The Bayh Line, Part 2

While I've talked about Evan Bayh before, the BooMan has more analysis on why he's the still the wrong choice:

I'm hearing word that Evan Bayh has at least a 50-50 chance of getting the vice-presidential nod and that the final decision will be made soon. Unfortunately, I don't have any other names to tell you so that you know what the alternatives are. The New York Times did a great job yesterday morning in explaining why the selection of Bayh would be problematic. It would be hard to fuck up Barack Obama's brand any worse than picking John McCain's honorary co-chairman of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. We really shouldn't have to say anything more than that.

Obama's Veep selection is either going to be a confirmation of his anti-war message and the anti-war beliefs of the people who got him to the big dance...or a complete repudiation of both. It's personal this year. As BooMan explains (emphasis mine:)

If Evan Bayh is acceptable then maybe John McCain's judgment isn't so bad after all. I might add that Al From of the DLC wants Evan Bayh and so does Cokie 'Myrtle Beach' Roberts. Those are two big alarm-bells. And I'd really prefer it not to be the case that Team Obama is more interested in appeasing Al From and Cokie Roberts than they are concerned with enraging their base of support online. There are many of us that were in the long fight to win the nomination with Obama who made that commitment out of a desperate desire to see the DLC sidelined and a new generation of post-Bush thinking Democrats put in charge of the party. We're the same people that fought off Tim Roehmer and Harold Ford for DNC chairmen and gave you Howard Dean and the immensely successful 50-state strategy. We did not put in all that work in order to see the former DLC chairman put next in line for the presidency.

Maybe that's a bit hyperbolic, but he's dead right about Howard Dean and the 50-state strategy. Obama must remember (and apparently we have to remind him) that he won the primaries because he reflected the majority views of anti-war Democrats. The terribad argument will be made for Bayh that 18 million Democrats didn't find any problem with Hillary Clinton's voting record on the Iraq War, but then "why not pick Hillary Clinton for Veep?" immediately and logically follows.

It's not just that Bayh is a bad choice, it's that the any logical process that would lead to Bayh as Obama's running mate has to cross that big thick red "Screw The Progressives" line, by reason that Bayh voted for Iraq on a number of occasions. The fact that Obama is even seriously considering Bayh is reason enough for the netroots to be pissed. Somebody in Obama's camp has convinced him that Screw The Progressives is acceptable, and the fact Obama hasn't shot this down immediately as a non-starter means he's thinking about it.

Bayh means Obama played the netroots and he's done with them, plain and simple. And he's not afraid of them should he go down that path, because he's convinced (or someone has convinced him) that they will not support McSame in the White House under any circumstances...even if those circumstances include Bayh.

And even if you accept the notion that Obama has tossed the netroots aside, the problem is even the most overly pragmatic reasons to have Bayh on the ticket do not work: he's not going to get Obama Indiana, he's not going to appeal to the PUMAs, he's not going to generate national buzz, the GOP isn't going to magically admit that an Obama-Bayh ticket is strong on national security and the guy's just kinda average in every other way.

So why is he even being considered at all? He's lose/lose all the way around.