SoCalDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:03 PM
Original message |
When senators run for president, we all lose. |
|
Edited on Sat Mar-17-07 03:06 PM by SoCalDem
Look at the senate these days. Biden is playing to the cameras with all the bluster he can muster. ALL of them are.
Any legislation they propose is carefully crafted to "do no harm" to their own political aspirations.
They are OUT of the loop, off campaigning most of the time.
It's no accident that not ONE sitting senator has been elected since JFK.
#1. They have too many votes on controversial things ON THE RECORD
#2. Everything they say in the senate is on TAPE, and easily retrievable to be thrown back in their faces...minus any nuance
#3. The very act of choosing to run is a slap in the face to any people who dug deep and contributed to their campaigns for senate. These people expected them to represent their state's interests for SIX YEARS...not to be a springboard to a possible better "job", and to have their new senators chosen by a governor who may not even be in their political party
#4. Very few senators are willing/brave enough to quit their "day job", and probably most of them choose to run immediately after (if not before) they win their 6 year term... They end up bearing little personal risk. Their failed presidential run costs them little, personally. They lose, and go back to their senate seat, only now they will forever be the "failed presidential candiate, senator from..."
One hundred puffed-up egos in the senate is the norm, but this year we have some SUPER puffed egos, sparring with each other instead of working together to do OUR business..
How long would you last in YOUR job, if a month after you were hired, you spent 75% of your time at work, running around applying for a "better" job somewhere else?
I know it's not illegal, but it should be !
I think the fact that congresspeople only get 2 year terms is a reason why more of them do not run for president.. They are all too busy trying to scrape enough money together for their next 2 years, to plan a presidential campaign..and fund it :evilgrin:
|
cascadiance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:05 PM
Response to Original message |
1. If Russ Feingold were able to run and win though, I think we'd all win! |
Radical Activist
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:09 PM
Response to Original message |
2. If you don't think they risk anything personally |
|
then you've never known a Senator who ran for President. Its a great personal sacrifice on any candidate and their family.
Not enough Democrats have been elected since JFK to conclude that a Senator "can't" be elected. We might as well say that woman or black person "can't" be elected because its never happened before, ever.
|
MGKrebs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Senators definitely have challenges to overcome, but so does anybody else who runs. Governors get tagged with "no foreign policy experience", US Reps. usually only have their district as a base and so have a lot of work to do to get wider support. I think Senators run more often- and more visibly- becasue of the elevated fundraising capability they usually have, and also their DC connections. Those should be good assets to start from.
|
Initech
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:12 PM
Response to Original message |
3. EXACTLY why I don't want Hillary to get the nomination. |
|
All of those reasons above. The fact that she was one of the Democratic senators who voted YES for IWR doesn't help either.
|
LeftishBrit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:21 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The trouble surely is though... |
|
that there seem to be just four possible scenarios:
(1) You are a senator running for president, and then you may be neglecting your Senate job.
(2) You are a governor running for president, and then you may be neglecting your state.
(3) You have never held a statewide post, and then you will be regarded as 'inexperienced'.
(4) You have formerly held a statewide post, and then you will be regarded as a 'has-been' or at least 'out of the loop'.
I realize that the situation is different from the UK and other Europaean countries where a prime minister MUST be a member of parliament; but still it seems a bit extreme to demand that senators should *never* run for president.
Also: it's extremely likely that another senator, Gore, did get elected as president - he just didn't happen to have a brother who was governor of Florida at the key moment.
|
SoCalDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. One quibble. Gore ran as a sitting vice president |
|
:)
and yes he did win, but we all know how that song goes :(
|
Deb
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-17-07 03:52 PM
Response to Original message |
7. In this exceptional year, I agree |
|
IMHO, the added traveling increases the odds of missed votes or attendance at committee meetings/hearings. It also aids the opposition in putting a nasty partisan slant on every good work they do perform while in DC.
During an unpopular war, with a tenuous majority hold on the Senate and a criminal Administration in charge.... they go campaigning. ugh! Did no advisor understand how that would reflect on the candidate?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 07:56 PM
Response to Original message |