll see that around November 3rd and 4th.