Opening the Day: Evan Bayh as VP Rumors Thick

by: Matt Stoller

Wed Aug 13, 2008 at 11:06


Lots of stuff happening.

  • Mark Warner is going to give the keynote.

  • Steve Clemons just noted that Evan Bayh's chances of being the VP have just increased to better than 50/50.  Max Bernstein launched this Facebook page.  He was wrong on the war.  Booman has more.   Though this prediction won't make me many friends, I'm going to suggest that if Obama keeps shaving off his left flank, he's going to create enough space for a primary challenge in 2012, just as Jimmy Carter did in 1980.  Being against the war in Iraq from the beginning while voting identically to hawks such as Clinton in the Senate, having a background as a community organizer, and secretly identifying as a progressive in a few speeches may be enough for an election, but as Van Jones notes, it's not enough to be reelected.  Given enough disappointments, where will progressives go?  And I have to say, Mark Warner keynoting - and we know what's going to say - and Evan Bayh as VP, suggests that Obama's campaign and governing agenda will be extremely small-bore.

    I like certain parts of the Obama team, and think that this can be headed off at any point in the next few years, but every decision like this that is made further constrains the options of progressives within Congress and activists outside of it.

  • Tom Friedman calls out John McCain on his opposition to renewable energy.

  • McCain won't cancel a fundraising with Ralph Reed.

  • Blue America endorsed Jared Polis.  He's in a pretty safe seat, so along with Donna Edwards, that makes two Responsible Plan endorsees who are going to be in Congress next year.

  • Russia violates its truce with Georgia.

  • Michael Phelps, greatest Olympian ever.

What are you reading?

Matt Stoller :: Opening the Day: Evan Bayh as VP Rumors Thick

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Opening the Day: Evan Bayh as VP Rumors Thick | 50 comments
I don't get this at all (4.00 / 2)
You're predicting a primary challenge in 2012?  He hasn't even been elected yet! Should he be elected, you have no real idea what he'll do as President, or what the national political climate will be then.  Carter himself picked Mondale, who was I believe to his left, and still got primaried.  I mean, the internet left loves primary challenges, so it's sure possible, but I think you're extrapolating from not that much information.    
Love democracy, love primaries. (4.00 / 2)
Frankly, I'd start supporting a progressive 2012 primary challenge against Obama right now, and I'm working to elect him! Gotta keep politicians honest.  
[ Parent ]
Matt's off the meds...or something (4.00 / 1)
Seriously, this is the height of punditidiocy.  He hasn't chosen Tim Kaine.  He hasn't been elected.  And here we have Stoller talking about a primary challenge in 2012.

[ Parent ]
I'd rather read Matt .. then MoDo .. (0.00 / 0)
you don't think the Republicans ever talk about primary challenges?
[ Parent ]
The key word is 'if'. (4.00 / 2)
"... if Obama keeps shaving off his left flank, he's going to create enough space for a primary challenge in 2012."

That pretty obviously depends on his first winning and then, y'know, shaving off his left flank. But maybe we shouldn't talk about hypotheticals. Wasn't that a talking-point, for a while?

[ Parent ]
Why Not Think Ahead? (4.00 / 2)
After all, the bad guys are.
[ Parent ]
Forget 2012 (4.00 / 2)
If he picks Bayh or perhaps Kaine, he'll give Nader an opening to get 2-3 critical points.  

The issue here isn't so much the war, it's the pro-corporate, pro-free trade sentiment. Warner and Bayh are pro-corporate Dems strongly associated with the DLC. Here's Warner speaking to the DLC:

Yet in the heartland, in states like Virginia, folks are looking for something else, something I call the sensible center. The sensible center is wide open for any Democrat who can credibly make the case....the issues in this country are no longer left versus right or liberal versus conservative; they are about the future versus the past. The Democratic Party has always been at its best when we've looked to the future. It's been our heritage. Roosevelt led us through the Depression and the Second World War. Kennedy challenged us to put a man on the moon. Clinton led us through the greatest economic expansion in American history. That is our Democratic record. We've done it before and we can do it again.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm...

Obama has long managed to split the difference between the centrists and the progressives. If he clearly tips in his hand in favor of the centrist, he could generate some harmful heat on his left.

Obama better hope the corporate mediate blackout of Nader continues.


The left would have no choice (0.00 / 0)
you'd leave him out to lose and then deal with the fire and brimstone from Clinton supporters who will tar and feather everyone who supported Obama?  
[ Parent ]
It won't make you many friends... (4.00 / 1)
Because it's a bit ludicrous to speculate about the 2012 primaries when we haven't even won the 2008 election.  It just hurts your credibility all around.
I don't think Matt's worried about that ... (0.00 / 0)
but you putting too much into it .. after all .. who exactly is going to primary Obama? .. who would be able to raise the sums needed? .. and just think of the tizzy the TradMed would be in then(if it still exists) ... it would surpass their wildest wet dream .. not to mention the Rethuglicans ... one has to wonder who Steve was talking to ... the only ones pumping up Bayh are Hillary surrogates(read DLC types)
[ Parent ]
I know lots of Hillary supporters, I among them (0.00 / 0)
Evan Bayh is not doing it for them....or me.

Matter of a fact....I like him as much as I like Hagel, Nunn, kaine or any other right wing Democrat of Repyblican that Obama is attracted to....which is not one iota.

The nominee is not a progressive and will govern as a centrist Democrat...settling for small ambitions and small measures.

This country is expecting and wanting more.  Greenberg Quinlan has a poll showing that the country thinks we need New Deal style policy prescriptions and New Deal ambitions.

We are electing a man who instead of making people's lives better...he thinks it's more important to change how politics is played.  The former is important and essential, the latter is chimerical and paltry.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

[ Parent ]
Can somebody get Evan Bayh to comment on John McCain's foreign policy? (4.00 / 2)
Probably the only way to disqualify him is for him to say exactly what he thinks: that John McCain isn't in any way a dangerous loon with a hard-on for wars.

Especially because the Georgia situation is looking more and more ominous. I still can't see them going for Tbilisi - they don't want a second Grozny - but it looks like they feel strong enough to ignore international pressure. They're looking to disarm Georgia so that it has no choice but to rely on Russia.

So the last thing we need there is somebody 'serious' on foreign policy. We need somebody with half a brain.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

Also (0.00 / 0)
Mark Warner isn't a good keynote choice. He won't attack particularly well, he's already relatively well known and he fits into the Evan Bayh-Harold Ford Jr. line of succession that Obama broke. Couldn't we have given it to somebody new and interesting?

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog
[ Parent ]
How has . . . (0.00 / 0)
Obama "broken" this line?
[ Parent ]
Obama Is "New and Interesting" (2.67 / 3)
I don't think he wants to dilute his hold on that niche.

He's very much a product to be sold.  Product differentiation is all.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Warner's mantra in his Senate Campaign... (4.00 / 1)
...is that DC needs a "RADICAL CENTER" - a coalition of moderates to take over the Senate (and congress as a whole).

Certainly not the message that should be highlighted in the DNC Convention.

I like Mark Warner, I wish he was more of a Democrat, and at least a little bit Liberal.  He is certainly an upgrade for the State of Virginia though...

He is a decent speaker, I've seen him a few times, we could do worse on that front for sure.

Solutions don't come from the middle.  Failure to articulate and establish the position of the Left mandates that all "solutions" will be right of center.

[ Parent ]
There Is No "Greatest Ever" (0.00 / 0)
It's a fun game for 8-year old boys, "Who's greater?  Superman or Batman?  Buth or Bonds?"

But even with "scientific" metrics it's ultimately silly, misleading and even worse... it distracts from the pure enjoyment of what's right in front of you.  Winning anything is not just a measure of how well you did, but also of the field you competed in.  That's why the only real competition that matters is with yourself.

Sure, it's great to note that he's won more gold medals than anyone else.  Isn't that enough?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

Wow (4.00 / 2)
We sure do like to wring our hands.

We have a credible chance to put a solid Dem in the white house for 4-8 years. I can't fathom a scenario that a President Obama would be a continuation of Bush and NeoCon policies and doctrine. We have a chance to put into power an administration that will give middle class families like mine some hard earned economic breaks, give us the healthcare system that won't bankrupt us if god forbid something terrible happens, and a hope for fathers like myself that we will give our kids a future worth walking into.

This is all very good news.

And if a centrist white male gets Obama the swing votes he needs here and there then I'm ok with it. My focus is reclaiming our country from the far right. I'm not so concerned about the near left.


Laugh hard. Its a long ways to the bank.  

But that is just the problem ... (4.00 / 2)
it's why sitting Senators are rarely ever elected President .. we don't have any idea what Obama would do once in office .. will he be what we think a Feingold presidency would be like? ... would he be an extension of Clinton's presidency? .. we don't know .. and that's the problem .. it's not like electing a governor .. where you have an idea of what that person's record of governance is .. the Senate is a cesspool of horsetrading .. so all we can do is scratch our heads
[ Parent ]
so maybe (0.00 / 0)
we should've nominated a Governor.  
[ Parent ]
I think the tension is between those who (4.00 / 3)
honestly believe that the best way to reclaim our country from the far right is to use a 'solid centrist' appeal, and those who honestly believe that the best way to reclaim our country from the far right is to use a 'full-throated progressive' appeal.

[ Parent ]
I totally understand that (4.00 / 2)
And I'm not begrudging that full throated perspective even though I don't personally prescribe to it. Not to muddle the topic, but its the same knee-jerk reaction I have to the current "Better Dem" topic floating around the blogs. I do think that we need the centrists as much as we need ultra progressives in the party. Everyone spitshines Sweitzer's boots around here, but he's pretty moderate. I love the guy. Heard him on the radio talking energy solutions and he pretty much had me in tears.  

My main point on Bayh is that he's got appeal to the fence sitters, could bring a state over that gets Obama the win. I'm just saying I can live with a him as VP. If Obama taps a full throated progressive then all the better.

I just think it gets a little shrill to keep threatening to revolt the moment things don't go exactly the way you want.  

Laugh hard. Its a long ways to the bank.  

[ Parent ]
It SEEMS Like You're Thnking In Terms of Labels, Not Substance (4.00 / 2)
Mayybe I'm wrong, but this is how it comes across.  You don't seem to grasp, or at least respond to the fact that people are objecting to Bayh based on a specific record, a consistent pattern of voting and working against core Democratic constituencies and values.  It's not about a label, it's about what's behind the label.

The notion that he could "appeal to the fence sitters, could bring a state over that gets Obama the win" is a favorite Versailles fantasy, and ought to be viewed extremely skeptically on that basis alone.  What evidence has anyone ever produced to support this claim?

Would Bayh himself ever have been elected in the first place were it not for his father, who was a far more progressive, far more prominent, and far more effective politician than he is?

In contrast to Bayh, there are two other sons of senators of that era we can look to--Gore and Dodd--and we can see things they've done to distinguish themselves as well.  Whatever one thinks of them in comparison to their fathers, whether they could have made it in politics on their own or not, regardless of all that, it's clear that they are not mere bland non-entities.  Bayh, OTOH is a poster boy for bland non-entities everywhere.

Versailles likes him because he's never done anything to offend. Them.  He's never done anything to recommend, either.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Yes and No (0.00 / 0)
Thanks for calling me out. I've read the arguments against Bayh. He's not done much and what he has done has been pretty middle of the road. But running for office in that part of the country I would say a Dem would have to be pretty vanilla to get elected during the right's ascendency.

The dad's coattails argument I think only holds water for the man's start in politics. Once he has a couple campaigns, a couple hard knocks and some 20+ years in politics he stands on his own.

The fact he's been able to win elections in a redstate is my primary point and not his legislative record. Others can argue that line, I'm content to float in shallower water. My argument for him is his political infrastructure and name rec (inherited from daddy, fine) in his home state, his blandness might be a good match to Obama's zing and frankly, his vanilla record can be morphed by the Obama adminstration into anything they want it to be.

Sorry if this is not substantive enough, but I'm of the mindset that the majority of us get some facts, get some imressions then vote on gut. To that end, I think a Bayh tap would be a positive for Obama.


Laugh hard. Its a long ways to the bank.  

[ Parent ]
Just happened over to 538.com (0.00 / 0)
And they have a writup on IN right now:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...

With all the bells and whistles that a proper analysis provides, my point is also echoed:

"The Bayh brand name remains extremely powerful in the state, and Evan Bayh can be an effective surrogate, whether or not he is Obama's vice president."

So if Obama wins Kerry plus IN, IA and NM done deal. Would Bayh seriously take IA, NM or any Kerry state off the map?

I agree that his job would be to deliver IN and that won't be easy.

Thanks.  

Laugh hard. Its a long ways to the bank.  

[ Parent ]
And, In Fact (4.00 / 1)
I agree that his job would be to deliver IN and that won't be easy.

It would probably be easier if he weren't the VP candidate.  After all, the VP candidate would be expected to spend a good deal of time in other states as well--at least 50-70% of it, or else it just looks like far too obvious a pander, and becomes counter-productive.

Plus, if Bayh is the VP nominee, does spend all that time in Indiana, and we still lose, then how effectual does he seem?  And how smart does Obama seem for picking him?

Most importantly, though, IMHO, we dont really need Indiana to win.  We just need to make the GOP fight for it, drain their resources.  And we don't need Bayh on the ticket to do that.  He could probably do a much better job of making the GOP sweat and spend money there if he could spend as much time as possible in-state, without anyone thinking it odd.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Birch Bayh for VP!! (0.00 / 0)
He wrote the original FISA legislation.  the son is not even a pale copy...the DNA had a transcription error.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller
[ Parent ]
Well, I agree that we need the centrists (4.00 / 3)
as much as the progressives, or even the 'ultra' progressives.

The problem is we don't have the centrists as much as the progressives, we have them ten times as much. Any additional centrism just further unbalances things.

Can you give me three examples of full-throated progressivism by a party leader? I'm sure we could both think of thirty examples of full-throated centrism!

[ Parent ]
Think long-term too (4.00 / 2)
Sure, it's important to win this time. But there are plenty of ways of doing that and not all of them require Evan Bayh.

Meantime, we need to secure the gains of an Obama presidency. That means continued progressive leadership. And right now, that means not Evan Bayh.

Of course, we could fight him in 2016, but it's best that he never gets put on the ticket at all, somebody better takes his place and we can unify around that candidate.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
It didn't take me long to realize... (4.00 / 1)
...that Matt had written this diary...  sigh... Matt, can you be a little more positive for a change?

If Bayh as VP means we win Indiana, then I'm all for it... period.  At this point, you worry about victory... then, you worry about everything else...

As for the Russians... I'm surprised it took this long (hours) for the  Russians to break the treaty...  I don't think, in the entire history of Russia/Soviet Union, that they've EVER held up the terms of a treaty...

Like it or not, Putin's fighting the cold war again... We are going to have to deal with it, otherwise, Europe, once again will be conquered by a totalitarian regime....

The French and Germans do not get it, yet... the Eastern European countries certainly do...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

We don't have to refight the cold war (4.00 / 1)
In fact it would be stupid to do so.  We need to work with Russia on issues like loose and old nukes, Iran, N. Korea and global warming.  Wherever possible, we need to avoid needlessly provoking other powers.  The neocons have built up Saakashvili as some new George Washington and whispered assurances to Georgia, emboldening him to strike at the area where the Russian peacekeepers were, either believing that Russia wouldn't strike back or that the US would come to his aid (stupid and wishful thinking on both counts).  We ought to be a little more sensitive to the Russians' desire to have a secure south (and west) flank since we demand that everyone else stay out of the entire Western Hemisphere.  

McCain's amateurish efforts at foreign policy via his spokesman the former lobbyist for Georgia and still member of the firm that represents them and Scheuneman may have given assurances to Saashkivili that emboldened him.  This is all dangerous, childish and bodes very ill for the US and the world should McCaihn win.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
We ought to be a little more sensitive (4.00 / 1)
Ring me when Putin deserves it. Georgia acted stupidly, but Russia is making an even bolder move. Georgia is a sovereign country and did not directly attack Russia or Russians, Putin has no business occupying the country. Wait a sec, I think i had this argument yesterday.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
That's Not The Point (4.00 / 2)
Georgia was stupid and militarily aggressive first.

Russia was stupid and militarily aggressive second.

The goal here is for the US not to be stupid and militarily aggressive third.

Why?  Because it's virtually all we've done for the past seven years, and it hasn't worked out so well.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Yep, i was right (0.00 / 0)
i did already have this argument yesterday.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
It's Not An Argument (0.00 / 0)
if you don't share a subject in common.

The points you are arguing aren't the points I'm making.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Why Refight The Cold War? (0.00 / 0)
Can't we be a little more imaginative and refight something else?

Bush liked the Crusades.  How about the Punic Wars?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
And I conclude: (4.00 / 1)
These gold medals are just wonderful and Carthage must be destroyed.
[ Parent ]
Et Carthago Delenda Esse (4.00 / 1)
Was very nearly John McCain's campaign slogan.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog
[ Parent ]
The French and Germans "get it" (0.00 / 0)
But two things;

1.) The Russians have lately been pushing to become part of a larger Europe and even have talked about joining the EU in the future (although not as seriously as Turkey). The French and Germans, while they may be wrong, believe the Russians will never do anything to hurt their standing on the rest of the continent. No reason to. They're not trying to spread some ideology, like Communism.

2.) The Western Europeans, I'm expanding this because the Franco-German belief is also held in other countries like Belgium, Netherlands and here in Italy, believe that they're on their own here. They can't count on the US to defend them, at least not to do a good job doing it, so they're not going to go along with what we want. They're going to try to diffuse the situation in their own way and that way is, like I said above, give Russia an ultimatum that if you want to be part of the larger European community, stop pretending it's 1955. Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't, but it is true Russia has wanted to become part of the larger community. In order for it to fail, Russia has to stop wanting that.  

[ Parent ]
Why the negativity towards Warner Matt? (0.00 / 0)
Didn't the guy keynote YearlyKos in 2006?  Isn't he great on Net Neutrality?  He may be more centrist than you want (being from Virginia, being in big business) but it seems to me the animosity is stronger than expected.

Also, can we let Obama pick Bayh before we get mad at him for picking Bayh?

That would be extremely foolish. (4.00 / 1)
I'd rather have we all get mad at Obama for picking Bayh before he actually choses him, because it's too late to afterwards.

This way the entire blogosphere might just have a tiny chance to influence him.

[ Parent ]
Overreact much, Matt? (4.00 / 1)
Clemons writes

Word has reached me that at Barack Obama's Hawaii retreat, Evan Bayh's chances to find himself the next Democratic VP candidate have moved to better than 50/50.

Maybe it's just me but that's not very convincing evidence that Bayh will be VP. Word? From whom? Better than 50/50? Ok is it 51/49 or 75/25? I don't think Bayh is the best choice, but he's not the worst choice either. And it's just a joke that Matt is already thinking about primarying Obama based on who his VP is. Primary him based on what he does as President. If Bay is VP for 8 years and runs in 2016, then by all means support whoever you feel is more progressive in the primaries that year. Bayh wouldn't be Cheney to Obama's Bush.

It's just you. (0.00 / 0)
But actually, you're right. He's not the worst choice. Stevens, Inhofe, etc. would be worse but as realistic VP choices go it's scraping the barrel. Heck, as VP candidates go the Dan Quayle selection in '88 was better then Bayh's would be.

As for "Word? From whom? Better than 50/50? Ok is it 51/49 or 75/25?" People Steve Clemons thinks trustworthy enough to base . And Steve Clemons a very good track record on this kind of rumors. Your question about the precise percentages is nothing more then an attempt to obfuscate the point. The point is that Bayh is considered more likely then not to be the VP pick, not the exact percentages.

As for matt's "joke". You'll note that he actually said just that.

"I'm going to suggest that if Obama keeps shaving off his left flank, he's going to create enough space for a primary challenge in 2012, just as Jimmy Carter did in 1980."
(...)
"[I] think that this can be headed off at any point in the next few years, but every decision like this that is made further constrains the options of progressives within Congress and activists outside of it."

No Bayh wouldn't be Cheney, but as recommendations go it's superfluous. Nobody Obama could choice would be a Cheney figure. A VP's power is wholly derived from the powers explicitly given to him by the president. And as Obama isn't Bush no VP will ever function like Cheney now, Obama chose Cheney himself and you could recommend him on the same grounds.

You know what? Bayh also wouldn't be the soul stealing beast of Bhaal while VP. But in spite of that he would still be an extremely bad choice that would reflect badly on Obama.

[ Parent ]
Excellent Matt Stoller parody (0.00 / 0)
Whoever wrote this, keep it up, you're hilarious!
Another thing that could instigate a primary challenge (0.00 / 0)
is if Obama betrays his promise to withdraw from Iraq, which I have a sneaking suspicion he is going to. Somehow I have a feeling that come 2012 we will be as bogged down as ever over there. Obama seeks approval from the elites, as when they tell him "We can't pull out now just when things are turning the corner!" he will listen to them, I'll bet you dollars to donuts.
Kaine said to be "glum" (0.00 / 0)
"Word has reached me that..." (4.00 / 1)
How about a source for this?

Before reading this I just bumped into article on 538 which discusses how hard Obama is going to try to win Indiana including setting up 30 field offices. So maybe he will pick Bayh. Still, I'd like a source.

.

Primary Obama? Who and what army? That's the funniest thing I've read all day.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

I Don't Have a Problem With Warner as Keynote (0.00 / 0)
I think Warner is a credible, somewhat charismatic figure who has shown in his campaigns in Virginia that he can sell himself on economic issues. Having him give a big speech at the DNC can't hurt considering Virginia is looking like one of the big battlegrounds of this campaign along with Ohio and Colorado.

Is he a little corporate? Yes. Is he to the right of Attila the Hun? No. Besides, the ideology of the keynote speaker isn't necessarily relevant to winning or losing the campaign. Remember, batspit crazy Zell Miller gave the keynote in 1992.

As for Evan Bayh, he's an empty suit. He's not charismatic. He doesn't have any real principles. He's a pumpkin with a tie. No thank you. If that's supposed to be some sort of compromise to appease the Clintons, I'd rather have Clinton herself on the ticket because at least she has a pulse. If it really is some kind of attempt to burnish the ticket's foreign policy credentials (which is stupid and plays right into McCain's hands for SO many reasons), I'd rather they put a political noob like Clark on the ticket because at least Clark stands for something other than being the son of a senator who thinks Washington DC is the center of the universe.

VP talk is getting depressing... (0.00 / 0)
When it was all wide open, I was just hoping for anyone to the left of Clinton, now sadly I am now wishing she was on the short list.

Now that John Edwards is completely out of the running, I think Sebelius is the best choice on what seems to the short list, but the Clinton nuts will set the party and feminism back a generation if she is the choice over Hillary.

I really wish Clark was in the running, since he has become the only nationally prominent progressive-leaning politician that has been mentioned as willing to take the spot.

The Bayh/Kaine/Chet Edwards/Hagel talk is truly discomforting.

Maybe it's all a ruse (0.00 / 0)
to get people into accepting Clinton. Look how it worked with you.  
[ Parent ]
Opening the Day: Evan Bayh as VP Rumors Thick | 50 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox