General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSorry, but there is absolutely no sane reason for not giving Senator Kerry's seat to Barney
temporarily. Case closed. Oh yeah and fuck you Shell Oil!
PennsylvaniaMatt
(966 posts)I agree!
exboyfil
(17,865 posts)Would it be an advantage to be a sitting Senator? If so that would be the only reason to not have Frank as interim Senator. Otherwise I would expect to Sen. Frank to back the democrat all the way and help in whatever way that he can.
It would be a nice reward to Frank for his years of service. Having the Senator's title even for a short time is very special, and he obviously will represent the interests of his state.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)his years of experience, knowledge and loyalty. Anything less is nuts.es the fact that he WANTS the interim appointment. He should have what he WANTS.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Barney is seventy--too old to run and start out as a junior senator, but perfect for the interim job.
demwing
(16,916 posts)other than that
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)Frank would be a best choice
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)Wouldn't Markey be good at that as well?
I'd love to see Frank as permanent Senator.
JI7
(89,264 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)their fucking pain in the ass!
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)I'm sure Patrick is getting all the pro's and con's as we speak.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)appt.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Contrary to your claim in the OP
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)That is, appoint Markey if it's clear that he'll be the nominee. Some of the potentially strong candidates, such as Frank and various Kennedy relatives, have already opted out. If the primary field clears for Markey, he should be the interim appointee. If someone like Capuano decides to run, then probably Patrick shouldn't appoint either of them.
JI7
(89,264 posts)it wont help in this case because the candidate will need time to campaign, raise money etc. they wouldn't have been senator long enough to get benefit from being incumbant.
MADem
(135,425 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)pukes dont re-run proven losers.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Yeah, I know, "pukes dont re-run proven losers," which is why Richard Nixon's career was finished after he lost the presidential election in 1960 and the gubernatorial election in 1962.
The Republican bench in Massachusetts is very, very thin. They have no one who comes close to Brown's name recognition and popularity. He'll be the candidate unless someone discovers nude pictures from his past... oh, wait....
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)stopped him . I see your point, but hope I am right. We don't need that asshat back in the senate.
Ratty
(2,100 posts)Why give that edge to somebody who won't even be in the election? As much as we all like Frank I don't see a good reason to appoint him.
Bolo Boffin
(23,796 posts)Response to Bolo Boffin (Reply #14)
Tx4obama This message was self-deleted by its author.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)I would rather see it go to somebody who is going to run for Senate.
Conventional wisdom indicates it would give the person a boost at election time.
These appointments are almost always given to somebody who is planning to run.
That's the default move unless there is an actual reason beyond just "Because I say so".
julian09
(1,435 posts)babylonsister
(171,090 posts)http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/273151-dukakis-seen-as-possible-senate-replacement-if-kerry-tapped-for-state
Dukakis seen as possible Senate replacement if Kerry tapped for State