Bayh

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

if opposing the FMA isn't centrist, what's conservative? Is supporting the FMA centrist? It seems to me like the true centrist stance is opposing the FMA but also opposing gay marriage. But of course since Philip thinks limiting the voting rights of non-land owners is centrist, we don't need to take him seriously.

[A18]

Opposing gay marriage and the FMA is a total joke that makes no sense whatsoever. A moderate stance would be like Ron Paul.

I'm for no taxation without representation.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

it's a pretty easy stance: You oppose gay marriage but don't think the issue is worth medling with the Constitution over. What's so hard to understand about that? And what's Ron Paul's stance? From what I heard it's exactly what I wrote above (against gay marriage and the FMA)

We already have in all states that since we do have representation in all states. Does this mean you support statehood for DC though?

[A18]

All you have to do is vote for it, and let the states decide. Ron Paul supports the Marriage Protection Act as an alternative.

I'm for giving DC's residential areas to Maryland, as I've said many times before.

Cities can outvote the people of other areas, raise their taxes, and spend the money as they please.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

and under your plan, the landowners can outvote the cities. It's the same thing. One person, one vote. Nothing wrong with that, it's the basis for equal representation. Your arguments sound like that no one lives in cities, but rather they are simply monolithic blocks of votes.

[opebo]

All you have to do is vote for it, and let the states decide. Ron Paul supports the Marriage Protection Act as an alternative.

I'm for giving DC's residential areas to Maryland, as I've said many times before.

Cities can outvote the people of other areas, raise their taxes, and spend the money as they please.

All the money comes from the cities.  Rural areas are an economic wasteland.

[A18]

Cities are filled with poor people. People in suburbs are more well off; no one said anything about rural areas.

and under your plan, the landowners can outvote the cities. It's the same thing. One person, one vote. Nothing wrong with that, it's the basis for equal representation. Your arguments sound like that no one lives in cities, but rather they are simply monolithic blocks of votes.

No they can't. It's only one branch of the legislature.

Cities are densely populated, so they shouldn't be making law for the entire state and spending everyone's money. People outside of cities are more spread out; you can't take the money and spend it on one area's welfare.

[Democratic Hawk]

As far as I can tell, to Philip, a "moderate" is anyone who agrees with the Republicans and a leftist is anyone who's to the left of them.  I'd hate to know what a rightist is...

Quite. It would seem that if you oppose tax cuts you're some kind of left-liberal extremist!

I think Bayh is a centrist/moderate Democrat. I doubt if Bayh was a liberal, he'd ever have been elected governor of, and senator from, of Indiana

His father was more liberal - but times have changed in Indiana, and America as a whole, since the 60s and 70s

Bayh's one of those candidates, who could reach out to "red" states without turning off "blue" ones

America does have its extremists: rabid secularists, on the whole hand, and 'Talibangelicals', on the other - but most folk are somewhere in the middle (and Bayh, like other centrists, speaks for them)

Dave

[phk]

Cities are filled with poor people. People in suburbs are more well off; no one said anything about rural areas.

and under your plan, the landowners can outvote the cities. It's the same thing. One person, one vote. Nothing wrong with that, it's the basis for equal representation. Your arguments sound like that no one lives in cities, but rather they are simply monolithic blocks of votes.

No they can't. It's only one branch of the legislature.

Cities are densely populated, so they shouldn't be making law for the entire state and spending everyone's money. People outside of cities are more spread out; you can't take the money and spend it on one area's welfare.

What about rednecks?

[Alcon]

Bayh wouldn't be my first choice (I'd rather a Populist) but I'd take him over Dean et al

Bayh actually is populist-leaning.

[A18]

Opposing tax cuts is extreme in that it means supporting a 50% tax burden.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

give some examples of some moderates then, and some conservatives.

[Ben.]

Opposing tax cuts is extreme in that it means supporting a 50% tax burden.

[Exasperation takes hold]

Bayh has supported Tax cuts when he thinks there sustainable, it is a fairly moderate position to argue that Bush's tax cuts are not sustainable in the long term and are potentially detrimental! 

[DanielX]

Bayh is moderate in comparison to Kerry or Dean, but not in comparison to Breaux or Ford.

I'd say Bayh is center-left.

[A18]

Opposing tax cuts is extreme in that it means supporting a 50% tax burden.

[Exasperation takes hold]

Bayh has supported Tax cuts when he thinks there sustainable, it is a fairly moderate position to argue that Bush's tax cuts are not sustainable in the long term and are potentially detrimental! 

So you support a 50% tax burden then?

[Democratic Hawk]

Alright, then tell me this. What would be the liberal position on all those issues?

I read his positions. Noteable is: Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.

Just because you are a moderate or centrist doesn't mean you don't take strong positions on issues. Your attitude is why so many moderates are pissed off about the Republican party.

Good point. Moderates have principles, which hold just as firm as those of liberals and conservatives. I prefer moderates because I feel they tend to be more pragmatic than ideological

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

I found this article from the Indianapois Star:

Russ Pulliam
2008 could be Bayh's best shot

 
December 12, 2004
 

With the Democratic Party suffering from too much cultural liberalism, Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh could have a good shot at being the first presidential nominee from Indiana since Wendell Willkie in 1940.

Bayh's name keeps surfacing in national political commentary about who can lead the party out of its post-election blues.

Bayh's credentials include his moderate to conservative views as well as a record of election success in a Republican-dominated Midwestern state. He won his recent Senate race by a record-setting 1,496,512 votes. Republican George Bush carried the state by a few less than that, 1,477,704 votes.

Democrats are puzzled over why they can't win the red, or conservative, sections of the country. They are likely to take note of how Bayh has never lost a race in a very red state that last went for a Democrat for president in the Lyndon Johnson landslide of 1964.

The hardest part of a presidential run for Bayh, however, could be his party's primaries. The primaries tend to attract liberal activists, screening out centrist candidates like Bayh. But political scientist Larry Sabato thinks Bayh could gain an advantage in a field of more liberal candidates if he is the only moderate to conservative.

"Bayh's path to victory is to say, 'Are you tired of losing?' says Sabato, who runs the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. "Evan Bayh will never scare anyone. A lot of Democrats do that. They scare people across the country in red states on the social and cultural issues. Those Democrats represent to them too much change in a liberal direction."

Political figures in both parties in Indiana think Bayh could be the nominee if he wants to pursue it.

"To the Indiana Democrats he is the modern-day Moses," says former House Speaker John Gregg, D-Vincennes. "To the national Democrats he can also be a modern-day Moses. He will be the emerging moderate."

Another potential centrist candidate is Sen. John Edwards, the losing vice presidential candidate. But Gregg thinks he has two handicaps. "John Edwards lost his own state," Gregg notes of the recent election. "He's a trial lawyer, and that's something he will be beat over the head about."

State Rep. Bill Crawford, D-Indianapolis, suggests the results of the 2004 election will favor Bayh. "I think between now and 2008 that there's going to be a recognition in the party that we don't need to put an Eastern establishment liberal on the ticket," Crawford says. "You've got to have someone who can appeal to people in the red states."

Mayor Bart Peterson agrees. "I don't think the door could be open any wider than it is to him at this point," he says.

Republicans from Indiana also see strengths in Bayh. "He's well spoken," says state Sen. Jim Merritt, R-Indianapolis. "He's a two-term governor. That seems to be one of the protocols for president now."

State Sen. Murray Clark, R-Indianapolis, thinks Bayh would be a stronger candidate than the more liberal Democrat who leads in the polls, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. "As a Republican, I'd rather us run against Hillary than Evan Bayh," he says.

Bayh has said that it is too soon for him to decide whether he would seek his party's nomination in the 2008 race. He skipped the 2004 race because of his two young sons, and he is young enough to wait and still run in 2012 or 2016.

But in terms of opportunity in his own party, the year 2008 may be Bayh's last, best chance for the presidential nomination.

Dave