Evan bayh steps down!!!!!!!! Woah!!

[KevK]

Originally Posted by highcotton

Sounds like Bayh is just fed up more [in general] with his own party's tricks. What was telling was when he asked Obama why people should trust the Democratic party.

What's funny is that Bayh did not tell Harry Reid about his decision not to run. That says a lot about how he feels about Reid...and his own party.

The Dems have until the end of the week to file for someone to run for Bayh's seat.

There are probably many Senate Democrats and others that HOPE and PRAY that Reid gets defeated in Nevada. If I were them I would be sending contributions to his opponent. I think that if Reid were gone, stuff would be getting passed.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by Smash255

His approvals were still VERY strong.

He would have won re-election.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by MainelyJersey

Could be. If he can position himself as a fiscally conservative Democrat, he'd find a great deal of support.

No he won't. The base of the party will not tolerate anymore Bill Clintons. If we wanted that, we would vote for a Republican. Not that they are "fiscally conservative" but at least they act like they are. We don't want "fiscally conservative" Democrats. We want Democrats who are not afraid to spend money on programs that benefit the country and put people to work.

[KevK]

Originally Posted by Smash255

One thing that could make it a bit interesting is the impending filing deadline. The Democrats nominee will likely come from a Party convention as its unlikely anyone will have enough signatures, Hill and Ellsworth would be pretty strong candidates. The GOP has three candidates who have already filed, but Coates, Hostettler and Stutzman aren't first tier candidates. Obviously the GOP has a much better chance of picking up the seat without Bayh than with him, but they likely would have been able to get stronger candidates if Bayh bowed out earlier.

I don't know much about Indiana except that, until recently, it was a pretty red state except for Lake and Porter counties (the Central Time Zone Indiana). But it did vote for hope and change last time and Byah was considered a safe seat for the Democrats. So the Democrats can win there but probably with a centrist candidate that is pro guns and anti tax increase.

[MainelyJersey]

Originally Posted by KevK

No he won't. The base of the party will not tolerate anymore Bill Clintons. If we wanted that, we would vote for a Republican. Not that they are "fiscally conservative" but at least they act like they are. We don't want "fiscally conservative" Democrats. We want Democrats who are not afraid to spend money on programs that benefit the country and put people to work.

The country's had a year of that, and to what end? Three elections that have gone to the GOP, and a possible November bloodbath. The "we" you speak of is a relative minority..the most left leaning of the party. While you may not support a fiscally conservative Dem, I think there are many, many independents who would.

[Smash255]

Originally Posted by KevK

I don't know much about Indiana except that, until recently, it was a pretty red state except for Lake and Porter counties (the Central Time Zone Indiana). But it did vote for hope and change last time and Byah was considered a safe seat for the Democrats. So the Democrats can win there but probably with a centrist candidate that is pro guns and anti tax increase.

Marion County (Indianapolis) has trended HEAVILY Democratic recently, and is now staunchly Democratic. The surrounding counties are still very Republican, but not nearly to the extent they were.

The likely Dem candidates are either Ellsworth or Hill, both are moderate, both actually represent districts that are slightly more GOP than the state as a whole. Ellsworth actually knocked off one if the possible GOP candidates in 2006 (Jeff Hostetller). It wasn't even close either 61-39, it was actually the only race in the Senate or House in 2006 in which the incumbent did not reach 40%.