This weekend we learned that presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama had selected Delaware Senator Joe Biden as his running mate. I don't want to seem like a Monday morning quarterback, but I think he made the wrong choice. With all due respect to Biden, Indiana Senator Evan Bayh would have been a better selection.
While Bayh has not been in the Senate as long as Biden, he has been in the Senate for nearly 10 years and does have experience with national security issues. He has served on the Senate Armed Services Committee, including the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities and the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support. But unlike Biden, Bayh also has executive experience -- he previously served as Indiana's governor for eight years.
Another factor that Obama should have considered is the fact issue that favored Bayh is that he has avoided major gaffes because he can control his mouth, something that has proved difficult for Biden during his years as a public figure. In addition, Bayh, who had endorsed Hillary Clinton during the primaries, would have brought Obama many of her most ardent former supporters, who are still holding out. Finally, Bayh would have given Obama a serious shot at winning Indiana, a state that has been solidly Republican in presidential races for decades. Obama was going to win Delaware anyway.
I bet Al Gore regretted not taking then-Florida Senator Bob Graham as his running mate in 2000. Graham, as is the case with Bayh in Indiana, had also served as the governor of Florida. No doubt Graham would have delivered Florida, and consequently the presidency, to Gore. Instead, he selected Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who proved to be of no real benefit to him. Likewise, Obama wasted a great opportunity to shore up his chances for victory when did not select Bayh. Now his presidential aspirations are likely to "Bayh" the farm.
Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, amateur political analyst, and blogger from Virginia, USA. He posts a least one article a day to his blog - http://commenterry.blogs.com - on subjects such as current events, politics, technology, society and culture, religion, health and well-being, self improvement, personal finance, trivia, and sports. His commentaries offer a unique point of view that is not often found in mainstream media. His articles here on SearchWarp represent only a small portion of his work. All of it can be found on his blog. If you like his articles, you'll love his blog.
» left by robert melaccio sr. (100 days 22 hours ago.)
Terry, I sincerely appreciate your opinion however you are addressing exactly the issue I put forth in my latest article "The nitty gritty of it all". Another one of those Washington crowd insiders who brought this all down upon us, as this candidate continually implies. I don't see any of them deviating one bit from the course they are on, although I will give you he is probably the lessor evil of all that could be picked and perhaps a few more here or there. Now I will grant you normally experience would be a plus. In the case of government in my opinion that is a reverse. The fact that he was for Hillary says it all.
I don't think McCain has selected Lieberman yet, unless you know something the rest of us don't. And I don't believe he will. My guess is that he will end up taking either Tom Pawlenty (governor of Minnesota) or Mitt Romney instead. Lieberman might have a strong appeal to Democrats and independents, but his selection might cause the conservative base of the Republican Party to abandon McCain, i.e., stay home on Election Day. I don't think he's willing to take that chance.
I think the obvious choice would have been Hillary Clinton, if she would have agreed to taking second seat; and I think that would have solidified a 'for sure' win for Obama.
If not, I would have hoped for, John Kerry. But again, I do not think that he would have accepted the offer.
Either way, it is now going to be a tight race. If McCain, which I thought that he had, officially selected Lieberman, then I disagree that this would cause him to lose the majority conservative right in this campaign. This particular campaign is not exactly red sate/blue state dependent. Many people are "on the border", so to speak.
And this has much to do with the people's disappointments in the way the war in Iraq has played out. People who were "gung ho" about the war against terror in 2004, are not so sure that we have taken the right offensive.
The issues that dominated the election in 2004, have shifted. The people are looking for someone who might offer a better solution; i.e., a way out of the war in Iraq.
Take Russia, for example..They know we are militarily too weak at this moment. China knows this too. Strategically, they are much more free to do as they please, because they recognise our military's weaknesses. We are spread too thinly.
Just think of the game 'Risk'. We only have so many troops to place in certain areas. If we had come to the aid in Georgia, this would have decreased some our our 'might' in other areas. Do you think it is just a coicnidence that Russia has chosen this time period to attempt to reunite? I don't think so. Let's say, they are in cohoots with China..
It wouldn't take very much effort to weaken our military. One more Katrina, and we're done! We are extremely vulnerable at this moment. Until we pull out of Iraq, our homefront is a sitting duck. Do you think our enemies are so stupid? They know damn well, we only have so many areas that we can protect at a certain time.
I agree that Hillary would have been a better pick than Biden. She would have been worth about 4-5 percentage points for him instantly in the polls. I'm not so sure about Kerry, though. People think of him as as yesterday's news.
I agree completely with your assessment of the Iraq war's impact on our nation. I was against it from the start, but few people would listen to me. That's the main reason I refuse to support McCain.
However, you seem to be misjudging the conservative right of the Republican Party. They are very dogmatic in their views and don't necessary care about the same issues that the average Joe does. They will abandon McCain in a heart beat if he selects someone like Lieberman or Tom Ridge. He's very well aware if that and that's why he won't do it. Trust me -- I've been following politics since I was in the second grade. McCain will select Pawlenty or Romney. I'll bet my career as a genuine amateur political analyst on it.
I'd be interested to hear what you think of my new article ( currently awaiting approval ) called ' The Current Threat of NATO's Conflict of Interests: The New Cold War'.
As far as the conservative right goes, are they as united as they were before? I think people are becoming less devoted to a singular party, nowadays. There has been too much exposure in the media discouraging this type of behaviour. People have 'caught on' to Rupert Murdoch's tricks, and have become distrustful of any type of fundamentalism. I think if any party has become more passionate, it is the left.
But who knows for sure until election comes? However, I do think Obama just blew it. He should have recognised the power of combining with Hillary, and vice versa. At this moment, even I am questioning my previous assessment of the Democratic party. I just can't believe it.
Jennifer, that sounds like an interesting article. I'll have to check it out when it becomes available.
Unfortunately, we have people on both the right and left who act like Stepford Wives and don't think for themselves. They run like packs of wolves and take their queue from others on what to say and how to think. Very sad. These are kinds of conservatives who believe everything Rush Limbaugh says (he doesn't call them Ditto-Heads for nothing, you know) and everything they see and hear on Fox News and the Drudge Report. These are the kinds of liberals who constantly get duped by the gospel of the Hollywood crowd, global warming fanatics, Planned Parenthood, and PETA. I'm planning to address this issue in an article in the very near future. Look for it in the coming distractions.
» left by skysage from California (100 days 14 hours ago.)
Can't say I agree with you. Bayh is a corporate DLC lite republican who still supports the war. He really appears to be a wimp with no force in his belly. Besides I understand that the folks in Indiana really don't like him that much. Biden has strong convictions and a man of substance in spite of his speaking gaffes. He will have many ideas to offer Obama. Although their relationship will not be perfect, they will still be closely tied in cooperative effort together. Bayh is not a progressive who can match the need for change. Obama made the right choice. Frankly I am sick of the DLC crowd who watered down our democratic principles. Bayh is one of these. To think that he could still be for the war is unacceptable. I am truly grateful Obama did not pick him.
Okay Skysage, so you don't like Evan Bayh. Fair enough. But you also say "the folks in Indiana don't really like him that much." Really? Why then have they elected him twice as their governor and twice as their U.S. Senator? Have they no one else to choose?
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
