A Quote by Evan Bayh

I believe I would be a very strong general-election candidate. — © Evan Bayh
I believe I would be a very strong general-election candidate.
Typically, the view of party leaders is that primaries are best avoided. Better to coalesce around a consensus candidate early, help that candidate amass a mighty bankroll, and focus the attention of volunteers, activists and other stakeholders on the general election.
We read primary results to assure ourselves that this candidate has won this state's primary and can win the state in the general election. I think that's a very dubious jump to make.
It is not just software glitches and corrupted memory cards that should be on the minds of election officials. Hackers pose another very real problem whereby an election could be tilted towards a favored candidate.
I am disappointed not to receive the endorsement of the Reigate and Banstead Conservative Association's executive council as the Parliamentary candidate at the 2015 General Election.
There is no question that I would be the better president. But as for the campaign, are Americans ready for a general election in which both major party candidates are ADD? Quite frankly, it could provide an opening for a third party candidate, maybe someone backed by the evil Koch brothers.
Election losses are always an inkblot test for partisans. If a candidate's defeat has no clear and obvious cause, if the data points are all over the map, it is easy for those on the sidelines to claim, 'Candidate X would have won if only he or she had been more like... me.'
I feel really urgent about this election. This is the first time in my voting life that I feel not only passionate about my candidate, but also that the alternative would be catastrophic. I want to help the best candidate win.
Vote for the candidate you believe would be the best candidate. That's the way it should work.
The right to participate in the choice of representatives for Congress includes, as we have said, the right to cast a ballot and to have it counted at the general election whether for the successful candidate or not.
The election is not very far off when a candidate can recognize you across the street.
After the election of George McGovern in 1972 as a peace candidate - I should say his election to the nomination of the Democratic Party - the party changed the rules to steeply tilt that playing field, creating superdelegates and Super Tuesdays that make it very hard for a grassroots campaign to prevail.
When you have a general election result you don't like, you don't have another general election.
Our [Republicans'] object is to avoid having stupid candidates who can't win general elections, who are undisciplined, can't raise money, aren't putting together the support necessary to win a general election campaign, because this money is too difficult to raise to be spending it on behalf of candidates who have little chance of winning in a general election.
If Christians should vote their duty to God at the polls, they would carry every election, and do it with ease. They would elect every clean candidate in the United States, and defeat every soiled one. Their prodigious power would be quickly realized and recognized, and afterward there would be no unclean candidates upon any ticket, and graft would cease.
Remember, the first presidential candidate to reject public financing for both the primary and general election was... Barack Obama, in 2008. He did it, in spite of a flat pledge to the contrary, because his campaign saw that it could vastly outspend John McCain.
One of the strong principles that I believe in is that you're always learning, whether you're a commissioner, a current general manager, a president or an owner, or somebody that's trying to become a general manger or a coach in the NFL.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!