Why did Obama pick Biden over Bayh?

[Bo]

I'm not sure if this is the correct place to ask this, but I was curious. Both Biden and Bayh had foreign policy experience, but Bayh also had executive experience. Also, neither of them are very charismatic. Finally, both of them could have appealed to Hillary voters. Did Obama pick Biden because he had more foreign policy experience, or was it something else?

[Bo]

Biden is dumber and easier to control.

Biden makes more gaffes than Bayh, so how is he easier to control?

[Bo]

Easier to elect a D in Delaware than a D in Indiana.

Obama would have won Delaware with or without Biden, and he knew that.

[Bo]

Yep it's all political. Bush chose Cheney. Honestly, someone convince me that it was politically motivated. How much do you think Cheney helped Bush in the 2000 or even 2004 election? Then again, Cheney was the head of Bush's VP committee and he picked himself. Bush could've said no though.

Cheney provided foreign policy experience and a measure of defense gravitas to the ticket, considering he was a former respected Secretary of Defense and was considered an old hand.

Exactly. Bush Jr. was attacked as inexperienced on the campaign trail (especially on foreign policy), so he needed someone to give him more credentials in that department. I still can't understand why Gore picked Lieberman, though. Unlike Cheney, he added nothing to the ticket.

[Bo]

Yep it's all political. Bush chose Cheney. Honestly, someone convince me that it was politically motivated. How much do you think Cheney helped Bush in the 2000 or even 2004 election? Then again, Cheney was the head of Bush's VP committee and he picked himself. Bush could've said no though.

Cheney provided foreign policy experience and a measure of defense gravitas to the ticket, considering he was a former respected Secretary of Defense and was considered an old hand.

Exactly. Bush Jr. was attacked as inexperienced on the campaign trail (especially on foreign policy), so he needed someone to give him more credentials in that department. I still can't understand why Gore picked Lieberman, though. Unlike Cheney, he added nothing to the ticket.

The theoretical idea was to increase turnout and votes from Jewish voters in order to win Florida.

Gore was overwhelmingly winning Jewish voters become Lieberman came along anyway, and I don't think Jews are as influenced by identity politics as other groups are. Also, Jews are a very small voting block, so energizing them a little bit more would have little impact electorally. Other than Jews, I don't see any other group Lieberman managed to appeal to. Also, Gore might have lost some anti-Semtiic votes by picking Lieberman (which there aren't many of, but you never know). I think that in terms of strategy, Gore should have either picked a liberal or a competent woman as VP. For instances, Russ Feingold would have been able to appeal to both the Democtaic base and Jewish voters, while Dianne Feinstein would ahve appealed to females and Jewish voters. Lieberman's appeal was too limited. Frankly, if it wasn't for Bush Jr.'s DUI story coming out right before the election, Gore and Lieberman probably wouldn't have even come very close in Florida.

[Bo]

Another consideration was that Biden's replacement in the Senate would have been picked by Democratic Governor Ruth Ann Minner. If Bayh had been chosen, Republican Mitch Daniels would have picked a Republican to replace him, altering the balance of power.

Biden was a much better choice than Bayh.

This.

Obama would have been stuck at 59 seats.

It would be 58 seats right now, or possibly 57 if Franken lost in MN due to the butterfly effect.

[Bo]

In reality I think Obama's preferences were actually something like

Kaine > (Bayh ~ Biden)

That's what I read as well. But the Russo-Georgian war in August changed everything.

[Bo]

Everything Obama has ever done has been pure politics. He has nothing in common with the average ordinary individual.

Same for many other Presidents, including Reagan and Bush Jr.

[Bo]

Everything Obama has ever done has been pure politics. He has nothing in common with the average ordinary individual.

Same for many other Presidents, including Reagan and Bush Jr.

First of all, there is no Bush jr. There is a George HW Bush and a George W Bush. Secondly, everything that Bush did was not political. One thing that I like about President Bush is that he put the country first and himself and politics last. He said that no matter what happened to him politically, he wanted to keep America safe. Another President like that is Jimmy Carter. He said basically the same thing but in a different situation. He said that no matter what happened to him, he wanted the hostages to come home. I think that our country is blessed to have Presidents like those two. Presidents who can say that they pay no attention to polls and do not care what happens to themselves politically, they only care about what is best for the country are the types of Presidents that we need more of. President Obama does not join that group.

Ronald Reagan also wanted what was best for the country. He made some mistakes. He thought that his economic plan helped the poor, that was wrong. It helped the rich. He and President Johnson, and Franklin Roosevelt are the three presidents who we can blame for the national deficit. Reagan did make some mistakes. But, he made people feel happier again. He asked Americans if they were better off than they were four years ago and in 1980 they were not. He asked them again in 1989 and they were better off. They were happier...children went to bed at night without the fear of nuclear war thanks to Ronald Reagan. The Russians and the Americans had good relations for the first time in fifty years thanks to Ronald Reagan. For a time during the Reagan years, 300,000 jobs were created per month. That was once again thanks to Ronald Reagan. So, Reagan did a lot of good things as well. And there is no real evidence to prove that everything that Reagan did was political as there is not for George W Bush.

I think that your comment is a partisan political comment rather than a factual comment.

GWB did not care about the American people first. If he did, he would not have been so fiscally irresponsible, would not have passed his 2003 tax cuts, and would not have gone into Iraq (since it did not pose an immediate threat to the U.S.). Carter did care for the American people first, but he was too indecisive to do mmuch good. The inflation rate drastically increased under his watch and he did nothing about it for most of his Presidency. Reagan did not want what was best for the country. He never thought his economic policy favored the poor; he always knew it favored the rich. That trickle-down crap was just made up so that poor and middle class voters would vote for him. He and his economic advisors never believed in it themselves. As for the deficit, FDR had to handle the Great Depression and WWII, so his large deficits are excusable. As for LBJ, he also had to fight a war, and even in taht case his deficits were less than Reagan's. Reagan had no excuse to create such huge deficits that our children and grandchildern would later have to pay off. Also, Reagan began the process of financial deregulation which later helped cause the 2008 fiancnail crisis. Just because the economy recovered under his watch doesn't mean Reagan had anything to do with the economic recovery. For making people feel happy again, many other Presidents have also managed to do that--Teddy Roosevelt, Coolidge, FDR, JFK, Clinton, and Obama all being prominent examples. The reason that the U.S. had good realtions with the Soviet Union at the end of Reagan's Presidency was because Gorbachev came to power, which had nothing to do with Reagan. And I'm not sure I would have called U.S.-Soviet relations the best in 50 years in 1989. And again, Reagan's large job creation had very little to do with his actual economic policies. What proof do you have that everything Obama is doing is political and not just out of a desire to improve the lives of ordinary Americans?

[Bo]

Everything Obama has ever done has been pure politics. He has nothing in common with the average ordinary individual.

Same for many other Presidents, including Reagan and Bush Jr.

I thought Bush Jr. was as middle America as you can get with his cowboy attire and stuttering.

No, he was just pretending to be an average guy. In reality, considering he was born rich and had everything given to him on a silver platter, he does not understand ordinary Americans and their lives and struggles. Heck, Obama is more middle American than Bush. Obama was middle-class for his early life, while Bush was always extremely rich.

[Bo]

Everything Obama has ever done has been pure politics. He has nothing in common with the average ordinary individual.

Same for many other Presidents, including Reagan and Bush Jr.

I thought Bush Jr. was as middle America as you can get with his cowboy attire and stuttering.

No, he was just pretending to be an average guy. In reality, considering he was born rich and had everything given to him on a silver platter, he does not understand ordinary Americans and their lives and struggles. Heck, Obama is more middle American than Bush. Obama was middle-class for his early life, while Bush was always extremely rich.

George W. Bush is one of the few people who is able to combine the negative attributes of the rich with the negative attributes of the poor.

Amen to that. Combining the elitism of the rich with the stubbornness, awkwardness, and lack of intellect of the poor is often pretty hard to do.

[Bo]

Bayh is not competent to lead anything.  If he was, he would be President right now instead of a complete nobody.

He's competent, just uncharismatic. He did a pretty good job as Governor of Indiana, if I recall correctly.