2016 Postmortem

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)

74. And those who do not run do not run because they feel they will not win. And to look at the

Sat Jan 5, 2013, 11:46 AM

Jan 2013

last 10 years alone-when about half of appointees did not bother to so much as try to win- is a rather tight window for an office that has 6 year terms. Going back to 2000 does not help your case, of course, nor does going back to 1990, or into the 80's. That is to say, if we look at the history of the Senate in any way other than 'just the last 10 years, and only those whose polling showed they might win' reality teaches us that incumbency is a possible help, a possible harm and most usually it is a wash.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

106 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I adore Barney Frank... [View all] RudynJack Jan 2013 OP

Agree and agree. gateley Jan 2013 #1

The Senate has a lot of work to do in the next 5 months and it hard to campaign SharonAnn Jan 2013 #9

You have a point, but I still lean toward getting him into the seat and then it gateley Jan 2013 #43

Markey won't get appointed dsc Jan 2013 #2

Can you explain RudynJack Jan 2013 #3

I think the law specifies that the appointee can't run dsc Jan 2013 #4

I don't think so... RudynJack Jan 2013 #5

Technically he can, but he won't Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #6

How did last time work out? allrevvedup Jan 2013 #39

You get it. RudynJack Jan 2013 #44

Incumbents do their job while running for re-election over a period of years, not months Hippo_Tron Jan 2013 #79

If Governor Patrick throws away this appointment, that's his choice. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #89

The question boils down to... RudynJack Jan 2013 #91

Markey's problem is making sure he wins the Special Election 6 months after he gets appointed. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #7

That's a lot hedge-betting. RudynJack Jan 2013 #8

Governor Patrick is the one who makes the decision who gets appointed to the seat. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #10

I'm aware of who makes the decision. RudynJack Jan 2013 #11

I believe that Gov Patrick said he will NOT appoint anyone that intends to run for the seat... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #12

And Rep. Markey won't RudynJack Jan 2013 #13

Barney Frank does NOT want to run for the seat, he is volunteering only... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #14

I understand what you're saying RudynJack Jan 2013 #15

Gov Patrick does not want to appoint anyone that is going to run... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #17

You didn't provide anything RudynJack Jan 2013 #20

Markey would be stupid to give up his House seat before winning the primary. n/t Tx4obama Jan 2013 #21

And he's less likely to RudynJack Jan 2013 #22

We will have to agree to disagree. Tx4obama Jan 2013 #24

That's where I'm at. Little Star Jan 2013 #101

Exactly. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #40

But Coakley was not appointed... RudynJack Jan 2013 #45

Right, and if she'd run as an incumbent allrevvedup Jan 2013 #47

The MA US Senate vacancy law originally changed in 2004 to prevent Romney-R from appointing NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #92

Okay thanks. Here's what I googled up as current Mass election law: allrevvedup Jan 2013 #95

I was mentioning the Deval's selection for the Kennedy seat. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #97

Based on that appointment, the Dem special election candidate seems the better choice, allrevvedup Jan 2013 #99

I have another perfect solution. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #100

Barney Frank is retiring, he's seventy. He is happy to fill in, but if he wanted the job he would MADem Jan 2013 #27

Is Markey down with that? lonestarnot Jan 2013 #16

I have no idea RudynJack Jan 2013 #18

Frank said that BEFORE he knew that the fiscal cliff spending cuts were going to be ... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #19

OK RudynJack Jan 2013 #23

Have a great weekend. n/t Tx4obama Jan 2013 #25

He's not being condescending--he's being accurate. MADem Jan 2013 #29

Of course he's being condescending. RudynJack Jan 2013 #30

Your main point is not clear--you seem to be confused about what Patrick and Frank have said. nt MADem Jan 2013 #32

I don't know how to make it clearer. RudynJack Jan 2013 #33

I don't know how to make THIS clearer. MADem Jan 2013 #37

Sorry you feel that way. RudynJack Jan 2013 #46

You keep saying that incumbency is a big advantage. What are the stats on re-election of Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #59

In the last 10 years the election rate has been 6/6 or 100% allrevvedup Jan 2013 #62

But you are leaving out the several who did not even bother to run, that is not honest... Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #66

They aren't relevant to the question, allrevvedup Jan 2013 #67

Good lord. The OP claims that Frank should not be interim because incumbency is a 'big advantage' Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #70

OP claims " Incumbency has a lot of advantages." Stats show that it does. n/t allrevvedup Jan 2013 #71

No, the stats do not show that it does. Stats show that it sometimes does, sometimes harms Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #76

If they don't run, they don't count. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #78

Coakly was not an appointee. The appointed interim Senator from MA did not run. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #81

Bingo. n/t allrevvedup Jan 2013 #84

They don't run because the voters do not wish to elect an appointee. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #86

Appointed folks running in a general election is different than a short term interim senator... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #104

Are you including IL-assuming Blagojevich had not got caught. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #93

NO. The governor has already said he will only appoint a placeholder--not a candidate or potential MADem Jan 2013 #26

And Frank has already said he wouldn't take the job RudynJack Jan 2013 #28

Barney never said he would not take the placeholder job. It didn't exist until MADem Jan 2013 #31

You're mistaken. RudynJack Jan 2013 #34

No I am not mistaken--I live in MA and I pay attention when I see my governor on the TV. MADem Jan 2013 #35

I was unclear. RudynJack Jan 2013 #36

Frank is not taking the job as the sitting, elected Senator from MA. MADem Jan 2013 #38

Also: if Frank wants the job, why didn't he just say so privately? allrevvedup Jan 2013 #41

He does NOT want the seat. The governor has already said he will NOT appoint a candidate to the job MADem Jan 2013 #48

He obviously wants the seat. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #49

No--he wants the INTERIM appointment. If he wanted the seat, he'd declare and run for it. MADem Jan 2013 #54

A "seat" is a right to sit whether by election or appointment. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #57

Kerry's Senate Term does not expire in 11/2014. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #103

Barney Frank RudynJack Jan 2013 #50

That's what seems odd. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #52

Barney Frank said he is now free to do much more in the private sector. If he wanted he would ask. Sunlei Jan 2013 #42

It seems he's already asked: allrevvedup Jan 2013 #51

Senator Barney Frank-would be first outed Gay Senator in history.The Dream lives on!Equality rules! graham4anything Jan 2013 #53

You won't find a bigger fan of the RudynJack Jan 2013 #55

Incorrect, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin is the first out (not outed) gay Senator. Barney would be Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #60

The man is a saint OccupyManny Jan 2013 #56

He's no saint. RudynJack Jan 2013 #58

Tell me the precentage of appointed Senators who actually win re-election. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #61

100% for the last decade. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #63

Incorrect, 5 of the appointed Senators in the last 10 years did not even attempt a run... Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #64

Of the 6 who have run, and all 6 won. n/t allrevvedup Jan 2013 #65

Repeating it does not change the fact that the actual question is 'what percentage of appointed Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #68

The question is whether the interim appt. would help Markey win allrevvedup Jan 2013 #69

No the question was:Tell me the precentage of appointed Senators who actually win re-election. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #72

The can't win reelection if they don't run. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #73

And those who do not run do not run because they feel they will not win. And to look at the Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #74

If Frank was appointed but didn't run, would you say the same for him? allrevvedup Jan 2013 #75

In all of history, only 4 people have been appointed from MA to the Senate. Not one of them Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #77

And Coakley lost their last special election. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #80

She was not an incumbent appointee nor incumbent in the Senate. As you know. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #82

Hey you're catching on. n/t allrevvedup Jan 2013 #83

By that do you mean that you have read the education I'm offering to you and seen the error Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #85

Not one incumbent appointee to the Senate from MA has ever won election to the Senate. Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #87

None of those 4 ran, and Coakley lost. Time for a new strategy. n/t allrevvedup Jan 2013 #88

That is correct, those 4 did not run. Why do you think that is? Because the people do not want Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #90

This reminds me of the old Certs commercial: "Stop! You're both right!" DFW Jan 2013 #94

Appointed US Senators that won their first election. NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #96

You sorta skipped over an important point ... Tx4obama Jan 2013 #105

I was being hypothetical but I do agree with your claim NPolitics1979 Jan 2013 #106

As I understand it the appointed interim senator CAN'T run for the seat- I hope Barney is picked. nt cecilfirefox Jan 2013 #98

Spam deleted by NRaleighLiberal (MIR Team) John_UAC Jan 2013 #102