2008 Democratic Presidential Nomination, Michigan-Style!

The biggest problem with Bayh (0.00 / 0)

He has repeated, on more than one occasion, the Republican talking point that "Democrats are weak on national security." (That is probably the result of his ties to the Democratic "Leadership" Council, but nonetheless inexcusable.) Even though Bayh has semi-recanted his vote for the Blank Check Iraq Resolution, he needs to issue a formal apology for that vote. He's also a soporific public speaker.

Still, he's better than Hillary Rodham Clinton.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.

---

by: Hy Dudgeon @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 00:45:44 AM UTC

Going along those same lines, (0.00 / 0)

I really didn't dig this quote:

"I'm concerned that we not come across as whiners and that kind of thing, like a bunch of wimps who say mean old Karl Rove is on us again."

He said that in mid-September, according to the Associated Press. It reminds me of Barack Obama-s over-ephasis on what ails us as a Democratic Party.

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 00:51:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

i'm not a big fan of bayh (0.00 / 0)

not really into any of our other potential contenders at this point, either.

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:07:11 AM UTC

Understandable, (0.00 / 0)

I'm still mulling over who I want to cast my poll vote for, let alone my actual support!

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:26:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Great post. I'm with Nirmal. (0.00 / 0)

First off, this is a great idea Michael. Frankly I'm surprised that it took this long for someone to get serious about doing a series like this. I hope you keep it up!

I pretty much agree with Nirmal, although I do have my eye on a couple personal favorites for the nomination (Obama and Edwards).

To me the only selling point for Sen. Bayh is that (1) he can win in a red state and (2) he has some executive experience as governor. Beyond that, I don't find the man or his record particularly interesting. The fact that he helped win those three Indiana districts this year is great, but he should've been fighting for those guys regardless of whether or not he wanted to run for president.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

---

by: BZP @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 13:21:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

no respect for winning indiana, (0.00 / 0)

he would be nowhere without his father, and nobody knows about that outside indiana.  he does score some serious points for the three districts.  those weren't bayhs running in those districts.  and then again, how much did the wave help, and the dccc and blogs and everything else?

i can agree with people on his rhetoric though, pretty silly.

---

by: Jon K @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 16:57:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In terms of Bayh's father, (0.00 / 0)

I bet more people that you'd think would make that presumption. I know I did -- and I had some language in my summary initially, but thought it may be a little too harsh and it was definitely conjecture.

Just the other day, I think it was Ballenger or one of those types, indavertantly said 'Birch Bayh' and then corrected themselves in referring to 'Evan'. That is something I've heard pundits do on more than one occasion, which I think lends credence to the perception that he is following in his father's footsteps.

Birch Bayh did end up ultimately losing his Senate seat in the 1980 deluge, but Evan Bayh has only seemed to grow in political strength in the state. That said, though, Bayh wouldn't have had the opportunity be strong in the first place if his surname were Jones.

I mean, look at how every other Democratic candidate for Secretary of State or Attorney General or what have you fares. And these aren't slouches -- Democratic Mayors of relatively significant-sized Indiana cities still don't get elected to SoS, even in open seat contests.

P.S. -- The same could be said for Albert S. Gore, Jr. For what that is worth.

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 17:21:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wesley Clark (4.00 / 2)

This guy is good:

Born in 1944 in Chicago, Illinois and raised in Little Rock, Arkansas, Wesley Clark distinguished himself early as an athlete and a scholar, leading his high school swimming team to a state championship and graduating first in his class from West Point. In 1966, he was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University, where he earned a Masters Degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics.

During thirty-four years of service in the United States Army Wesley K. Clark rose to the rank of four-star general as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. After his retirement in 2000, he became an investment banker, author, commentator, and businessman. In September 2003 he answered the call to stand as a Democratic candidate for President of the United States, where his campaign won the state of Oklahoma and launched him to national prominence before he returned to the private sector in February 2004.

In his final military command, General Clark commanded Operation Allied Force, NATO's first major combat action, which saved 1.5 million Albanians from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and he was responsible for the peacekeeping operation in Bosnia.

In previous duty, General Clark was the Commander-in-Chief, US Southern Command, where he was responsible for all US military activities in Latin America and the Caribbean. And from April 1994 through June 1996, he was the Director of Strategic Plans and Policy, J-5, in the Joint Staff, where he helped negotiate the end to the war in Bosnia. His previous assignments include a wide variety of command and staff positions, including Command of the 1st Cavalry Division.

General Clark's awards and honors include the Presidential Medal of Freedom, The State Department Distinguished Service Award; the US Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal;(five awards), The US Army Distinguished Service Medal(two awards), The Silver Star, the Bronze Star (two awards), the Purple Heart, and Honorary Knighthoods from the British and Dutch governments.

He is the author of the best selling book Waging Modern War: Bosnia, Kosovo and the Future of Combat (Public Affairs, New York, NY 2001) and Winning Modern War: Iraq, Terrorism and the American Empire (Public Affairs, New York, NY 2003). General Clark graduated from the United States Military Academy (B.S.) in 1966 and completed degrees at Oxford University B.A. and M.A.) as a Rhodes Scholar. He is also a graduate of the Ranger and Airborne schools.

General Clark currently serves in leadership roles with a number of non-profit public service organizations, including the Center for Strategic and International Studies (Distinguished Senior Adviser), the Center for American Progress (Trustee), the International Crisis Group (Board Member), City Year Little Rock (Board Chair), the National Endowment for Democracy (Board Member), the United States Institute of Peace (United Nations Task Force Member), and the General Accountability Office (Advisory Board Member).

Clark is my hands-down favorite. He pulls no punches, he's super-strong on national security, and if I'm not mistaken, I heard the White House feared Clark more than they feared any of teh other Dem candidates.

Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott

---

by: ScottyUrb @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:25:38 AM UTC

Question about Clark: (0.00 / 0)

Have you ever had the opportunity to meet him in peson? If so, what were your observations?

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:28:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nope (0.00 / 0)

Not yet.

Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott

---

by: ScottyUrb @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:31:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wesley Clark (0.00 / 0)

My husband and I met General Clark during the 2004 campaign and were both very impressed by him.  He looks you right in the eyes while you are talking with him and really listens.  He is an honest, sincere, intelligent man who can think on  his feet and I will work for him again if he chooses to run for President!!  He is everything this country needs: A diplomat with lots of military and leadership experience who really cares about the good of the country above political party. He made some mistakes the last time around, which is not surprising considering it was his first run.  But he is a quick study and has learned a lot during his time on Fox.  There is no other candidate who comes close to him.  Run Wes Run!!! -Kitty 

---

by: kkahn007 @ Sun Nov 26, 2006 at 18:25:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

ActBlue has a presidential page up already (0.00 / 0)

If your favorite candidate isn't running yet, you can donate to their "draft" fund at ActBlue.

I believe General Clark is in the lead right now in terms of both $$$ and # of donors.

Success is not final, failure is not fatal. - Winston Churchill  

---

by: TJarrell @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 01:56:13 AM UTC

Excellent! (4.00 / 2)

Michael,

As a starter of a series myself, I commend you on your dedication and excellent work thus far on this series. While MichLib is about Michigan politics, we would be truly amiss to not discuss this important issue.
I believe I can speak for many others when I say that I look forward to the next of your several installments and thank you for your hard work educating all of us.

I want to change the world, not help people adjust to it. - Millie Jeffrey, MI - National Women's labor and Democratic activist, Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient

---

by: LiberalLucy @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 02:18:38 AM UTC

Oh, Lucy! (4.00 / 2)

The nice things you say ;)

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 03:07:26 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was for Feingold (4.00 / 1)

And I still think Russ Feingold is the most honest man in Washington. We (being the folks at RunRussRun.com) had some awesome plans, but I respect Senator Feingold's decision. 2016, anyone?

For now, I'm undecided. I like Al Gore's global warming work, and wouldn't mind having him back, so long as he was actually himself this time, and not the bland thing the consultants turned him into in 2000. I also like John Edwards' message on poverty in America. That's an issue that's been ignored for too long. And I like both Obama and Clark for character reasons. But liking any of them isn't enough yet to translate into support.

I would have voted for Birch Bayh back in 1976 happily, but Evan Bayh, I'm not as sure about. It's not just that he's more of a centrist, and it's not just that he's not the most dynamic speaker (C-SPAN's "Road to the White House" coverage is great for getting an early, unfiltered glimpse at the way a candidate speaks).

I guess my problem is, I don't want to nominate someone who has a good resume and just looks presidential. I don't want to pick someone only because they're electable. They need to be electable, yes, but I want more.

I want to nominate someone with vision, bold ideas, and a plan for the country. There's no one issue that I can imagine defining a Bayh presidency, like with Gore or Edwards. But that's just me.

Oh, and a small note. You wrote:

At no time in our nation's history since 1952 have the presidential nominations for both parties not involved either a presidential or vice presidential incumbent in either race.

Actually, in 1952, there were incumbents involved. Harry Truman dropped out of the race after losing the New Hampshire primary (which was much less of a media spectacle back then), losing to Sen. Estes Kefauver.

Vice President Alben Barkley did seek the nomination and received votes at the convention, but he was 75 years old and not a leading choice. In the end, Adlai Stevenson (my personal favorite of losing candidates, along with George McGovern) got the nomination.

In fact, the last time no sitting President or VP ran was in 1928. President Coolidge decided not to run and, though there was a brief draft campaign, neither did VP Charles Dawes. (Dawes is a fun character himself; in addition to being a vice president, he was also a songwriter, whose "Melody in A Major" had words put to it and was a hit in the '50s.)

It's always nice when I can use some of this useless trivia that rattles around in my brain...

---

by: Fitzy @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 02:45:34 AM UTC

Wasn't it Charles Dawes who said... (0.00 / 0)

"That this country needs is a good 5-cent cigar"?

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.

---

by: Hy Dudgeon @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 02:51:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dawes (4.00 / 1)

Also wrote the tune (or at least the lyrics) "It's all in the game," since covered by Van Morrison and many, many others (including a Motown version that's great).

---

by: jmgear @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 17:15:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ready to sign up to help Barack Obama! (0.00 / 0)

I went to a Camp Wellstone in Chicago in the spring of 2004 around the time when Barack was in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senator there in Illinois.  There were about 50 or so (about 1/4 of the attendees, I'd guess) Barack Obama volunteers present, and they were fired up for Obama.  These folks were ready to walk through fire to make Barack their U.S. Senator - and as luck would have it, some multi-millionaire candidate who was a big competitor turned out to have some dirty laundry that destroyed his chances (something about Gerri Ryan and weird swinger activities if I recall correctly).  Anyhoo.... few politicians have that gift to inspire, and I think Barack has it.  Good, middle of the road Democrat who recognizes freedoms and fiscal responsibilites that make for a well-run democracy.

Anyway... my hopes are that Barack will go for it.

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 04:12:04 AM UTC

Gore! (0.00 / 0)

I think Gore has the brass ones to pull it off.  Hell, I wish he ran in 2004!

My second choice would be Gen. Clark.  Since we're both military, I'm biased:).

But no Senators.  None.  I don't care how much ass Feingold kicks.  Senators never win.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 08:17:58 AM UTC

YES to Al circa 2006. (0.00 / 0)

NO to Al circa 2000. If he runs, he needs a better "strategery" than he used in 2000. That campaign sould've been a cakewalk, regardless of what happened in Florida.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

---

by: BZP @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 13:23:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed! (0.00 / 0)

I voted Gore in this straw-poll, myself.  Although I am not too fond of talking future elections, really; I like talking policy. :(

-- Signature! --

---

by: quaker21 @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 15:23:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

gore would bring an interesting dynamic (0.00 / 0)

people would think about voting for him, look back to 2000 and wonder how different our world would be if he had pulled it out...  i imagine they would prefer gore.

---

by: Jon K @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 17:03:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Gore-Spitzer '08 (0.00 / 0)

Now _that's_ a ticket with heft.

---

by: jmgear @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 14:46:33 PM UTC

i like spitzer (0.00 / 0)

a whole bunch.  he seems like the next teddy to me. (minus the killing lots of things)

---

by: Jon K @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 17:03:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No love for Hillary? (0.00 / 0)

There is still nary a vote cast for Hillary Clinton -- will she get even a single vote before the week has come and gone... ?

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 15:34:52 PM UTC

everybody's afraid of hillary (0.00 / 0)

because nobody has ever run a woman before...  i can already hear the beckmanesque attacks about her being different because she's a woman.  i think the goopers tried to test out their strategy against hillary on granholm with little success.  im not sure if it was because devos, or granholm was just too good, or their plan just sucked too much.

i guess we'll see.

---

by: Jon K @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 17:06:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hillary can't win. (4.00 / 1)

Setting aside the fact that the right has been attacking her since 1993, she can't win because she loves to pander to the right.  It's the same strategy that Kerry used in 2004 (and DeVos used this year), and it was a miserable failure.  Instead of trying to be all things to all people, they left themselves undefined by the voters.

I think America is ready for a female president, but not her.  We need someone who stands strong on the issues, not cowers from them.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 19:55:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party (4.00 / 1)

That's right ... like Gov. Dean said in his explosively inspiring speech in California before the state Democratic convention in 2003, you can't beat the Republicans if you're voting along with them 85% of the time.  I want a Democrat for my Presidential Candidate in 2008 who represents the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, thank you.  :)

What I want to know is .....

Its a great speech ... check it out at http://www.archive.o...

It is awesome!

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 22:17:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

hillary (4.00 / 1)

djtyg, I couldn't agree with you more about Hillary.  Besides, she is a very effective senator.  She would also be great as Attorney General under a democratic president. 

---

by: kittychi99 @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 02:42:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If I wanted to vote for ... (0.00 / 0)

. . . a (a) pro-war (b) senator who (c) wants to gut the bill of rights to prevent the scourge of flag-burning, (d) who voted to make poor people slaves to their creditors, and (e) who wouldn't even _discuss_ the merits of a single-payer plan when she led the national health care commission, well, I'd just kill myself rather than allow my vote to go for her.

Annotations:

(a) loves the Iraq war

(b) another sitting senator who won't win the White House

(c) supports the only amendment in history that would restrict the first amendment

(d) backed the MBNA bankruptcy bill

(e) delivered a monstrous "health care" plan that did nothing but enshrine the top five insurance companies as the keepers of the keys to all health care.

Just like MichLib wants Saul for GOP Chair, the GOP is dying to see the Dems immolate themselves by running Hilary for pres.

Oh--and has been abysmally silent on global heating.

---

by: jmgear @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 20:49:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hillary (0.00 / 0)

She represents someone who is just looking out for herself rather than her constituents, in my mind at least.  I don't feel it - I don't feel that she's making decisions based on what is best for all Americans, not really.  I'd vote for her with the same zeal I voted for John Kerry - Zero.

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 22:13:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

She's the least-acceptable candidate on the list (0.00 / 0)

Her hawkish views and refusal to recant her vote for the Iraq Resolution are deal-breakers in their own right. She's also a Tony Blair-type authoritarian with a wide moralistic streak: the perfect candidate to scare off 18-to-30-year-old voters. And did I mention that she's cozying up to the awful Rupert Murdoch?

There are plenty of more reasons not to nominate her: she'll reignite the Clinton Wars, unite the Republicans, and focus attention to the top of the ticket even though the Dems need to rebuild from the bottom up. She's also the willing handmaiden of the party's Old Guard--the fat wallet donors, Beltway pundits, and lifer consultants--who want the grassroots, netroots, and outsiders in general off the Democratic chessboard.

Finally, there's the Wars of the Roses factor. Since 1980, there has been a Bush or a Clinton on the national ticket in every presidential election cycle. It's time for both of these families to exit the political stage. Dynastic politics is not what the Founding Fathers intended.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.

---

by: Hy Dudgeon @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 22:20:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Edwards wants Obama to run: (0.00 / 0)

"I hope he runs. I think he should run," Edwards told The Associated Press. "This is such an important job that I would urge anybody who can make a serious contribution to the campaign and the dialogue - either in our party or the other party - to run."

http://www.huffingto...

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

---

by: BZP @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 16:02:20 PM UTC

Over at that Huffington Post entry, (0.00 / 0)

I am a little taken aback at some of the comments. They read like the GOP noise machine. Ex-trial lawyers and "health care costs too much already" -- I wouldn't be surprised if it was merely GOPers. But still.

I agree with Edwards, though, if that was his sincere meaning. I want him to run. I want Barack Obama to run. If we have a strong, active field of candidates, then our ability to have the strongest candidate who has successfully endured a difficult race skyrockets.

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 16:38:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

obama/clark (0.00 / 0)

either way, it would be huge

---

by: Jon K @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 17:07:51 PM UTC

Since nobody has said it yet, I will. (4.00 / 2)

AMEND FOR GRANHOLM!!!!:)

If any member of the Democratic party can take on a candidate with unlimited resources and leave him running home with his tail between his legs, it's her.  That alone makes her Presidential material in my book!

Besides, watching her go up against Governor Schwarzenegger in a debate would be super-sweet:).

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 20:00:01 PM UTC

If Granholm were Constitutionally eligible... (4.00 / 3)

I would have instantly jumped on the Draft Granholm '08 Bandwagon -- or started it, if need be. I worship at the altar of Granholm.

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Mon Nov 20, 2006 at 23:48:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed! (4.00 / 1)

That makes two of us.  But do you have incense at your altar? ;)

-- Signature! --

---

by: quaker21 @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 01:24:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Damn, you got me there. (0.00 / 0)

BUT! Do you have:

Two ten ft. by twelve ft. decoupaged murals dedicated to Granholm, one representing images of her pre-governorship and one representing her tenure;

Signed headshots;

... Okay, I better stop. People are going to start taking my tongue-in-cheek retort too seriously.

The point is that Granholm is phenomenal! :0)

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 10:02:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I like Mike -- Let the People Decide -- gravel08.us (0.00 / 0)

Do any of us really want the same old tired methodologies of an outdated, unresponsive system? Was it Bullworth who said, "We stand at the threshold of history.."? Well we do.  Americans need the courage to grasp a bold new vision of democracy if we are to deal effectively with issues as major as global warming, a potential economic crash, unfavorable foreign relations and war, social security reform, higher energy prices, health care reform, poverty, an unfathomable tax structure and problems with our election systems, to name a few. The current system just isn't responsive enough to people's obvious needs and wishes.

The recent election was a clear victory for progressive principles but the old guard DLC centrists supporting Hillary are sucking all the air out of the room, successfully cutting out anti war Murtha for majority leader and doing their best to take control of the party machinery from Howard Dean progressives. Carville is jealously guarding his old power, stuck in the middle, leading nowhere. Hillary should be coronated queen, she shouldn't be elected president. She doesn't dare show leadership.

What is needed is an electorate that recognizes the need for serious reform and a dark horse candidate with a method to cut the Gordian Knot of the corporatist/Republicrat/Demublican juggernaut. The only candidate offering an idea powerful enough to do that is Senator Mike Gravel, a man who earned gravitas and respect as a bold maverick 30 years ago when he read the Pentagon Papers into the National Record and, by himself, successfully filibustered an end to the Vietnam era draft. These days no Democrat dares filibuster.

The keystone of Mike's candidacy is codifying the "power of the people" as law.  Let the people decide serious issues and take the corporate lobbyists out of it. The legislative process as we know it does not have the political will to make the changes this nation needs in the shortened time frames necessary no matter how much people march and protest, and we shouldn't have to exhaust ourselves with that effort anyway. 

Mike is proposing that "we the people"  have the codified constitutional right to use the ballot initiative in every jurisdiction from federal to local. Let the people decide on more issues. We're smart, and it is our lives that are at stake. Why should we give all our power to a few legislators who immediately must sell out to corporations? If Congress wants to surrender its obligation to declare or not to declare war, let the people make that decision.  Democracy vests the ultimate authority to govern in the hands of the people. A democratic republic should as well. These days when a lie can be half way around the world before you say "Lickety split", and opinion polls show popular support for issues that are blatantly ignored, and incumbents have a 98% re-election rate, we need a method to put an end to their madness. I request, with great earnestness that you help Mike get into the Dem. Presidential Primary Debates. He is a serious and qualified candidate with a message that needs to be heard. Nader and Dean got their political support by chanting "the people have the power" but that is mere rhetoric until the power is made law...Empower the people by law and we will change the world.  Check out www.gravel08.us or www.vote.org or www.ni4d.us

Just so you know, his position on the war is bring them home Now! He stated his opposition to the war on MSNBC before the war began.

---

by: georip @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 07:33:14 AM UTC

Regarding Mike Gravel -- (0.00 / 0)

Thank you for your passionate eloquence and speaking out on behalf of the candidate you support!

Great Lakes, Great Times.

---

by: Michael McGuinness @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 10:00:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mark Warner (0.00 / 0)

I'm shocked Warner isn't running. I picked him to be the winner.

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

---

by: Republican Michigander @ Tue Nov 21, 2006 at 16:06:44 PM UTC