grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
If Louise Slaughter's endorsment is so great, then why not appoint her to the Senate seat?charlequin said:
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
PoliGAF After Party Thread of Harsh Realities
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
charlequin
Banned
grandjedi6 said:
Because she's the Chair of the House Rules committee (a pretty sweet position that she might not want to give up to move to a position as frosh Senator), and because she's 79 (so it might not be a job change she's particularly interested in at this point if she never felt like making it before.)
That said, she would be my first choice if she were interested. :lol
PhoenixDark
Banned
Jak140 said:
I bet the Chicago power brokers will heavily finance whoever opposes him during re-election
no snitchin
Harry Reid has endoresed Caroline Kennedy.
I am so glad. I love Caroline Kennedy. I have for many years now, I have always wanted her to run for senate for years. It's really exciting for me to watch this dream come true. She has always been my favorite of this generation of Kennedy's over John Jr. and Bobby Jr. So great great great for me.
I adore the Kennedy's. All of 'em. It's always a good day in my book to see a Kennedy in DC. Blah blah blah dynasty who cares, glad to see the establishment is rallying behind her.
I am so glad. I love Caroline Kennedy. I have for many years now, I have always wanted her to run for senate for years. It's really exciting for me to watch this dream come true. She has always been my favorite of this generation of Kennedy's over John Jr. and Bobby Jr. So great great great for me.
I adore the Kennedy's. All of 'em. It's always a good day in my book to see a Kennedy in DC. Blah blah blah dynasty who cares, glad to see the establishment is rallying behind her.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Since you love her so much perhaps you can try and answer my question Cheebs: Why should Caroline become a Senator besides her being a Kennedy?Cheebs said:
Ted Kennedy had no experience and got appointed to JFK's seat purely cause he was a Kennedy and ended up going on to be in my view the greatest senator in history. So I am not going to be one to poo-poo dynasty. It really doesn't matter to me. I am a huge fan of hers, mostly out of non-political reasons.grandjedi6 said:
Why should Al Franken be a senator besides him having a name due to being on tv?
This could go on and on. There is no way one can defend Franken winning and not be bash Caroline going to the senate. It's not like she doesnt have to run, she is running again in 2010 AND 2012.
But again my love of her has very very little to do with politics. I have been obsessed with the Kennedy's since before I got into politics. Comes from my grandpa I guess, he is an irish catholic who didnt vote but when kennedy ran in '60 cause he was a fellow irish catholic he got involved and worked for the campaign and got to meet him and take his picture with him.
Cheebs said:
You're not answering the question. (You can't answer it, perhaps?)
You're basically saying "Sometimes other inexperienced, undeserving people have become senators and it has turned out alright!" which doesn't inspire much confidence.
Simply I don't care about experience really. So it's a silly argument to make with me in all honesty. I didn't care about experience with Obama, I remain consistent like that I guess. Their political viewpoint comes first, then if I personally like them. Caroline is a liberal democrat, and personally I adore her.GDJustin said:
PhoenixDark
Banned
Giving her the seat doesn't strike me as the right thing to do. That being said she'd easily win a special election thanks to her name BUT at least that would mean The People chose her, not senate big wigs.
She's done nothing to deserve having a senate seat handed to her.
She's done nothing to deserve having a senate seat handed to her.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Cheebs said:
That isn't a reason why Caroline should be a senator at all. Who knows how Caroline will perform in the next 40 years. For all we know she could end up being the worst in history. There's no way to gauge her since she's only be proposed because of her name.
Oh its easy to support Fraken and oppose Caroline (though I wouldn't really say that I support Fraken....)
1.) The governor is suppose to be filling a vacancy, not appointing a Senator for a full term. It's the voters of New York that decide who will be elected for a full term, and:
2.) Fraken's qualifications, or lack thereof, are entirely due to his own actions during life. Caroline's are entirely due to another's actions.
Point #2 is especially important
Again I am not saying she is the most qualified person for this job, and it'd be insane to try to claim that. I just personally really like her so I am fine with her getting appointed. She is the most level headed Kennedy there is and is very very smart, it would be hard for me to oppose her for any job due to my personal liking of her.
I am not a journalist I can let my emotional attachment dictate a position once in a while. I am not saying my support of her is based on any sort of logic at all which is why it is silly to ask me to back up my reasoning. I only bring up Franken and the rest cause you keep asking me for some sort of logical reasoning for my stance.
I like Caroline Kennedy. I'd support her if this was mayor, dog catcher, governor, president, whatever.
I am not a journalist I can let my emotional attachment dictate a position once in a while. I am not saying my support of her is based on any sort of logic at all which is why it is silly to ask me to back up my reasoning. I only bring up Franken and the rest cause you keep asking me for some sort of logical reasoning for my stance.
I like Caroline Kennedy. I'd support her if this was mayor, dog catcher, governor, president, whatever.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
"I'm not going to vote for Obama. I just don't like the guy"Cheebs said:
You're as bad as all those uninformed voters Cheebs. You should be ashamed.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Sounds like a Nintendo fan
Like I said political viewpoints come first. And she fits that criteria. If she was some bluedog democrat who was in favor of the iraq war or something then even my love of the Kennedys would make me be unsure, but that isn't an issue here.
She shares a political viewpoint of mine and I really like her, that isn't a horrible thing. Stop trying to act like a perfect non-personal political outsider. Everyone has emotional views of various politicians not based just on how they perform.
Look, Jimmy Carter was a terrible president but by god I love the guy and would vote for him for just about anything in an instant.
I have never liked the DailyKos way of looking at politics, I think they are too petty and too demanding. I have a more Chris Matthewsy weird warm-fuzzy love of politics (although a liberal leaning view of the political spectrum is still of utmost importance).
She shares a political viewpoint of mine and I really like her, that isn't a horrible thing. Stop trying to act like a perfect non-personal political outsider. Everyone has emotional views of various politicians not based just on how they perform.
Look, Jimmy Carter was a terrible president but by god I love the guy and would vote for him for just about anything in an instant.
I have never liked the DailyKos way of looking at politics, I think they are too petty and too demanding. I have a more Chris Matthewsy weird warm-fuzzy love of politics (although a liberal leaning view of the political spectrum is still of utmost importance).
grandjedi6 said:
You seem to have some major dislike of Kennedy. I wouldn't begin to suggest that she's the most qualified candidate for the position. But neither was Hillary, who had no legislative experience. Kennedy, assuming she gets the appointment, will have to run for re-election eventually, and the voters will get to decide. Until then, she's like most appointees, someone the Governor decided would make a good Senator for reasons both bad and good.
Is it that her name is Kennedy that makes her a special target? Because I don't see you in here railing about Secretary picks that are clearly not the best qualified candidates.
Indeed. Explain to me what is so god damn bad about her? She is more liberal than a good deal of the dem caucus in the senate and is not like she isn't smart. You think she is going to be some sort of horrible senator?Mandark said:
Sometimes I realize just how annoyed with the fringe blogosphere left I get. Although I have never been a really part of that wing of the party to begin with despite being on the same side in the primaries this time (in 2004 I was not a dean guy, although I loved him in the DNC).
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Aren't there also tons of more qualified people who also fit that criteria?Cheebs said:
Which has lead us astray how many times now?
"Look, George Bush was a terrible president but by god I love the guy and would vote for him for just about anythign in an instant"
:/
Again, you ignore the fact their political viewpoint COMES FIRST. Carter is liberal, a lot more liberal than hell Obama is in foriegn policy. I came to my stance on liberal issues logically as well as my worldview. And you seem to try to ignore that aspect. And that still comes first in my support. ALWAYS.grandjedi6 said:
I would never vote for someone who I disagree with on the key important issues, regardless if I personally adored them. I have said that many times but you keep ignoring it because I said I have personal attachments to some politicians (and all of them happen to be ones to fit my stances! I still have a filter based on my logically taken stances).
And yes there are plenty of qualified people to be senate and I'd be fine with any of them because they share my worldview. But Caroline is my first choice. When did I say there weren't other qualified people or people MORE qualified than her?
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Actually I don't mind Caroline at all. But I do dislike political dynasties. It wouldn't be nearly as bad if Caroline's name was being tossed around for any reason other than her name, but she isn't.besada said:
What exactly? I make personal attachments to politicians or because I hate DailyKos?Mandark said:
And it is hilarious to see people here make a big deal about being unattached and look at politicians based on issues and experience.
The very same poligaf who trashed Hillary nonstop on a VERY personal level almost never on policy just less than 6 months ago
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
So you'd vote for someone who sucks yet agrees with you over someone that may not agree with you on everything but does a good job? That's the same kind of logic that gives Bush 20% support in the country and has lead to the continued stream of political bickering.Cheebs said:
And again, you still haven't given me one reason why Caroline should be in the Senate other than her being a Kennedy. In fact the only reason you love Caroline seems to be because she is Kennedy.
No I would not vote for someone who did not share my political views, I don't believe in conservative ideology, and would not vote for a strong conservative on any ground. If the democrat was a corrupt mess, ala Blago I would vote third party or just not fill in that ballot. I will never vote for a conservative as long as their are liberal options.grandjedi6 said:
Again you are looking at things from what seems to be almost non-political. I am a liberal democrat, the fact I voted Obama, and voted Kerry in 2004, and voted straight ticket democrat in all 3 elections I have voted in should make that obvious.
And I liker her personally as well. I read all of her books, great gal. If it was just her last name why do I like her a lot more than RFK Jr? Caroline >>>> Bobby Kennedy Jr.
grandjedi6 said:
Frankly, she seems ideal to replace a female Senator with no legislative experience known mostly because she was related to a famous politician. They're just replacing like with like.
I would absolutely prefer finding the most qualified candidates, across the board. I've been pretty vocal about that. I just find it hard to understand the amount of vitriol towards Kennedy that I've seen when you've got picks like Hillary for State and Richardson for Commerce, both of which are entirely political appointments of poorly qualified people -- and in much more important roles.
The reality is that she's going to be the Junior Senator from New york, a role with little power past the ability to bring bacon home to her state, which she's fully capable of doing. She's worked with the New York power structure in the past, she's got a history of public service, and she's well educated. She's certainly more qualified -- even if her name were Jablonsky -- than Franken is.
Frank the Great
Banned
Cheebs said:
You know what the name of the policy that says the United States will use its military to defend oil interests in the middle east is, right?
The Carter Doctrine. Very liberal.
NintendoTogepi
Banned
This has nothing to do with the current subject (about Caroline Kennedy), but does anyone else find Rachel Maddow to be attractive?
Good looking, intelligent, exposes the evils of Bush & Cheney...perfect.
It's a shame she's a lesbian :lol
Good looking, intelligent, exposes the evils of Bush & Cheney...perfect.
It's a shame she's a lesbian :lol
It seems to me the only reason Caroline is seriously being considered for Senator is so that Democrats can leverage her name to raise large sums of money. With Chuck Schumer out at the DSCC, I wouldn't be surprised to see Kennedy (if anointed then elected) to have some sort of role in the DSCC in the future. Afterall, recent history shows us that the DSCC powerbase is NY and Wall Street and what better person than Caroline Kennedy to have out there as the face of the party asking for $$?
bafflewaffle
Member
CK- she seem like a nice lady, plus she got a big head so you know she hella smart
Incognito said:
I'm glad that the GOP's nutcase social conservative wing has driven the elitist bankers to our side, but it still sucks that the Democrats feel beholden to them.
If Obama were going to pick an intra-party fight, the first thing that jumps to mind is closing the hedge fund manager tax loophole.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Cheebs said:
Says the man who mocks others for voting 3rd party
What does this prove? You like one Kennedy more than another? So what?
thekad said:
?
There's sure an awful lot of projecting going on here. I don't care about the Kennedy name at all, I care about the person. People aren't talking about her being a Kennedy, they're talking about the fact that she's a Kennedy being advanced as the only qualification to be named to a Senate seat.
I dislike appointments personally, ironically I think Alaska has the right idea with a special election. It's also why I supported Blago appointing a placeholder for Obama's seat.
Learn2read
Member
I'm averse to the idea of dynasty as anybody. But I really like Caroline Kennedy and think she'd be a fantastic and level headed liberal voice in the Senate.
In a world where Chris Matthews' name is seriously being bandied about for a PE seat, I'm finding it hard to get outraged about CK, though I understand where it's coming from.
In a world where Chris Matthews' name is seriously being bandied about for a PE seat, I'm finding it hard to get outraged about CK, though I understand where it's coming from.
Synth_floyd
Banned
It's blatant nepotism if she gets picked to take Clinton's senate seat. How can anyone not deny that? And the quick endorsement of all the powerful dems is a way for them to close ranks around a member of their "club." She's done lots of good things but come on, it's pretty obvious why she is where she is today.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
In other news, Dickless Cheney admits to torture.
Smiles and Cries
Member
I was watching Good Morning America it seems that Jamie Foxx does a really good Obama too bad he is to big of a star these days to be on SNL
- Status