Does anyone actually WANT Bayh?

[bidenista]

He just seems such a "blah" candidate.

[Naturyl]

1. Nope. (n/t)

[Metric System]

2. His wife.

[Lorien]

3. No way. n/t

[valerief]

4. Nayh. nt

[marlakay]

5. no be very dissapointed but still vote for him of course

i would wonder what he was thinking...

[Cleita]

6. No, but since I

would like Kooch, none of those listed are whom I would want.

[BeyondGeography]

7. Pas moi

I prefer your guy.

[anonymous171]

8. No. Too much DLC.

[WA98296]

12. Exactly. Will Obama remember WHO brought him? Wasn't them.

[LVjinx]

22. I'm sure Obama would answer that argument that we didn't bring him, he brought us

[wyldwolf]

25. who was it?

[ulysses]

35. a *majority* of Democrats.

[wyldwolf]

36. exactly, as it always is

[ulysses]

39. the DLC doesn't represent the majority of Democrats?

[wyldwolf]

40. Yes, in my opinion, which makes the other poster's statement irrelevant and a bit divisive

[ulysses]

41. let me make sure I understand you correctly.

You're saying that the DLC does not represent the majority of Democrats?

[wyldwolf]

46. Nope, wasn't what I said

Recap:

Exactly. Will Obama remember WHO brought him? Wasn't them. (DLC)

Who was it?

a *majority* of Democrats.

Exactly, as it always is...

SEE? The DLC has never "brought" a candidate. Nor has the PDA, DFA, FBI, CIA, WWE, or the any other organization.

So stating "Will Obama remember WHO brought him? Wasn't them. (DLC)" is an irrelevant statement. A candidate's nomination cannot be credited to one entity within the Dem party.

[ulysses]

47. except that you've edited out the part about

"Exactly, as it always is..."

I saw it, though, so no problem. Your editing leaves something Stalinist to be desired, but I digress.

SEE? The DLC has never "brought" a candidate.

So how do you claim credit for Bill Clinton?

[wyldwolf]

48. I didn't edit anything out

:shrug:

I don't claim credit for Bill Clinton.

:shrug:

[ulysses]

49. I invite DUers to look at post #40 to see if it has been edited.

As to the second point, the argument for some years has been that the DLC is the group that gave us BC. Do you deny that now?

[wyldwolf]

50. I invite DUers to check posts #36 and #46 where the passage you said I edited out resides twice

the argument for some years has been that the DLC is the group that gave us BC. Do you deny that now?

That has never been an argument. Do you have a link for that?

[ulysses]

51. no one has ever made the argument

that the DLC brought us the years of prosperity under Bill Clinton? You're kidding, right?

No, I'm not going to look up a link. Anyone paying attention knows.

[wyldwolf]

53. you've just changed what your claiming the argument has been

Originally, you claimed the argument has been made that the DLC brought us Bill Clinton. Now you're saying the argument has been made that the DLC brought us the years of prosperity under Bill Clinton.

There's a difference. Which is it?

Because the DLC recruited Bill Clinton to run for President and equipped him with several of their key policies. But Clinton had to go through several primary candidates and a general election. So like you said previously, a *majority* of Democrats brought us President Clinton.

[ulysses]

59. easy there, stretch.

There's a difference.

Not really. Clinton and the Good Years aren't separable in party-speak. Not sure where you're trying to go with this, unless it's to unhitch BC from the dotcom boom, which I doubt you'd have done a couple of years ago.

So like you said previously, a *majority* of Democrats brought us President Clinton.

And this time, they didn't bring the DLC candidate, centrist though Obama is. So does the DLC represent the majority of Democrats?

edited for clarity - replaced "he" with "Obama" in the last line. Not so hard to let people know what edits mean, is it?

[wyldwolf]

62. Easy there, Dodge

Clinton and the Good Years aren't separable in party-speak. Not sure where you're trying to go with this, unless it's to unhitch BC from the dotcom boom, which I doubt you'd have done a couple of years ago.

We're discussing the nomination of Democratic presidents (hence the statement in post #12) and the eventual election. The nomination and election of Bill Clinton is separate from "the good years" especially in the context of this discussion.

And this time, they didn't bring the DLC candidate, centrist though he is.

No, they didn't. Still as irrelevant as previously in this discussion. But it was the DLC along with the majority of Democrats who did bring Obama.

So does the DLC represent the majority of Democrats?

My answer isn't going to change no matter how many times you ask it.

[ulysses]

64. "But it was the DLC along with the majority of Democrats who did bring Obama" edited

Really? But I thought the DLC didn't bring candidates. You just said that.

edit - from your post 46: "SEE? The DLC has never "brought" a candidate. Nor has the PDA, DFA, FBI, CIA, WWE, or the any other organization."

[wyldwolf]

66. Why not quote my entire quote?

"The DLC has never "brought" a candidate. Nor has the PDA, DFA, FBI, CIA, WWE, or the any other organization.

So stating "Will Obama remember WHO brought him? Wasn't them. (DLC)" is an irrelevant statement. A candidate's nomination cannot be credited to one entity within the Dem party."

Again, we're discussing a nominee and eventual election of a candidate.

[ulysses]

67. why not back up the statement you made?

Is it that hard?

[wyldwolf]

69. back-up which statement?

:shrug:

[ulysses]

70. post 46

"The DLC has never "brought" a candidate".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6704184&mesg_id=6705447

[wyldwolf]

71. I already have... multiple times.

Exhibit A: We're discussing the nomination and eventual election of a candidate
Exhibit B: Many more Dems other than the DLC variety voted for Bill Clinton in the primaries and general.

:shrug:

[ulysses]

72. has the DLC ever brought a candidate? yes or no.

[wyldwolf]

74. there's another question you keep asking over and over because you don't like my first answer

...

:shrug:

Since you KNOW we're discussing the nominee and you KNOW I've already stated several times, ""The DLC has never "brought" a candidate. Nor has the PDA, DFA, FBI, CIA, WWE, or the any other organization. So stating "Will Obama remember WHO brought him? Wasn't them. (DLC)" is an irrelevant statement. A candidate's nomination cannot be credited to one entity within the Dem party."

Again, we're discussing a nominee and eventual election of a candidate.

[ulysses]

75. answer the question.

You denied it once and asserted it once. Which is it?

[wyldwolf]

77. I already have... multiple times.

[ulysses]

79. no, you haven't.

[wyldwolf]

82. yes, I have. The latest was in post 74

[ulysses]

52. does the DLC represent the majority of Democrats?

[wyldwolf]

55. Asking me the same question twice won't get you a different answer.

:shrug:

[ulysses]

60. see #59 then.

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

see #40 then

:shrug:

[ulysses]

65. never have gotten much of an answer

so I guess I'm not surprised.

[wyldwolf]

68. as usual, it wasn't the answer you were anticipating. That alway throws your game off.

YOU: the DLC doesn't represent the majority of Democrats?
ME: Yes, in my opinion, which makes the other poster's statement irrelevant and a bit divisive

[ulysses]

73. the statement was vague, which was why I asked the followup.

:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

76. the answer was clear, just not what you were anticipating

:shrug:

[ulysses]

80. what answer?

I understand that clarity is a problem, but do try.

[wyldwolf]

81. post 40

[Lucky 13]

9. Nope.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

10. Meh!

[Robeson]

11. My mother.

[Lucinda]

13. Not me. Clinton, Biden, Clark would work for me

[bigwillq]

14. I don't.

:mad:








DLC! DLC! DLC! :bounce:

[IndyOp]

15. The woman who cuts my hair. She is smart, not too political - and

thinks he is a decent man. And, yes, she'd be thrilled to have someone from Indiana chosen.

Some people would be very happy with Evan.

Not me.

[TwilightGardener]

16. I'm OK with him.

[Ashy Larry]

17. Nope.

I have yet to hear any support for Bayh outside the corporate media.

[wyldwolf]

18. Apparently Obama thinks highly of him and so do I. I'd rather have Biden, though.

[NorthCarolina]

19. Not me n/t

[Danieljay]

20. no. n/t

[Chloroplast]

21. Eh, there are worse picks.

[City Lights]

23. Not me.

Total bore.

[Geek_Girl]

24. Not really but it would put Indiana in play

which would spread McCain thin.

[DeadEyeDyck]

26. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[nsd]

27. I like him.

I'd be happy with Biden too.

[...of J.Temperance]

28. I want it to be Senator Bayh, I adore the man

He's very intelligent, has a lot of political experience, and as a Moderate he'd help Senator Obama make Swing States be in play.

[salonghorn70]

29. Bay's My First Choice

But its going to be Biden and that will be great too.

[Roxy66]

58. Shouldnt you have to be able to spell his name first

[tulip]

30. I'm ok with Bayh or Biden!

:hi:

[Debi]

31. No n/t

[musicblind]

32. I don't want anyone who has held any support for constitutional amendments banning same sex marriage

[Tom Rinaldo]

33. No. n/t

[emilyg]

34. No. No. No.

[Dinger]

37. Fuck No! (nt)

[and-justice-for-all]

38. Nein!

I live in Indiana and I do not want to see him VP.

He does not support Gay Marriage at all, not even civil unions. Biden has much more of a bite and seems to be much more strong willed to me.

[GoesTo11]

42. Might be a low risk play

If you were up 99-1 and just had to avoid a pedophile scandal.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

43. hhhhhhelllllll no

[invictus]

44. NO! Bayh is a foaming-at-the-mouth, war-loving neo-con. He is basically a Republican, not even lite.

n/t

[progressivebydesign]

57. and guess what? Most of America is moderate/centrist.

He plays well to that. You have to think of what the majority of voters would choose... not what those of us who spend hours dissecting politics would choose.

[Arugula Latte]

45. Gawd, no.

[progressivebydesign]

54. I'd be happy with Bayh.

YOu have to remember that the majority of people on these sites are all hardcore politicos and much more liberal than most Democratic voters. Most voters repsond to guys like Bayh -- he's very middle America, looks like a guy that might own a local business in town. I think the fresh and youthful image of Obama and Bayh would give voters that feeling of hope and change -- not some of the names being floated about that wear uber expensive italian suits and can talk your ear off about obscure policy.

Politics is show business -- and McCain is being marketed as a regular guy, that's how Bush got close enough to steal it against Gore, and how he beat Kerry. America warms up to guys like Bayh and Chet Edwards and yeah.. Gephardt.

[MissDeeds]

56. I just heard on a KC news cast

that a company in Lenexa, KS, is feverishly printing Obama/Bayh bumper stickers. The owner of the company won't comment, but word seems to have leaked out. Sorry if this has already been discussed...

Not a Bayh fan myself.

[kas125]

61. I live in Indiana and I do not know a single person who

wants it to be Bayh.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

63. No, he'd be a real disappointment

and too DLC for the tastes of this "looney leftist."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3834398

[saltpoint]

78. If Obama chooses Bayh I'll make the case for him. It's a bit

tougher than it would be for several others, but hey, we're not wimps. We can do it if we have to.

[RNdaSilva]

83. Not gonna happen. He's already been informed. I think!?!

Check out NBC and Keith Olbermann.

[sampsonblk]

84. No-nt