RSS
Using PayPal
100,000 Strong Against Evan Bayh?
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Wednesday, Aug 13 2008, 9:40AM
Well, not quite. . .but Max Bernstein just launched this Facebook affinity aversion page by the same name.
I was signatory #75, but the list is comprised of some of the most powerful progressive bloggers and activists in the United States.
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - Share Your Views on Evan Bayh: Pro and Con. . .» Next Article - Stop Obama/Bayh 08: A Surge of Concern
Reader Comments (9) - post a comment
I might have joined if I hadn't seen Bob Brigham's name. The original purity troll of the blogosphere.
Echoes of another illustrious Senator from Indiana--Dan Quayle. Will someone ask him to spell potato before it's too late? Is it something about the water in Indiana that produces public "servants" like this?
Nice to speak with you this morning, Steve. Usually the callers
aren't as nutty as "Alex", but on some days, you get what you get.
I'd like to hope that you are right, but I don't see it happening
absent some sort of future violent uprising. Power doesn't give up
power. You have to take it.
As for Evan Bayh...well, he strikes me as someone who plumbs the
depths of mediocrity. His competency runs the gamut of being
competent at saying nothing about anything to saying nothing
about everything.
This is a clever attempt tp unrail the Obama/Sharpton '08 juggernaut.
I am choosing to embrace the optimistic hypothesis that the reason the Obama campaign has launched this particular trial balloon is to avail the blogosphere and other activists of an easy opportunity to puncture the balloon, aggressively and en masse, and bring it down quickly, thus making it easier for Obama to demonstrate the political facts of life to Bayh and his deluded backers.
Count me as one who thinks very little of the idea of "ideological balancing" on a ticket. I can appreciate the appeal of regional balancing, or balancing other aspects of personal style or superficial identity such as racial or gender balancing. But when it comes to ideological outlook and message, I believe the VP candidate should be an enthusiastic and unreserved devotee of the presidential candidate's vision - someone who is going to hit the campaign trail running as an energetic happy warrior and enthusiastic pitch man for the campaign. The choice of the VP candidate should constitute a doubling down on the message, not a muddying of the message with awkward ideological or institutional compromise.
I continue to think Richardson has the right attributes. He has a good sense of humor and buoyant personality, and is nevertheless a familiar face with the requisite governmental experience in state and federal executive branch government, and a good rapport with a number of foreign leaders. He also seems to have genuine personal chemistry with Obama, and sincerely grooves to Obama's beat.
Can women throw their underwear to Richardson while he gives a speech, or does he have to rely upon his own magnetic sexual harassment powers to win them over?
Richardson looked completely clueless and in dire need of a hearing aid during every primary debate.
Bayh.. this year's cure for insomnia...zzzzzz...change this year would be picking a woman and only Hillary has an army of supporters chomping at the bit to work for the ticket...why turn them off? Why do electoral calculus when simple math will get you there? Vanilla, vanilla, vanilla, as far back as I can see... this time I want choclate and strawberry for a change.
I find Evan Bayh to be an unispiring - almost cynical choice. He totally squelches the change meme. Bayh smells of Mark Penn-like microslicing. Brian Schweitzer would be a truly exciting choice. And against the backdrop of war in the Caucuses, Joe Biden would be an excellent pick.
I'd prefer Tim Kane, Jack Reid or Chet Edwards to Bayh.
Leave a comment: