Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

NY-Senate: Is Caroline the People's Choice?

Even as the buzz continues to grow over the possibility of Caroline Kennedy being named by New York Gov. David Paterson to replace Hillary Rodham Clinton, two new polls show the public somewhat divided on who they would like to see in the Senate.

A new Marist College survey shows Kennedy and state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo as the frontrunners -- each garnering 25 percent support from the 503 registered voters surveyed on Monday. No other candidate scored in double digits.

Among self-identified Democrats, Kennedy was the choice of 31 percent while Cuomo was the preferred option for 21 percent; the numbers were reversed among Republicans with 34 percent choosing Cuomo and 21 percent naming Kennedy.

A Public Policy Polling survey, which conducts automated interviews, put Kennedy as the clear frontrunner for the job with 44 percent while Cuomo trailed with 23 percent.

Take both of these polls with a grain of salt. At this point, they are nothing more than tests of name identification. Both Kennedy and Cuomo carry VERY famous last names in terms of New York (and national) politics, so it shouldn't be surprising that the duo are at the front of the pack for an appointment. Members of Congress like Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand or Steve Israel -- who are far less well known statewide -- if better known might be significantly more appealing to New York voters.

And, always remember that, ultimately, the appointment of the next senator from New York is in the hands of just one man: Paterson.

While there is chatter about the possibility of Paterson needing to use the pick to shore himself up for a serious primary challenge in 2010, his numbers in both recent New York polls suggest he is on strong footing.

Fifty-four percent of voters in the Marist poll said Paterson was doing an "excellent" (nine percent) or "good" (45 percent) job while 29 percent said he was doing only a "fair" job and six percent said he was doing a "poor" job.

In the PPP poll, 68 percent approved of Paterson's "job performance" while just nine percent disapproved and 23 percent were "not sure."

While the Illinois Senate appointment -- given Gov. Rod Blagojevich's arrest today -- is the far more high profile these days, don't forget about New York's Senate opening. If either Kennedy or Cuomo is the pick, they will immediately assume a high-profile role well above their relatively junior status in the chamber.

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 9, 2008; 4:10 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Blagojevich Criminal Complaint: The Best of the Best
Next: Sizing Up the (Illinois) Special

Comments

i would suggest Gov.Patterson appoint me before CK as i am a workaholic,have a doctorate, just retired from my dayjob after 37 years and am looking for something else to do, am a straight arrow which can be verified by my history, have done alot of volunteer work, have no outlaws in my family, and best of all: I'm interested in the appointment. on the other hand, i think the governor would be nuts, or incompetant to appoint me when there so many qualified people in NYS who can represent me in the senate; we have 2 senators just like any other state in the union; for the governor to dole it out to some goody 2 shoes neophyte with a famous name would be the height of stupidity and a horrible insult to the residents of this state, even to those who are too blinded by the Kennedy name to see it.

Posted by: rocx | December 15, 2008 10:34 PM | Report abuse

If Patterson is going to appoint a Kennedy, it should be Robert Kennedy Jr., not Caroline. Robert is one of the nation's leading spokesman on environmental issues. He's more substantive and more willing to do the hard work of politics. He's a fighter. I don't know why all this focus on Caroline, when Robert is the best pick.

Posted by: DCLawyer1 | December 15, 2008 10:10 AM | Report abuse

Ruth Marcus's piece on Caroline Kennedy was, in a word, ridiculous. Caroline does not have an impressive resume. She's never been employed anywhere in any capacity. Marcus's article was based on sentiment and nostalgia for another Kennedy in public life, not on reasoned analysis.

Posted by: arthurgowran | December 11, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

I am so tired of the legacy and entitlements in this country.

If Caroline Kennedy wishes to become a U.S. Senator, great. Then run for the office. But simply because she is a Kennedy - even though she is bright and capable - doesn't mean she's entitled to this appointment.

Ms. Kennedy should enter the political arena like other candidates. Run for local office, establish herself and her positions and eventually seek a Congressional bid.

Just by virtue of being a Kennedy or a Clinton or a Bush doesn't entitle her to this position. C'mon now! I'm a Democrat but how can we scream about Palin's lack of experience (which I/we did) and not hold ourselves to the same standard with Caroline Kennedy.

Let her earn her stripes, just like everyone else. Please let's end this dynastic sense of entitlement!

Posted by: Cocopelli | December 11, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

"NY-Senate: Is Caroline the People's Choice?" Who the f..ng hell is that woman - never heart of her.

Posted by: ridagana | December 10, 2008 9:12 PM | Report abuse

Politics are politics. In Illinois, what has been revealed is not only criminal but it is there for all to see. What happens in other places, like NYS, can also be looked at with a certain degree of uncertainty. Who is to say that someone with no experience running as a candidate, or with little experience in Washington's power grid, should automatically be picked as the new NY senator. There are lots of Congressmen and women who would make wonderful candidates for the Senate but unfortunately they do not have a household political name or connections. Experience does count for this extremely important position. charles hopfl

Posted by: hopflcd | December 10, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

I'd rather have Fran Drescher.

Seriously, why isn't this subject to a special election?

ENOUGH WITH THE DYNASTIES - Jesse Jackson Jr and Carolyn Kennedy need to run on their own MERITS not an inherited aristocracy!

Posted by: WillSeattle | December 10, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

It would be obscene to appoint Caroline Kennedy to the senate. There is no other word for it. She has never run for elected office and what public roles she has had have all been directly linked to her being her father's daughter. People accused Bush, and rightly so, of cronyism. This is 100 times worse.

There are literally hundreds of people who have a better claim to that seat than Caroline Kennedy. If you want both continuity and experience, why not appoint Bill Clinton?

Posted by: anon99 | December 10, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Will the Kennedy nightmare never end? Will the American people never get away from this uniquely unqualified and criminally minded family? What is wrong with people wanting the see a Kennedy in office. There are over 300 million other people in the United States far more qualified, so why stick with a bunch of losers from Massachusetts?

Posted by: surfer-joe | December 10, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy should do the right thing and remove her name from consideration. From all we hear her emmissaries are doing the same thing as some of the Illinois candidates and suggesting to Patterson how great a candidate Kennedy would make to run with him because she could raise so much money in 2010.

Noblesse Oblige is no way to choose a Senator. One of these polls shows how much trouble she will face in 2010. Many Democrats will vote Republican to say this is wrong.

For those who didn't want to see a Bush dynasty or a Clinton dynasty I would suggest we end the Kennedy dynasty unless a Kennedy wants to actually run for office and then they should have the right to do that.

So if Kennedy wants the Senate seat let her announce now that she will run in 2010 and see if she will face a primary. Let the people vote on her and see if she is willing to do the work to be elected and not just recieve a royal appointment.

Posted by: peterdc | December 10, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Oh I get it....Sarah Palin is inexperienced, HOWEVER, a rich woman whose father was President, uncles were Senators, and cousins are in government has the right experience. You Democrats are always entertaining.

Posted by: Shirl1 | December 10, 2008 4:32 PM | Report abuse

No one has the name or the ability that Caroline will bring to the table. She is loved here in NYC and we look forward to her serving us.

Posted by: PatrickNYC1 | December 10, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

All this talk of the New York senate seat opening makes me really wish John jr. was still alive.

Posted by: tdc221 | December 10, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

I'm not from NY, but I am from FL (which makes me an expert on all states in the northeastern U.S.) -- why would any of us concern ourselves with New York senators? It's a waste of time - leave it to New York! You can't replace Hillary with Obama or C.K.!!

Posted by: newbeeboy | December 10, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

bsinon1 - Olsen twins would be a great choice. The resume of their accomplishments rivals BHO's.

Posted by: leapin | December 10, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

"Here's my suggestion to caroline to ensure a life-long career in politics.

Get drunk, run your car off a bridge and fail to save your companion from drowning because you are so totally drunk. Then have your powerful family cover up the drunkenness and get law enforcement and the judiciary to not charge you with manslaughter.

It worked for Uncle Ted!"

Not so fast, numbnutz. If old drunk Teddy hadn't taken the plunge off the Dike Bridge, you'd be calling him former President Kennedy now.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | December 10, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

The whole idea behind an appointment is the choice is solely that of the executive--not the people.

Posted by: txgall | December 10, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

If she wants to be a Senator let her run for it.

Posted by: brewstercounty | December 10, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

I was appointed to office when my husband died. After the appointment, I had to run for the seat. I won 3-1. What I learned was that many of the elected people are not smart. while my husband was sick, he told me that there are three things required to win, 1. be careful who contributes to your campaign, 2. remember that the average voter did not graduate from an ivy league school, so be simple in your language (GWB) people vote about what you can do for them, all politics is local.
Once you get in office, always remember one person, one vote. Lobbyist have one vote they are equal, nothing special.
What caroline needs is not experience. We are truly sick of experience. We need new ideas and trust. Good enough. Because women are not yet equal, we need a woman. She does not need to be compared to uncle Ted no more than Hillary is compared to Bill. Women have a mind of their own.

Posted by: sm98yth | December 10, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Aren't the Olsen Twins New Yorkers now? Maybe one of them would take the job. Heck, give 'em both the job, the could share the same chair.

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 10, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Would Obama (or anyone else for that matter), be sinister enough to put two or three Senators like Lamar Alexander (TN), Sam Brownback (KS) and Jim Bunning (KY) into his cabinet, largely in order to pull three Republicans out of the Senate who would be replaced by a Democratic governor in order to build a fillibuster proof majority? I'm just curious about this.

Posted by: andygoldman | December 10, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Aw, give it to her. Why not? Giving Senate seats to the snobbish elite with no experience to use as springboards is in vogue these days.

Posted by: jeffsmyname | December 10, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse


.
Here's my suggestion to caroline to ensure a life-long career in politics.

Get drunk, run your car off a bridge and fail to save your companion from drowning because you are so totally drunk. Then have your powerful family cover up the drunkenness and get law enforcement and the judiciary to not charge you with manslaughter.

It worked for Uncle Ted!

/

Posted by: ImpeachNOW | December 10, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Okay, folks,

Here’s how it goes…the responsibility of appointing the next senator from New York falls to one person and one person only: Gov. David Paterson.

Whoever gets the appointment will then have to run for the seat twice in the next four years. That means raising a lot of money (or using your own) to advertise in one of the most expensive media markets in the country.

It also means fending off primary challengers and Republican opponents in rapid succession.

If you’re Gov. Paterson, you’re going to want someone with strong name recognition so your appointee doesn’t have to spend all of their time over the next two and four years reminding everyone from Buffalo to Bensonhurst who the hell they are (“Hi, I’m Nydia Velázquez, your senator. You ARE?????”)

So that leaves Paterson with two practical choices: Andrew Cuomo or Caroline Kennedy.

Cuomo would be a fine choice (although he does come across as a bit of a thug). For Paterson, appointing Cuomo might also remove a potential rival for the governorship for the foreseeable future. However, Cuomo does, in fact, want to be governor himself (he already ran for it) and potentially a future president. So while he’d gladly take the Senate appointment, that isn’t really where he wants to be.

Caroline Kennedy would also be a fine choice. She’d scare away primary challengers with her wealth and fundraising capacity. Republicans (including the ridiculous Peter King) wouldn’t stand a chance against her. And she’d probably remain in the Senate for the next 30 years if she wanted to. And Paterson would also benefit from appointing a woman to replace Hillary.

From a political standpoint, appointing Caroline is a no-brainer.

And thanks to Neil Diamond, she comes with her own campaign song....

Posted by: Bondosan | December 10, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

We've seen plenty of "People" magazine-like items about the possibility of Kennedy being named to the seat. Even a few listing names and why, politically, they might help or harm Paterson. How about an article actually looking at the relative experience and positions of each possibility? And is Eliot Spitzer not a possibility? He at least knows a lot about the NY-DC train schedules and would certainly be more wary of, um, compromising situations than would others.

Posted by: Sutter | December 10, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Hey, on the plus side, she has her own money and would be unlikely to be a thieving, conniving, base, criminal like so many of the others with whom she would share legislative duties.

New York, like California, is neither salvageable nor useful any longer, politically. Let 'em both live with the stupidity of their financial and political decisions.

Posted by: jshaver001 | December 10, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

If she is really a person of the people then let her run like everyone else.

Posted by: bparrish | December 10, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

I have read as much as I could on the web about Ms. Kennedy and she has performed several functions well in her adult life. She has a reputation as a constitutional scholar. Nevertheless, I am sure that dozens of decent NY pols have paid their dues in the rough and tumble world of politics while she has not. Aspergirl was unfair to characterize her as a "banquet hostess" and CK might well be able to handle the Senate slot. Others have done so with less of a resume. Nevertheless, the Ruth Marcus "princess" column was an embarrassment to RM even if she does not yet know it. A CK appointment would, in fact, be a "legacy" choice and we should be suspicious of "legacy choices" from the gitgo.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 10, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

She is not qualified. Period.

Other hard-working people in government who have gone through rigorous campaigns and actually been elected are the ones who deserve to be considered. If Princess Caroline gets this because she is a Kennedy who supported BO and everyone feels sorry for Ted, then the moral/work ethic in this country is finished. Nepotism and corruption rule. Very sad.

Posted by: NewHamster | December 10, 2008 9:13 AM | Report abuse

I have no idea how Caroline Kennedy would be as a Senator. What I do know is... I know almost nothing at all about her, and that is due to her choice to remain among the most private of the Kennedy family.

She has never run for public office. By itself, that raises some questions. Is she able to manage a campaign? Is she capable of the tasks required of Senators beyond public appearances? Does she have the stamina and stomach for long, pitched battles over legislation, or the ability to compromise on what she wants for a greater good?

She's famous and undoubtedly the Camelot glitter will rub off on her. But is that enough?

Given her last name, lots of people will think they know her. I submit that we don't know Caroline Kennedy at all... and that is not a strong recommendation for a prospective Senator.

Posted by: dbitt | December 10, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Caroline Kennedy would be an excellent choice for the Empire state. Her family name brings back good memories of JFK, RFK, Ted Kennedy. No other American family has contributed so much to public service for our nation.

Posted by: yog2541 | December 10, 2008 8:35 AM | Report abuse

For once I'm glad I live in Maryland.

If the people of New York want a never-employed semi-aristocrat who knows best for them then let them.

The appointed Senator will face two elections in pretty short order. That will shake out the nice to haves from the down and effectives.

Posted by: RedBird27 | December 10, 2008 6:09 AM | Report abuse

to the funny and limted people who think Kennedy would be a bad appointment...

oy

Name one other potential senator who would have a stronger weight for the state that it is her job to have weight for...than caroline Kennedy


one person who has more gravitas, combined obvious personal balance and balanced judgement, that is as well spoken and educated on national issues, who has such a full and lifelong understanding of how Washington works

you have to be an idiot not to want someone like Kennedy to be YOUR spokesperson in the Senate.

Not to mention name another Senator who will be as close to the Obama family and have Obama's personal phone call.

Idiots ...they just spout and don't think about anything outside their bias about what they are saying.

If you have dem values... if you have any of the values that our country is moving to...Caroline Knnedy would be anyone's (including states that would like her to carpetbag to theirs...yet NY she's a native) "hit it out of the park" selection.

Go read her writings and books idiots.

Posted by: klondike2 | December 10, 2008 5:27 AM | Report abuse

To redeem yourselves (the Washington Post that is) from Ruth Marcus's utterly embarrassing article yesterday waxing lyrical about the Camelot and modern princesses, you should do another article outlining all the possible choices for senator and listing all their key accomplishments including Caroline Kennedy. This would give the readers and the larger public a factual basis on which to make a choice other than the Kennedy name.

I hope Americans don't defer to celebrity in choosing the next Senator from New York. If Kennedy gets chosen it means people like Ruth Marcus are willing to sacrifice our children's hard earned education hopes and dreams on the altar of Camelot worship. Assuming Ruth Marcus has children, is she really willing to send the message to them that hard work does not count and the fame and Uncle Ted is the only currency? New York is by and large a meritocracy, where hard work, grit, ambition and proven, result oriented people win the day, let's keep it that way. I hope Patterson does not got the Blagoievich way.

Posted by: exocet | December 10, 2008 4:39 AM | Report abuse

All the comments here supporting Princess Kennedy's appointment to the senate come down to this:

1) I remember her dad. What a great guy

2) I've seen her on TV. Wow, what class!

3) I've heard she's a Skawler! W00t I want her to be my Senator!

Seriously guys, these are all *emotional* issues to choose the celebrity candidate. NY did that with Hillary and got one of the most ineffective senators who primarily used that as her platform to run for president.

How about choosing someone who has actually been elected to an office?

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | December 10, 2008 4:31 AM | Report abuse

To Sean,

You said the Delaware arrangement is nothing like the Illinois arrangement. Not True! You state that putting in a placeholder allows for a more fair election in 2010, which would make sense, but it is not the basis for the appointment made there. They put in a temp so that Senator Biden's son can run for the seat when he is back from his tour of duty in Iraq. Sean, wake up, Biden is using his influence to keep his Senate seat in the family, and no one is even hiding this, they are right out in the open with it. This is total arrogance!

Posted by: gckarcher | December 10, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

There is no doubt about it. Caroline Kennedy is an excellent choice. I wish her Godspeed. She is tough,straight forward and a true Kennedy if I ever saw one. I know that she would make a great Senator. Yes indeed.

Posted by: MDickey28 | December 10, 2008 1:41 AM | Report abuse

I watched Caroline Kennedy from the Whitehouse Lawn to the Democratic National Convention and I can assure all the doubters that New York and American could not be better served than with Ms. Kennedy. Of all the Kennedy clan she has always impressed me as the most level headed and a true political science scholar. Even though her marriage had its ups and downs, she persevered and raised her family well. Now, it is time to serve America in the legacy of her father.

Posted by: maitami | December 10, 2008 1:10 AM | Report abuse

It is unfortunate that Caroline Kennedy is not judged on her own merits. As a constitutional scholar she has dissected the Bill of Rights and parsed the meaning of our "right to privacy." A spot-on antidote to the last two terms.

True, she is no celebrity like Arnold, or an athlete like Bill Bradley, but I suspect she would rise to the challenge.

Cilliza -- How about look at her bona fides and accomplishments? It seems your readers could use some tangible facts.

Posted by: jweinstein5 | December 10, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Also, I wonder how much say the DSCC has in this....

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | December 10, 2008 12:32 AM | Report abuse

While I have nothing against Caroline Kennedy personally, I must say that I find it troubling that the Senate seat may be given to someone because of what their last name is, especially since it is obvious that the Dems would want this person to be able to hold the seat for a long time. Let's get real, if her name were Caroline Jackson, and she was an attorney from small-town Watertown, NY, would Patterson be thinking about her? Of course not.

This is all about fundraising for the Party. This is all about family privilege. This is all about what Obama is specifically NOT about. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | December 10, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

The American people deserve qualified leaders in government, instead of the person who can raise the most money.

Posted by: ohioan | December 9, 2008 9:54 PM | Report abuse

The Delaware arrangement is nothing like this; first, senators having a say in their replacement is nothing new, and is probably a good idea. And the appointment of a placeholder merely means a level playing field in the 2010 primary.

Posted by: SeanC1 | December 9, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

In light of today's events in Illinois, which showed us how not to select a US Senator, Governor Patterson had better be real careful in the ways and means that he uses to make his choice. Frankly, if Ted Kennedy is pushing for his niece, that would not be viewed too favorably, elitism all the way! In Delaware, Senator Biden pressured, and Governor Minner acceded to his wishes. to put in a caretaker for his soon to be former Senate seat, so that his son, Beau, can run in 2 years. This is not too different than what happened in Illinois, its only a question of degree.

Posted by: gckarcher | December 9, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Does it bother anyone in the least that Ted Kennedy has sent word to Gov. Paterson's office that Caroline has contacts and family connections that would mean legislation affecting New York would receive prompt attention?

If Biden can pick his son, why not replace Hillary with Chelsea? The Clinton's have a few contacts as well, and I bet she wants a vocational change from her hedge funds.

This smacks of cronyism bordering on an American aristocracy. Who on earth put the "No Experience Necessary" sign out in Washington D.C.?

Posted by: kimba1 | December 9, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

It's interesting that Cuomo does better among people exposed to excessive amounts of lead in infancy while Kennedy does better among people who can read past a 3'rd grade level...wait, let me rephrase that...

It's interesting that Cuomo does better among Republicans and Kennedy better among Democrats. Republicans seem to have a knee-jerk favorable response to the title "prosecutor", and Democrats, to the title "Kennedy".

Posted by: officermancuso | December 9, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Repeated from last night for Officer Mancuso:

Officer Mancuso wrote:

"If you can explain to me why it was wrong for the USA to resist Ho Chi Minh I'd be much obliged."

I and John McCain both believe that the definitive works about VietNam are the collected writings of Bernard Fall. From those books, McC draws a similar conclusion to yours. I draw a different one.

Ho was not interested in Chinese hegemony but in VN independence, from France, from China, from us. The Michelin plantations remained open for capitalist business during Ho's rule; he was nothing if not a pragmatist. The succession of rulers in Saigon whom we backed were corrupt and unworthy. The RVN could or would not hold territory we took b/c they did not care.
We would have required more than a million troops to hold the south without active help from the RVN.

We misread the situation in the light of the Cold War. We thought Ho was a stalking horse for China. In fact, Ho would have been an indie commie, playing both sides against the middle for the survival of an indie VN, something like Tito, if we had made overtures to him.

Anyway, that's how I read it after the fact - not before I entered Navy OCS in 1968.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 9, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

The most interesting fact I read about the NY Senate today is that Rep. Peter King is considering running in the special election in 2010. If he did that, it's plausible that House delegation could be 28-1 after the midterm election. We'd probably be favored to win his seat. And, in looking for places to play offense in two years, NY-26 will most likely surface as a potential pickup district.

Posted by: jdunph1 | December 9, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Another Cuomo? A news hog. And with Chris Cuomo on TV too?
Andrew is full of himself and has a bad temper.
Between him and Caroline no contest. She's a decent, principled person with the power to hold the seat.
Mr "Shuck and Jive" has a strong sense of entitlement, an ego in search of a position.

Posted by: walshgen48 | December 9, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Oh, please. Not another Kennedy! One in the Senate is too much! But, two? At least Bill Clinton would be entertaining.

Posted by: lorddunsmore | December 9, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Oh, please. Not another Kennedy! Can't Patterson find someone with an ounce of G2 in all of NY?

Posted by: lorddunsmore | December 9, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

It wasn't too long ago that The Fix reported Ms Kennedy wasn't interested in the seat. What changed?

Posted by: bsimon1 | December 9, 2008 6:18 PM | Report abuse

Caroline who?

Posted by: hhkeller | December 9, 2008 6:09 PM | Report abuse

ypcchiu====maybe Hillary should get each of those 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling to chip in 50 cents and they would pay the debt off and have 1.7 million left over . Or maybe Hillary should pay it off herself. After all, she's the one who spent the money.

Posted by: majorteddy | December 9, 2008 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are already preparing to wage a strong campaign on this seat, and a top candidate just expressed his interest today:
http://campaigndiaries.com/2008/12/09/appointment-headaches-for-democrats#NY

Posted by: Daniel20 | December 9, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Libs only spend other people's money, never their own.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | December 9, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if Caroline Kennedy would be generous enough to donate one tenth of her wealth (inherited from Jackie kennedy Onasis) to cover all of HRC's campaign debt ? According to Babara Walters' autobiography, the 5th ave condo Jackie used to live worth 35 million dollars.

Posted by: ypcchiu | December 9, 2008 5:09 PM | Report abuse

white people need not apply. It is the change you were seeking.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | December 9, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

I think we'd all like to know the what Ted Kennedy is telling the recipients of those arm-twisting phone calls he is said to be making on behalf of Caroline, particularly with the Blagojevich seat-peddling business that's going down in Illinois.

This wouldn't be Ted Kennedy's first adventure in trying to foist under- qualified candidates on the public. Some of us have not forgotten his vigorous and persistent attempts to have his father's crony, Francis X Morrissey appointed to the Supreme Court, despite the fact that Morrissey didn't even have a law degree from an accredited law school.

Posted by: bobbiewick | December 9, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Caroline is the elites' choice for Senate. I met her once and she is cold. She does not talk to the common people and her only qualification is her dad (whom I cherish).

If she is appointed, it will reek of the worst kind of aristocracy and celebrity politics. If Paterson appoints her, he will suffer in his own reelection bid, especially if a competent guy like Tom Suozzi runs in the Democratic primary.

Posted by: freedom41 | December 9, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

"Sweet Caroline...good times never seemed so good..."

Posted by: Bondosan | December 9, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

we had all been wondering how Rodham Clinton was going to pay off her campaign debt...

Posted by: angriestdogintheworld | December 9, 2008 4:21 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company