General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSen Kerry for cabinet anything is folly.
Hear me out on this one. To voluntarily give up a senate seat is madness. He's currently ensconced in MA just as anyone named Kennedy would have been. He's too valuable to us as an almost shoe in for that job to ask him to leave it. A governor appointed interim Senator would be viewed as just that, interim.
dsc
(52,117 posts)he can quit the Senate. I would prefer to see him not serve for the reason you outline but the fact is he gets to do what he wants, free country and all.
bayareamike
(602 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)freaking out over this? Seriously, I think if President Obama appoints Kerry and he accepts, there'll be a good reason for it.
Democrats can and will win his seat.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2012/11/11/election-over-talk-mass-turns-next-one/S6E4eXHZgddYlpghbNXI4H/story.html
dsc
(52,117 posts)unless Patrick were to run.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Massachusetts just rejected him. He was an incumbent Senator who lost by 7 points.
Sheesh, fear of Republicans is absurd.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)in 2013.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,338 posts)The Republicans in MA would have to decide to renominate him to run again. When is Kerry's term up? Would they be quick to renominate him? Do we have some good standby candidates to run for the seat? Some things to consider before dismissing the idea out of hand.
dsc
(52,117 posts)and would run for this seat in a special election the kind he won. He also wouldn't have to contend with the Senate is in the balance thing. I sure wouldn't count him out. It isn't like they have Republicans sitting around ready to run there. If I were a GOP power broker and that seat came up Brown would be the first person I would turn to.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)By state law, if Kerry vacates, a special election has to be held within 6 months of him vacating. That mean we voters in Massachusetts would have faced the following:
-Special election for Kennedy's seat.
-Defending a Governor that went into his re-election year with a 34% approval rating but won.
-Supporting and electing Elizabeth Warren.
If Kerry vacates, we will face the following:
-Another Special election around the middle of 2013.
-A Senate race in 2014 for a full term for Kerry's old seat.
-An Open Governor's seat if Patrick stays on, or electing Tim Murray for a full term if Patrick leaves early
The risk is that if Kerry's seat opens and we will the special election, good. But if we lose that election, 2014 is going to be a tough slough for democrats in Massachusetts. I am asking the President not to put us in that situation, if he does, no one know what the political outcomes will be.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)in 2014, if as expected, the economy continues to improve. The unknown is whether Patrick can beat Brown. As little as two years ago, Patrick had a 34% approval rating, I have not checked what is is lately, but it appears to be close to or above 50%. Patrick has a strong statewide organization, the same organization that helped Warren and a north shore Congressman that had family legal problems. But still, many democrats in Massachusetts don't have a stomach for a special election because that would fell that we are constantly in election mode. Democrats could not unseat Scott Walker in Wisconsin because of too many special elections. There is one poster in this thread that is disputing Massachusetts residents and their feelings, but one certainty is that if voters are exposed to too many high profile voting situations too often, they tire and undesired results happen.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)He duped people, some Democrats. That's not likely to happen again...otherwise he wouldn't have lost by 7 points.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)thinking to me. Please listen to Massachusetts residents, I have not read a post by a single Mass resident that say a special election is desired.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)I sure wouldn't want him for Secy of anything....
The Rep who prepped him for the 2nd debate, forgot his name, tall young blond affable guy, he could be Secy of something...was it Chris something?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)fadedrose
(10,044 posts)He was on some tv program where he was introduced as the debate partner of the President in the 2nd debate. He has a ready sincere smile that is rather contagious, as is the President's.
Kerry might have been there, but I saw Van Hollen's influence on Obama's demeanor, if not on his intellect.
Could be wrong, the memory's not what it used to be. Feel free to look it up. I had to go thru an alphabetical list just to recall Van Hollen's name.
Kerry doesn't have the magnetic personality required, nor does he have the gravitas of Mrs. Clinton, or Leon Panetta who had Defense...
He makes a fine Senator. He looks like a Senator should look, and looks as tho he was cast by Hollywood for the part.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Van Hollen prepped with Biden.
Kerry did with Obama for all three debates.
"Kerry doesn't have the magnetic personality required, nor does he have the gravitas of Mrs. Clinton, or Leon Panetta who had Defense..."
That's silly. Kerry ran for President and got 59 million votes, something Hillary never did.
You're comparing Kerry to Panetta?
politicasista
(14,128 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 13, 2012, 06:00 PM - Edit history (2)
Some are just jealous that the Senator is still relevant. Their loss, Obama and Kerry's gains.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)Still loyal, I guess.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)I understand.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)But Van Hollen does have a nice personality...
Not comparing Kerry to anybody. He has his fans, and I'm one.
JI7
(89,151 posts)started making things tougher. but this was more because of their strategy for Obama to appear "presidential" and not too combative .
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)Every account I have read has said that the president just couldn't focus on debate prep before the first debate, that he wasn't receptive to coaching and that he underestimated Romney. Obama himself apparently said it was all on him in calls with donors and supporters after the first debate. I don't think you can put that on Kerry...I am sure Obama doesn't.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)It's still unfortunate that some are trying to downplay his surrogate work with Obama/Team Obama.
Some people will just always have their grudges towards the Senator one way or another.
Obama didn't put the 1st debate loss on Kerry like so many of his other "supporters" did. Glad that he and Team Obama didn't listen to the armchair strategists and Twitter warriors and stuck to his/their script.
Keep doing you thang Obama, you too Kerry. Haters gone hate.
Hutzpa
(11,461 posts)he is privy to all foreign and intelligence info as Chairman of the Foreign Relations without the traveling.
We have to find a very solid replacement for him as Chairman and as Senator of MA, he is a tough act to replace no doubt.
I hope they're thinking long and hard about this.
boxman
(14 posts)Keep him in the Senate.
moondust
(19,896 posts)Appoints somebody and then runs for the Senate seat himself?
cherish44
(2,566 posts)We need them in Congress right now because the next two years are going to be a dog fight.
ProudProgressiveNow
(6,127 posts)MineralMan
(146,116 posts)thinking about Kerry for a Cabinet position? If not, I'm not sure that's even in the cards. Maybe we're worried about something that won't even happen.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)he hasn't made a decision yet.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)a specified time by state law. The Governor did have the power to appoint a person to serve out a term, but that was changed when Mitt Romney was Gov because of the fear that he would appoint a republican to a democratic open seat. The law was changed again after Ted Kennedy died to call for temporary appointment then a special election, that is the law today. Change of the law again by the democratic legislature is not a good idea, that would likely lose the large, vote rich Middlesex county for the party and likely cost us winning the 6 year term when it comes up in 2014.
I can't believe the President is seriously considering taking Kerry out of the Senate and I can't understand why Kerry can't bury his ego for the good of his party. The President should survey Massachusetts democrats about their taste for a special election before opening up Kerry's seat. I am sure the President will see that there is no desire for a special election.
A better situation is for Kerry to hold the seat until 2014 then have Joseph Kennedy III run for the open seat after spending 2 years in the House. Kerry can take international assignments and wait for 2016, when I think we can again win the Presidency, at that time, Kerry can have his SOS job. Joe Kennedy can hold the Senate slot until 2024, when he will be old enough to run for President.
karynnj
(59,466 posts)It is completely uncalled for to speak of Kerry burying his "ego". The fact is that he was listed by many people as the obvious SOS in 2009 - but it was given to Clinton, who had far less foreign policy interest and experience. He has since quietly worked both as a Senator and as a surrogate diplomat for Obama - often with very little attention or praise. I can think of NO ONE at his level who less deserves to have people speaking of his "ego". He has been incredibly loyal to the party, the President and to Massachusetts.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)politicasista
(14,128 posts)As much everyone is bashing Kerry over this MA should trade Senators.
You can have two GOP senators in Alexander and Corker, a filthy rich GOP governor (he is really like Romney), a GOP controlled state house/senate, Teabaggers who get elected to Congress (one lied about his mistress' abortion, the others are Anti-Obama bat junk crazy), a heavy red Southern state (TN) where ignorant pols (some DINOs) don't care until every election cycle.
Give us Kerry and Warren, but keep Brown far away up there.
At least you are from a blue state. Must be nice to have a Dem delegation that works hard, but never appreciates its own Senior Senator.
As for the SOS job, the Senator is very qualified, but understand he is also needed in the Senate.
Interesting how no one had a problem with Kerry going back to the Senate doing good work (SFRC Chair, etc). after Obama tapped Hillary, but no matter what he does, he is accused of having an "ego" when he has been nothing but loyal to Obama/Biden and the Democratic party. Funny how Democrats let the media off the hook, when Kerry hasn't said a thing. Go figure.
NYC Liberal
(20,132 posts)He lost the presidential election 8 years ago, so therefore nothing else he's ever done before or since matters (apparently). His campaign made some mistakes in 2004, but find me one campaign that hasn't. Obama made a few this time around. It's primarily the media that should be blamed. They did nothing but attack him the entire campaign while propping up Bush and giving countless hours of free publicity for the Swift Liars and their bullshit. They breathlessly covered every minor claim the Swift Liars made, while completely ignoring any talk of Bush being AWOL, for which there was way more evidence.
Just what does Kerry have to do to "prove" his loyalty after over 30 years of public service and support of the Democratic Party? I wonder.
(BTW, I am wary of appointing a senator -- any senator -- right now. But that has nothing to do with Kerry specifically.)
politicasista
(14,128 posts)the GOP memes on Rice are also tiresome.
Interesting that people are so terrified of Porno Brown (there are other Dems there too). Co-sign on being very wary of appointing Senators (or safe Dem governors). Agree with your 2004 assessment. The Senator doesn't need to prove anything (though sometimes it seems otherwise). Kerry can still do good wherever he is serving (or will serve?)
Not to say that our opinions should not be heard, but folks need to chill and let Obama decide. There are so many other issues and people out there right now that need help.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)TM99
(8,352 posts)Why would Obama consider this given Kerry's senate seat is beyond me. He is valuable in MA and I know from personal experience what the ramifications of such a placement would mean for the state.
I have lived in Arizona for 22 years, and Jan Brewer is by far the worst governor I have seen. She makes Symington look good, and he was a fucking crook.
When Obama tapped Janet Napolitano for Homeland Security, he deprived the state of a much needed Democratic governor. With the rise of Brewer, we have moved so far to the Tea Party right, that the state and its population are suffering immensely. SB1070 ring any bells here? How about the fact the Arizonans voted via proposition to always fund AHCCCS (state Medicaid) for those who need it, and she and the Tea Party assholes that she ushered in have all but decimated it. Funding for the severely mentally disabled has recently been gutted.
Damage can be done with this type of appointment. If he is left where he is in the senate much more is accomplished. Why risk losing a senate seat now? Think long term as opposed to rewarding a loyal Democrat in the short term.
politicasista
(14,128 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 14, 2012, 05:28 PM - Edit history (1)