Srsly, I would actually maybe feel good about voting again if this dude threw his hat in the ring and had even a whisper of a chance (which would, obviously, not ever be the case).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1134
Wasnt Bayh one of the most heavily "bi-partisan" invested Senators though? He talks the talk, sure, but every time he had to walk the walk, he quavered and shacked up with Lieberman and Graham.
TBH, I know very little about his political career other than that he garnered alot of "rising star" buzz in '04 and that seemed to have evaporated by '08.
I'm still suspicious on why he is bailing out when he could pretty much have that Senate seat for the rest of his life. Sure, Coats would have given him a run for his money but there is enough anti-Coats sentiment that Bayh could have slipped past with 52% of the vote instead of his usual 60%. The timing on all of this is very weird. I don't think that there any scandals chasing him and he doesn't seem to have another job lined up. There's rumors of the DNC shoving him out the door but even they aren't stupid enough to shoot themselves in the foot this close to the primaries without a back up plan, right???
Glenn Greenwald (http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/11/30/bayh/index.html) is a little naive even on his best days (he seems to think that erosion of civil liberties is like, something that didn't happen until a decade or so ago, and as such Is Ignorant Of History), but when it comes to Bayh he pretty much has him dead to rights:
QuoteIt's impossible to find a more perfectly representative face for the rotted Washington establishment than Evan Bayh. He is the pure expression of virtually every attribute that makes the Beltway so dysfunctional, deceitful and corrupt.
Bayh wants to send other people into every proposed war he can find and keep them there forever without ever bearing any of the costs himself -- not in military service for him or his family nor even in higher taxes to pay for his glorious wars. Sacrifice is for everyone other than Evan Bayh and his friends. He runs around praising himself as a "deficit hawk" while recklessly supporting wars and indefinite occupations that the country can't afford and which drive us further into debt. He feigns concern over the "deficit" only when it comes time to deny ordinary Americans benefits which he and his family already possess in abundance. He is a loyal servant to the insurance and health care industries over his own constituents -- as his wife sits on the Boards of numerous health care giants, who, right when Bayh became a Senator, began paying her millions of dollars in cash and stock. And this Sermonizer of Personal Responsibility is the ultimate by-product of nepotism, following faithfully and effortlessly in the footsteps of his Daddy-Senator, whose seat he now occupies. The fact that he's a Democrat -- and was Obama's close-second choice for Vice President -- just underscores how bipartisan these afflictions are.
When the sad and destructive history of the U.S. over the last decade is written, the coddled, nepotistic, self-serving face of Evan Bayh should be prominently included. It embodies virtually every cause.
Also, the WaPo (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/community/groups/index.html?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aa70e3396-6663-4a8d-ba19-e44939d3c44fForum%3a5543a34c-af92-4736-b81b-4aad0ab02e2eDiscussion%3ac78b216f-f182-483a-b890-82671b1467b5?hpid=talkbox1), amazingly, defied conventional DC wisdom and called Bayh out on what he was really doing - flouncing from the Senate:
QuoteCommentators are being much too gullible about Senator Evan Bayh's reasons for not running for re-election. Eugene Robinson writes, "He probably could have kept his seat if he wanted it, but he decided, basically, that serving in the United States Senate was a waste of his time. . . . It is incredible that a U.S. senator believes he can be of more service to his state and his nation in some other role — running a business, leading a university. Wow."
I'm shocked, too–that Robinson believes this piffle. Bayh's announcement came days after former senator Dan Coats, a Republican, said he would challenge Bayh's re-election. Which is more plausible: that Bayh suddenly noticed that Congress has a lot of partisanship, or that he decided he didn't want to go through a tougher Senate campaign than he has ever had before?
Ruth Marcus, meanwhile, quotes Bayh pining for the days when Republican and Democratic incumbents helped each other get re-elected. That sounds awfully cozy. But what's in it for the public? The chance to have the service of Senator Bayh forever?
Bayh may be a nice man who has sincerely sought to serve the public interest, but he is not some great legislator the like of which we will never see again. He has changed the outcome of no debate. He has taken none of the risks of leadership on any issue. His decision to leave the Senate is not a tragedy.
And that, my friends, is the smell of pwnd DC gossips masquerading as journalists.
It's pretty tough to run against a sitting President running for reelection on your political career.
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 07:06:03 PM
QuoteCommentators are being much too gullible about Senator Evan Bayh's reasons for not running for re-election. Eugene Robinson writes, "He probably could have kept his seat if he wanted it, but he decided, basically, that serving in the United States Senate was a waste of his time. . . . It is incredible that a U.S. senator believes he can be of more service to his state and his nation in some other role — running a business, leading a university. Wow."
I'm shocked, too–that Robinson believes this piffle. Bayh's announcement came days after former senator Dan Coats, a Republican, said he would challenge Bayh's re-election. Which is more plausible: that Bayh suddenly noticed that Congress has a lot of partisanship, or that he decided he didn't want to go through a tougher Senate campaign than he has ever had before?
As I said, I can see that the race would have been the toughest he ever had to go through (he won his last three elections with over 60% of the vote) but he still would have won. He definitely has enough cash for it. There's backlash against all incumbents here just like everywhere else BUT his likely opponent is also a Beltway insider who has been a lobbyist for the last 10 years and has close ties to Bush (and Harriet Miers :lulz:). Add to that the fact that he hasn't lived in state this century and that he was caught on video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVdRW-Jj4uU) saying that North Carolina is better than Indiana. There's enough negativity around Coats that I think he still won't win no matter who the Democrats put up. I'm hoping that it's Brad Ellsworth even though he's a Blue Dog.
Quote from: Emerald City Hustle on February 17, 2010, 07:43:03 AM
Srsly, I would actually maybe feel good about voting again if this dude threw his hat in the ring and had even a whisper of a chance (which would, obviously, not ever be the case).
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1134
Make it 2016 and I think he'd have a realistic shot. As things stand, I don't think he'll be running though.