Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Caroline Kennedy for Senate:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:33 PM
Original message
Poll question: Caroline Kennedy for Senate:

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ok, who's the miscreant who thinks she, an attorney and accomplished author
and social activist, isn't qualified?

Probably somebody who thought Sarah Palin would be a great president.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I provided that vote, but do not endorse that option.
When I start polls, I usually let it go four or five votes, and then throw a vote at whichever option does not have any votes, if such an option exists. I think that people are more likely to pick what they actually believe if they see that they are not entirely alone in their belief.

I don't bother voting how I believe in my own polls. After all, I already know how *I* think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I thought you opposed her
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Yes and no. I think she's a flawed and risky choice, who lacks
Edited on Fri Dec-05-08 10:56 PM by Occam Bandage
the breadth and depth of experience required to be effective on a policy level, and I'm not convinced she has the ability to withstand the rigors of the Senate--she hasn't even run a campaign yet. On the other hand, I think she could turn out very well indeed, in a Ms. Smith Goes to Washington sort of way. If I'm the governor, I wouldn't take the gamble of appointing her. On the other hand, it would be thrilling to have her be appointed.

She isn't the safe choice by any means, but then again, you don't win the big money if you don't bet big.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I'm pretty much of the same mind
I would prefer the Governor appoint someone who has run for political office, managed a primary and general election campaign and has been tested as a public servant responsible to a broad constituency. Someone who has made some tough decisions in the public arena.

If he wants to take a gamble and do something historic, my suggestion would be Christine Quinn.

Then again, I like Caroline and am sure she would make a fine Senator. I just would like to think one earns such a position through meritocracy. Even when appointed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. what you said.
I think she could do fine, but I'd rather Paterson pick from among many state and federal elected Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
28. She is highly intelligent and has been very careful about conserving her image
and involvement in politics.


The most interesting part of this whole episode hasn't been addressed by anyone - why does she now want to get involved. She doesn't want or need the attention, in fact she is terribly shy.

I think it is a particularly good indicator of the kind of transformation Obama can have on people, even people who have been close to great fame and wealth. I am confident that if she were appointed and if she took it she would become one of the best Senators in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #28
36. Excellent points, grant!
And, as a New Yorker(these days) I absolutely agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
33. She could be a good placeholder
What if she was selected, but chose not to run in 2010?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. That would be the OP and another poster who just started a thread slamming her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Why do you use the word "slam" to describe their opinions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Because, in my opinion, that's exactly what they're doing.
That okay with you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Can one oppose her selection thoughtfully?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. When they selectively overlook her work as a constitutional scholar and her lifetime of public svc?
And refer to her dismissively as a dilettante and a cookbook author?

No, not so thoughtful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Are there thoughtful reasons to oppose her appointment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Not many, no.
And you asked about two specific posters, and I gave specific examples specific to their comments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Originally I did
but I'm wondering why you think there aren't a number of legitimate reasons to hope Governor Patterson appoints someone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. I said no such thing.
I've only addressed the comments here criticizing her (mostly baselessly, in my opinion).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. I don't mind if she gest appointed
but I do think there are others more qualified. And more interesting as potential potent, fresh voices in the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. You claim your examples are specific to my comments.
Where have I called her a "dilettante" or a "cookbook author?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaysunb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. I thought poster # 8 did a good job of being thoughtful
Although I strongly disagree w/ the poster, I thought his/her arguement was well thought out and fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Maybe because they compared her to Ma Bush
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. I voted 'yes.' In italics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
7. Other
Ambivalent. She could probably handle the job better than a few dozen Senators I could list ... but I'm not inclined to see her savaged for such an appointment. She doesn't deserve the kind of partisan attacks she'd get.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-05-08 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
18. I think she's tough enough to handle it
She beat back the entire party over the VP appointment...and there is that little thing of her families history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
22. the state of NY has too many serious problems to risk an untested neophyte; she'd be a bad choice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerry-is-my-prez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 01:47 AM
Response to Original message
23. I have mixed feelings - It would be kind of cool to have her there but she really hasn't paid dues
I'd be pretty po'd if I were an accomplished politician who had been around for years and saw some big profile person with little political experience leapfrog over me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. That's what they said about Teddy too.
When he became a senator he was much younger and much less experienced than Caroline is now, but I think everyone will agree that Teddy turned out to be one of our greatest senators ever and a great voice for liberalism. I expect no less from Caroline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marlakay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #23
35. Thank god Obama didn't have to pay his!
thats what everyone said about him. That he should wait his turn.

It's hard when you see someone taking cuts, but sometimes their the best person for the job.

I think Caroline would be great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 02:13 AM
Response to Original message
24. There are much more qualified people but I'm sure she would do an adequate job.
I'm not sure how I would feel about it if I lived in New York, and since I don't, I'm not too worried about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
25. kick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-06-08 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
27. I voted yes but she doesn't really belong there.


She's far too intelligent and graceful for that group - (thinking of the quote from the Senator in 'Religiousity' = "You don't have to pass an IQ test to get to the US Senate").
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bjorn Against Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
30. I voted yes because I will not be upset if she gets the position...
I don't necessarily think she would be the best person for the position, but I do think she would be very competent. I would like to see a woman in the seat as well for the simple reason that men outnumber women in politics by a large margin, and I think it is important to have some gender balance. Considering we will be losing one female Senator from New York it would be good to see another woman take her place. Ultimately this is Patterson's choice however, and as long as he doesn't choose someone who is really regressive on key issues I will be happy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brianna69 Donating Member (339 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
31. Definitely yes!
Go Caroline. Patterson needs to make this happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
32. would love to see former Gov. Cuomo, but she would be fine
Edited on Sun Dec-07-08 11:52 AM by tigereye
she's smart, classy and beloved by pretty much everyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
34. couldn't vote in your push poll
there are fair ways to phrase the question. I, for example, am not against Caroline being appointed because she's not qualified; I'm against her being appointed because no other person with her qualifications, but without the family name, would stand a chance of being appointed, and because there are others who are MORE qualified than she.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. Then you believe she's not qualified; you just talk around it to make it seem gentler.
"Well, she's qualified enough I guess, but not so qualified that I would choose her over any of the more-qualified people" can be shortened to "she's unqualified" and not lose any meaning. You are against her appointment because of her level of qualification. I think that whether you believe she fails to meet some external, objective standard, or whether she fails to rise above the bar set by her competitors, a declaration of non-qualification is equally fair.

But let's leave that aside. Admittedly, I could have provided no justifications whatsoever after "yes" and "no." On the other hand, I like providing brief, fair justifications; it reminds people what the arguments are, and in the few dozen polls I've posted here, this is the first time anyone's claimed a justification was evidence that I was posting a push poll. Sorry you didn't like the justification for the "no" choice--despite agreeing with it--but that doesn't make it a push poll. I'm not sure how it could be construed as a push poll, actually. I can't even decide which side you think I'm pushing. So, you don't like the "no" choice. Is it an anti-Kennedy push poll, because you think the "no" justification is harsher than the "yes" justification is favorable? Is it a pro-Kennedy push poll, because you think the "no" answer is harsh, keeping people from voting for it, giving an inflated "Yes" total? You're not usually one to assume malice over negligence, so I'm kind of surprised at your assumption of underhandedness.

Anyway, if I had changed the "no" choice to "No, I either believe that she fails to meet my standard of qualifications for office and as such am against her nomination fearing inadequate job performance, or believe that she does meet such standards, but that other people are more qualified, and as such I am against her nomination while believing that she would perform well in the job," would that have made you happy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC