Obama picks Bayh as VP in 2008: What happens in 2016 and 2020?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:46:39 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderator: Dereich)
  Obama picks Bayh as VP in 2008: What happens in 2016 and 2020?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Obama picks Bayh as VP in 2008: What happens in 2016 and 2020?  (Read 1074 times)
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 29, 2019, 01:46:21 PM »

Obama picks Evan Bayh as his running mate in 2008, rather than Joe Biden.  Obama/Bayh wins in 2008, and is reelected in 2012.

Who then runs for the 2016 Democratic nomination?  Bayh vs. Clinton vs. Sanders?  Does Bayh peel off enough votes that would otherwise go to Clinton that Sanders is able to win the nomination?  Or Does Clinton still win the nom.?  (Or does Bayh somehow win?)

And in the event that Trump is still elected in 2016, then who would be leading the 2020 Democratic primary polls right now?  (I'm assuming Biden wouldn't be running right now if he was never the VP.)
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2019, 02:23:38 PM »

With Bayh elected, his Senate seat would've gone Republican, thus depriving Democrats from their 60 seats needed to pass health care bill. Without having his signature accomplishment, and with RL problems such as slow recovery remaining, Obama might've very well lose in 2012, making 2016 a wide-open race, thus denying Bayh semi-incumbent status of a sitting VP. Good economy and no Democratic fatigue would probably be enough to reelect President Romney.

Under this scenario, Hillary may not have ran at all, since it was easier for her to run for popular Obama's "third term".
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2019, 06:31:25 PM »

Assuming Obama wins reelection, you would probably have a more crowded field in 2016, just because it's the Vice President versus Hillary, so there's less pressure for others to stay out. She would remain the frontrunner, given her advantages (ties to Bill Clinton, desire for first female President, approval rating as Secretary of State) and the lack of a constituency for Bayh.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,801
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2019, 02:44:32 PM »

Biden, who hasnt proved anything he has done substantial,  wasnt properly vetted by either Obama or McCain. That's why, he was ineffective
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,504
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2019, 10:21:04 PM »

Bayh would have been elected in 2016.
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,459
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2019, 10:00:24 PM »

Well, what's up with Hillary? Is she still Secretary of State in this scenario, or does she stay in the Senate? Obama was a big fan of the "Team of Rivals," but, if he were to put Biden in at State instead of Clinton, then his foreign policy would've been a lot less hawkish, & much more in line with what he campaigned on in 2008. Not to mention, we wouldn't have the right crying about nothing but Benghazi for a few years just to weaken Clinton's chances in 2016.

Regardless, had he gotten the nod, VP Bayh definitely would've run in 2016, but I think he'd stand even less of a chance against Hillary in this 2016 than Biden did in ours. If Joe Biden didn't have it sewn up against Hillary, then there's no way in hell that Bayh would.

With Bayh elected, his Senate seat would've gone Republican, thus depriving Democrats from their 60 seats needed to pass health care bill. Without having his signature accomplishment, and with RL problems such as slow recovery remaining, Obama might've very well lose in 2012, making 2016 a wide-open race, thus denying Bayh semi-incumbent status of a sitting VP. Good economy and no Democratic fatigue would probably be enough to reelect President Romney.

Under this scenario, Hillary may not have ran at all, since it was easier for her to run for popular Obama's "third term".

Depends on how Bayh's presence on the ticket impacted the Senate races in 2008. Yeah, Mitch Daniels would've replaced Bayh with a Republican (this scenario probably butterflies away Dan Coats' return to the Senate, as you'd probably see Daniels appoint then-Rep. Mike Pence (or some other placeholder until Pence runs in 2010) to the seat), but if Bayh means they do better in 2008 & win some other seats (e.g., defeating McConnell (more likely) & Chambliss (less likely, given GA's runoff structure, but still possible) in 2008 are goals that would've been achieved with just a 3.3% nationwide swing, which seems reasonable), then there'd be a 61-39 Democratic margin in the Senate come 2009. Even if Scott Brown still wins down the line, that'd still be a filibuster-proof margin. If this were the case, then Bayh would probably have some good contacts within the Blue Dogs in the Senate, which could've helped Obama get the ACA passed.
Logged
connally68
Guest
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2019, 01:08:40 PM »

Obama wins Indiana by an even bigger margin, and he wins Missouri.
Logged
connally68
Guest
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 31, 2019, 09:49:07 AM »

Bayh is definitely a lot more verbally cautious than Biden that is for sure.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,801
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 31, 2019, 01:43:18 PM »

The lesson of John Edward's, is pick someone with foreign policy. If Gephardt would of been picked over Edward's, Kerry would have had a stronger hand against Cheney, and Gephardt would of cleaned Cheney's clock in that debate. Bayh never was gonna get Veep spot, Biden is close to Israel.


Gillibrand has more foreign policy and is a female and would be a stronger pick than Yang or Klobuchar or Bennet. Gillibrand can be Biden's Veep.  
Logged
connally68
Guest
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 31, 2019, 02:16:59 PM »

I agree with you that Gephardt would have been a much better and safer pick than Edwards.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 12 queries.