Bayhmania

Now it's Evan Bayh's turn. I would again point out that Bayh likewise has a much longer connection to the DC journalistic establishment than Kathleen Sebelius. Though I fear that at this point this I am just engaging in wishful thinking to try and keep Sebelius in the running.

Nate Silver tries to make the case that Bayh's decent on the issues, given Indiana's electorate. Josh Patashnik does too. In his defense Bayh did vote against both the 2003 and 2001 Bush tax shifts, and seems to have been on the side of the angels on a good number of lower profile issues (torture, Supreme Court justices, stem-cell research, bankruptcy bill cloture, estate tax repeal). That leaves Iraq, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, and some other lower-profile issues (tort reform, partial birth). Given the outcry over Obama's statements on late-term abortion, and the fact that he's viewed suspciously by some women's/choice groups, I think that would make by a risky pick from a base perspective. So, I'll call the Silver/Patashnik case half convincing, and keep holding out for Sebelius or some as-yet underreported pick.

Comments

[Joe Klein's conscience]

Don't forget, Bayh was co-chair of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq with "Holy" Joe Lieberman and John McCain.

[Stephen]

If Hillary lost the primary largely due to, as Atrios has said, her support for the Iraq War, and if her unacceptability as a VP candidate is based largely on the same thing - well, plus all the times Bill dressed up in blackface and did watermelon and fried chicken jokes, apparently - why exactly is Bayh acceptable?

Why would it be OK to Obama's core supporters for him to pick anyone who supported the Iraq War and who, unlike John Edwards, hasn't repented?

I'm not trying to relive the primary. I'm trying to understand why such a huge issue, the basis for Obama's campaign, the genesis of a billion discussion about "judgment," why it would no longer matter. The talk about Bayh is greeted with a big yawn, mainly, from Democrats, but as JK'sC pointed out, he not only voted for the AUMF, he played a key role in pushing this nation into an illegal war.

Bill Kristol is roundly viewed as a horrible human being, and when the NYT hired him, liberal blogs went nuts. But our own nominee for the Presidency is considering Bayh - one of Kristol's co-conspirators - for VP, and no one seems to care.

Bayh would be a terrible pick, a nullifying pick, a pick designed to inform the powers that be in this nation - left, right and whatever else - that despite the rhetoric, Obama poses no threat to them, indeed knows exactly what side his bread is buttered on and plans on making sure that side is as available to be buttered in his administration as any other.

How sad.

[Trevor J]

"why exactly is Bayh acceptable?"

He's not, to me, for exactly the reasons you just listed. If Obama picks him it's not a deal-breaker anymore than the FISA vote was, but I'll be pretty damn disappointed.

C'mon, Obama. Don't cave to the DLC.