Any wonder on how Bayh will vote?

[nawainwright]

No surprise, but show's his douche-baggery. Hey, I'll vote for anything....even if its a pile of manure, because its not our money, so why should I care. His wife is on a bunch of boards that will receive money because of govt-run healthcare, why not vote to give himself more money?

"The political process as it's currently constituted in Washington may just be incapable of coming up with an ideal solution. So we may be left with alternatives that are less than ideal," Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., said on "Fox News Sunday." He echoed his Democratic colleagues in saying inaction is not an option -- in other words, it's better to have an imperfect bill than no bill at all.
"The other thing would be to vote for a bill, frankly, that we continue to have some questions about. That may be the choice that we're left with," Bayh said. "So my objective is to try and make that alternative of doing something as positive as we possibly can, realizing that at the end of the day it may be just imperfect. And unfortunately, that's the way Congress works from time to time."

Source: Moderate Democrats' Demands Could Drive Streamlined Health Bill - FOXNews.com

 

[SirRealism]

How convenient. Spend years ignoring calls for tort reform, insurance competition across state borders, and a resolution to illegal immigration. Now, in what they deem the 11th hour, they shrug their shoulders and say they must do "something". Great.

Here's my alternative to their plan. They need to give us the ratio of folks who will be receiving benefits they don't pay for, versus those who will be paying for their own and others' benefits. Let's say it's 1:4. That one person must go in front of a panel of 4 citizens. He must plead his case for why he cannot pay his own way in life. He must provide tax records for 10 years and prove he hasn't purchased a single luxury item. After hearing his presentation, the committee of 4 votes on how much assistance he deserves. If the person truly needs help, then they can each write a check out of their own checking account. No government involvement needed.

No, I'm not serious, but I think it's a good illustration, nonetheless. I hear so often from liberals that, because I don't want government involved in my healthcare, I have no compassion for the poor. But I rarely see those people volunteering to pay for someone else's insurance out of their own pockets.

 

[Barry in IN]

I just wish we could get rid of people like him who are firmly implanted. People will vote for him next time no matter what he does, just because they recognize the name.

It's the same with Lugar. The Dems didn't even bother to run anyone against Lugar last time since they knew there was no use, and I can't hardly argue with that. If he has such a secure hold the other party won't make an effort, it doesn't give much hope of ever dumping him.
But of course since he is one of the better Dems they have, even if there is an "R" by his name, why would they want to unseat him anyway? They get their liberal and don't have to spend anything in the process.

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

I just wish we could get rid of people like him who are firmly implanted. People will vote for him next time no matter what he does, just because they recognize the name.

It's the same with Lugar. The Dems didn't even bother to run anyone against Lugar last time since they knew there was no use, and I can't hardly argue with that. If he has such a secure hold the other party won't make an effort, it doesn't give much hope of ever dumping him.
But of course since he is one of the better Dems they have, even if there is an "R" by his name, why would they want to unseat him anyway? They get their liberal and don't have to spend anything in the process.

YES! This is what E.E. Schattschneider elucidated on in his books - name recognition is the key factor to winning elections, far and beyond any single factor in determining the outcome of any election, save party identification. Spending lots of money won't help if people don't know who you are; moreover, you don't need to spend a lot of money if people pretty much know who you are - hence why a lot of famous people tend to become political: Reagan himself was originally from Hollywood, lest we forget, and Schwarzenegger, despite not - in my opinion, at least - being a stellar governor, it was a decent transition - Californians, and America as a whole, already knew who he was, so he had to campaign less intensively than Paul Citizen, say, from Sacramento. This isn't to say that this applies only to celebrities... if a local businessman wants to run for office in a small district, odds are good that people know him - even if they don't like the guy, they know who he is... and apparently, the transition is then a mental comparison and the championing of the candidate as the lesser of two evils... and, more frequently, as an outsider to Washington, or the Statehouse, and still in touch with the People, someone who will stride into the Congress and knock them off their high horses with his newly-found Polo-mallet... when in reality, he's going to have the least seniority around, have the fewest opportunities to speak, and generally be assigned to the worst committees... so that district is actually pounding itself in the rectum concerning having its issues and problems addressed with others' taxes-paid money....

People always claim that a third-party will inevitably arise, but it's almost impossible for a third-party to firmly establish itself in the Congress: where there exists winner-take-all and no multiple candidates for a district, the system will favor two parties and not a plurality. Where majority wins, duality wins; where plurality wins, a plethora of parties arises. Look at Europe or Canada: most races are proportional to vote received nation-wide, and per district there may be four or five candidates, the leading candidate taking only 25% of the vote, with the rest taking 23, 19, 21, and 12%, respectively. However, in America, a majority must be won, more than 50% of the vote, so even if a third candidate were to win, his platform would have to effectively steal the undecided votes - so much so that the third-party candidate would have more than 50% of the vote, which is completely unlikely in this world of red and blue State. (Incidentally, the colors used for States during national elections used to alternate between red and blue every other election. Republicans were Red, Democrats, blue - and it would switch each election... until the 1990s, when suddenly blue meant Dem. and red meant Rep. ... which I find interesting to say the least.)

As to what will happen next year, who knows.... there isn't a candidate on either side who would, at this point, stand a snowball's chance in hell of defeating either Lugar or Bayh. Met Evan Bayh face-to-face twice when I was a teenager at a photo-op, and even though I went in totally dissatisfied, when the time came to spit on his face and shout at him, I still politely shook his hand and smiled... and I didn't even like the guy. It's strange to meet someone you don't like, but in the end, I just couldn't say anything I really would have liked to say to him. Never met Lugar, but we went over this in political science all the live-long day... he's on the ballot and probably will be until he dies.

 

[Barry in IN]

Met Evan Bayh face-to-face twice when I was a teenager at a photo-op, and even though I went in totally dissatisfied, when the time came to spit on his face and shout at him, I still politely shook his hand and smiled...

He has "that way" with people. Kinda like Clinton, and apparently, Obama. It's another way he keeps getting elected: "he seems like such a nice man".

Which reminds me of this that I've thought about, but never found the right place to bring it up before-
I have to think Bayh would hold a grudge against Obama.
Obama took his place.

It was Bayh who was the charming young governor, all set to be the next JFK-like young president. It was Bayh who was supposed to be playing raquetball or basketball in the morning, throwing White House parties at night, and pushing FDR-type agendas in between. He spent his career piecing that together.
Then about the time all was right, along came a second year senator few had ever heard of and took his place in the White House.
I can see that Bayh might feel that Obama took what was rightfully his.
It had to sting a little bit.

He also had to have thought that when (not if) Obama fails, it might cause a hard right turn in voters (like after Carter) making it a long time before the stars align again. If Bayh was ever going to be president, now was the best time for him.

I can't believe he hasn't had these thoughts, and it doesn't eat on him some. I was hoping he might be bothered by it enough to oppose some of the nonsense Obama is pushing just because he could.
I'm still waiting.

 

[Ramen]

He also says that sending 30,000 troops to a foreign country is a great idea and will save us from people who don't like having their countries invaded.


I <3 Evan Bayh.

 

[henktermaat]

He also says that sending 30,000 troops to a foreign country is a great idea and will save us from people who don't like having their countries invaded.


I <3 Evan Bayh.

 

[Ramen]

Bayh stands with Obama on Afghan surge_ exit | The Journal Gazette, Fort Wayne, Ind.

Half war for the win! Lets stay in forever!

We don't exit places we send troops. The "exit strategy" is a joke.