And in any case there is no guarantee that he will take the seat – though any would-be challenger had better be hitting the street hard right now, for you know Dad’s machine will be there for Beau.
I agree with mswas on Paterson picking someone taking into consideration the ***New York ***political panorama and his own as well as the appointee’s place in their respective careers. To borrow a phrase from Blago, what would Paterson get from appointing Kennedy… her “appreciation”? I am in the camp that believes CK’s dropout was a move to avoid having to confront him with a situation in which he had to overtly reject her. The marquee names were Kennedy/Cuomo, yes, but ISTM Paterson was not eager to pick a “marquee name” in this filler post.
Oh, and:
[annoyed nitpick]
Everybody: The verb meaning to be defeated in an election and have to relinquish the seat is “lose”. “Loose” means that which is not tight.
[/annoyed nitpick]
Her dedication to that one issue is understandable, given that she only entered politics after her husband was murdered. I still don’t want people like her in power, but it’s obvious why she feels the way she does.
Yes, the guy controlling the process was doing his best to resist pressure from someone who wanted a favor from him. I’m not saying he did it wrong or picked the wrong person, but he looked bad and indecisive for most of it. Considering he’s also presiding over some impending and uncomfortable budget cuts and other issues, this is not likely to help him with the public.
Yeah, I don’t think he looked indecisive. I just don’t get where you see that. He said he wasn’t going to announce until after the inauguration and he didn’t. He wanted to make sure Hillary got confirmed. I see a guy who resolutely stuck to his guns despite pressure, not someone who was indecisive.
What does the timing have to do with it? The question was who he was going to choose for the job, and how it looked like Kennedy nearly pushed him into it.
I don’t see that Kennedy nearly pushed him into it. The timing has everything to do with it as indecision indicates that someone is going back and forth over a period of time. You’re basically saying that because he didn’t display his hand prematurely that he was indecisive. I don’t buy it at all. He showed that he’s good at what he does.
I read this interview. Wow. I gave up on all “conservatives” a long time ago, but this lady is smart. Just boom-boom-boom, brilliant answers down the line. And not “Machiavellian” horseshit, either. Real interest in policy. I don’t know if there is anyone in politics–or anyone, period–in my congressional district as intelligent about governance as she appears to be.
That’s not at all what I am saying. I’m saying he failed to demonstrate control of the process: he couldn’t get Kennedy’s people to shut up and couldn’t fight off the impression that he was being outmaneuvered. I hope he picked the right person and did it for his own reasons, but meanwhile, he appeared to be getting pushed around, and the end of the process was a mess, with his people and hers bickering in the press. It can’t be good for him at this time.