# I don't think that Caroline Kennedy is qualified for the NY Senate seat. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 16, 2008, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436 "2008-12-16T18:52:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/121 "2008-12-19T06:16:53Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > Really? What was Arnold’s “proven executive ability”? Reagan was president of the SAG. This means he was qualified to run California? How so? I think anybody familar with the SAG would tell you that it’s more difficult to manage than even the state of California. 😃 Or so I’ve read. Schwarzenegger had a long-standing record of financial success and accomplishment (real estate and bodybuilding primarily) long before he bacame an actor, and then was then became involved in the financial and promotional aspects of his films, serving as executive producer on, IIRC, at least a couple of his films. He had, as he has shown since becoming governor, become very knowledgeable in handling finances and negotiations and was a very effective people manager by the time he was elected governor. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > I didn’t vote for her, but I don’t think she got elected because her husband was president. You don’t? Are you kidding me? If her husband hadn’t been president no one would have ever heard of her. And what qualifications did she bring to the table apart from what she gained riding Bill’s coattails? And do you really think New Yorkers didn’t think that she brought with her some major political influence due to her husband’s status and connections? > [@Rubystreak](#): > > I do think it gave her great name recognition and a big war chest, but for some reason, New Yorkers actually like her. Well, those are a couple of major obstacles for most candidates, aren’t they? > [@Rubystreak](#): > > She You may not like her (I don’t), but she is a very capable, educated, experienced person. She seems to have that reputation, but frankly I’m a hell of a lot less impressed with her intelligence and capability since the primary election than I expected to be. She showed herself to be very incapable of thinking on her feet; adjusting her game plan; getting her message across believably and effectively; and in gaining a nomination that she had previously been a shoo-in to win. And of course this is not to mention the healthcare fiasco that she instituted and managed during her husband’s first term, nor the blatant dishonesty and outright lies with which she conducts campaigns and lives her daily life. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > Hmmm. Reagan sure used it as a stepping stone to higher office. I don’t believe that. He certainly didn’t do it solely and nakedly with the primary purpose of becoming president, and he wasn’t elected by the people of California with the expectation that he would bail as soon as a higher office or politically expedient cabinet post arose. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > Arnold can’t really go any higher because he’s not a native born citizen. To my chagrin, you are correct. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > Do you have any particular reason why you think that Hillary could only get elected in NY? I mean actual, concrete, factual evidence, not just your opinion? Nope. Like most of what I do around here, I was giving my opinion. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > I think New Yorkers might disagree with you about the quality of her representation. She has always been very popular and had [higher than average approval ratings.](http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300022) Well, perhaps this is one of the reasons they get called bozos. [/quote] Do you have any factual, concrete reason for alleging that she did not provide quality representation? [/quote] Yes, but you won’t like it. I read it on these boards during the Democratic primaries. I recall reading her meager record of accomplishment but don’t recall the specific thread. Sorry. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > Are you going to accuse other Cabinet appointees who are vacating Senate and Congressional seats of disloyalty for accepting Obama’s offered positions? Nope. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > I’m not sure why you think she’s being disloyal to NY by becoming Secretary of State. Because in my opinion the only reason she ran for office in New York was to gain an acceptable patina to run for president, and now that an opportunity has arisen to try to gain additional patina elsewhere, she off like a shot. She has no loyalty to New York and never has…in my opinion, that is. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > The majority of New Yorkers wanted her to be President of the United States, so I’m sure overall they’re pleased by her appointment. I would imagine you’re right. Seeing as how they elected her knowing she had no real interest in the job and was only using it (and them) as a stepping stone to higher office, it wouldn’t be surpising to see them root for her to be landing on a new stepping stone now. This is largely why some of us think they’re bozos. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > Doesn’t Clinton bashing ever get old for you guys? If they left the public eye, perhaps. Other than that, no. > [@Rubystreak](#): > > We are hijacking the hell out of this thread, I fully realize this, but I can’t let these statements go unchallenged, as they seem hypocritical to me. I am not a Hillary Clinton fan either. I have never once voted for her. However, as a New Yorker, I think your perceptions of her job in NY are not accurate. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/122 "2008-12-19T12:20:20Z")
OK, let’s try this. If Clinton bashing is OK, how about a lefty favorite instead? > [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > All three had records of accomplishment and proven executive ability all on their own. George W. Bush certainly had plenty of proven executive failure of his own before he became Governor of Texas. > [@](#): > > None were elected because their husband had been president and they figured she had big suck because of it; He sure had big suck because Daddy was Prez. In fact, he worked on the campaign. That was all his governmental experience prior, besides a failed Congressional run. > [@](#): > > none were elected because their electorate was willing to roll over and serve as nothing more than a stepping stone to higher office; Yes, those Texans sure are bozos. > [@](#): > > and none were elected by carpet-bagging themselves into the only state in the union in which they could have been elected more than dog catcher. Well, I’m not sure how deep the roots of the Bush family go in Texas, but Jeb Bush certainly hoodwinked those Floridians with his carpet bag, didn’t he? Caroline Kennedy has lived in NY far longer than Jeb lived in FLA before running for its highest office. > [@](#): > > The voters in New York elected her and they got the quality of representation and the loyalty that the rest of us knew they’d get all along. Thus they’re bozos. I think Texas and Florida speak for themselves as to what quality of representation they got, and their bozo-hood. My point being, you can single out Hillary Clinton for scorn, and heap it on Caroline Kennedy, but it’s sheer partisanship. The Republicans have their share of celebrity candidates, and candidates who go very far in American politics due to the “who’s your daddy?” factor. If you’re OK with Reagan and Arnold, and had no problem with W and Jeb, then I’d think you’d ease up on Hillary and Caroline. Though relinquishing Clinton-bashing and Kennedy-bashing as hobbies would leave great voids, I’m sure. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_Clock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Shot\_Clock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_Clock)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/123 "2008-12-19T12:34:55Z")
I don’t have a dog in the fight, but the fact that she’s one Kennedy who has (as far as I know) managed to avoid arrest, drug addiction, and/or messy public scandal says a lot about her. Or maybe it says a lot about the rest of the Kennedys. Or maybe it says a lot about me. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/124 "2008-12-19T12:44:21Z")
The amount of love for my mad limericking skillz is just underwhelming. Just thought I’d say. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/125 "2008-12-19T13:14:41Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Schwarzenegger had a long-standing record of financial success and accomplishment (real estate and bodybuilding primarily) long before he bacame an actor, and then was then became involved in the financial and promotional aspects of his films, serving as executive producer on, IIRC, at least a couple of his films. Also, I just have to say, if someone on the left used the above as justification for some actor becoming governor, I’m sure the scoffing would be deafening. He made a lot of money at bodybuilding and was the producer of some of his own films? That qualifies him, without any prior elected office, to be Governor of CA? Really? Then I feel safe saying that Hillary Clinton and Caroline Kennedy are both qualified to be Senators. You’ve set the baseline pretty low. > [@](#): > > He had, as he has shown since becoming governor, **become** very knowledgeable in handling finances and negotiations and was a very effective people manager by the time he was elected governor. Note the bolded word: become. Via on the job training. Also, [California’s state budget](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/19/state/n180206S27.DTL&hw=california+budget&sn=001&sc=1000) is considered to be [in crisis](http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=cf1818a81fefc0fa840f4dbec5a8d585&from=rss). I’m not saying that’s all Arnold’s fault, but you can’t point to CA right now and say, “Wow, he’s really a brilliant manager!” ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2008, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/126 "2008-12-19T14:09:34Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > If her husband hadn’t been president no one would have ever heard of her. She was starting to make a name for herself before they got married, so I doubt this. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 9:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/127 "2008-12-20T09:08:42Z")
> [@gravitycrash](#): > > I know that I can be politically naive but for some reason I like rich-connected people in office sometimes. They already have the power and can tell some of the wankers to fuck off. > > Much like Arnold in California. No less of an American patriot, Founding Father and all-around genius than Benjamin Franklin would quite agree. He felt that ideally, elected offices should be held by those who are well-enough off that they have no need for the money, fame, and power that can come with elected office. His thought was that they are far less susceptible to corruption that way, and hence, more effective and beneficial to their constituents. I tend to agree. Go Caroline. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436/128 "2008-12-20T14:58:56Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > I didn’t vote for her, but I don’t think she got elected because her husband was president. I do think it gave her great name recognition and a big war chest, but for some reason, New Yorkers actually like her. She was not simply a housewife before she became Senator. You may not like her (I don’t), but she is a very capable, educated, experienced person. Hillary’s election to the senate was based on two things: her last name and her promises to the upstate region. Seeing as how she’s done jack to attempt to help the upstate region, I think it’s safe to say that her election was a bust and that the people that voted her in were bozos. Of course, if the pubbies had run someone, anyone, decent against her this mess never would have happened. Sarah Palin had more name recognition in May than Rick Lazio did when running against Hillary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-think-that-caroline-kennedy-is-qualified-for-the-ny-senate-seat/477436.md?page=6)