MalachiConstant
(368 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:28 PM
Original message |
| if lieberman takes rummy's job... |
|
what happens to lieberman's senate seat?
|
Taverner
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:30 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. I'm sure it would go to another Republican |
LaurenG
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 3. Good answer, lol I can't stand lieberman. nt |
NewJeffCT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:31 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. The Republican Governor of CT would appoint a Republican |
|
I just posted this elsewhere -
The Republican governor of CT would appoint a fellow Republican to the seat. While she is fairly moderate, she is still a Republican and a Republican appointee would have a leg up in the run for the empty seat in 2006, when Lieberman's term expires.
The top Republicans in CT Nancy Johnson, long-term congresswoman in a Dem district, conservative Rob Simmons, 3 term congressman in a Dem district, conservative Chris Shays, long-term congressman, moderate.
If Rell appointed any of those 3, the House seat would likely be a Democratic pickup. It might also get popular AG Blumenthal into the race for the Senate next year. He's like a small state version of Spitzer.
|
MalachiConstant
(368 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
the governor just get to appoint whoever they see fit to replace an "elected" official. that sounds... counterintuitive?
|
demigoddess
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 5. Hey, they (reps) want to go back to the old way of the governor appointing |
|
all the Senators instead of the citizens voting them into office. They don't think we are smart enough (and too dem) to vote for them directly. If they get enough votes they may actually repeal that amendment to the constitution.
|
MalachiConstant
(368 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
| 6. yeah, somebody should probably fix that. |
ISUGRADIA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
| 8. A correction: Governors never appointed all the US Senators |
|
it was a vote of the state legislature before 1913 and the constitutional amendment.
Still, a bad idea to revoke tat amendment and it's not going anywhere.
|
ISUGRADIA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 7. It's the US Constitution |
MalachiConstant
(368 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
| 9. i didn't realize it was stated there |
|
seems silly to me. maybe an amendment is in order.
|
ISUGRADIA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
| 12. No prob, states can get around this with special election provisions as |
|
Massachusetts has done. I think Oregon has the smae law as I cannot remember an appointed Senator after Packwood resigned, just a special election.
In states like these no appointed Senator serving until the next even year election as in New Jersey.
|
garybeck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 01:08 PM
Response to Original message |
| 10. EXACTLY. that is what's really going on here. |
mmonk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-09-05 01:51 PM
Response to Original message |
| 11. Will his seat be liberated, confiscated, or remain the same? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Mar 05th 2026, 12:13 PM
Response to Original message |