Blocking Booker - National Dems recruiting Patrick Kennedy?

[Keystone Phil]

http://www.politickernj.com/63287/dems-reaching-out-kennedy-senate-run

The former Rhode Island Congressman has been living in South Jersey for a year now (which is an eternity in Kennedy carpetbagging history). A meeting is scheduled in a few days.

[justfollowingtheelections]

I don't think he will run.  I saw him recently on tv talking about mental illness and it sounded like he wants to take the time to deal with his health problems.

[RogueBeaver]

No, just no.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

This is an awful idea. I say this as somebody with a lot of respect for Patrick Kennedy.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I don't think Kennedy could actually win a primary in New Jersey against someone who is actually from New Jersey. The Kennedy name just doesn't have any of the cache in New Jersey that it has in Massachusetts.

[seanNJ9]

no

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

why

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

This is stupid.

[Maxwell]

Oh man if they butcher this it is going to be hilarious. Like Corzine v. Franks, Kennedy would still win against a Republican, but still.

[Badger]

That's a misleading use of the word "national" in the title. The article simply says 'high-level' which could mean almosxt anything. Though what it almost surely does not mean is 'national' dems. Booker is clearly the national party's golden boy.

Even in terms of nj state dems, it's hard to imagine many with real clout pushing Kennedy over Booker, or Pallone, or Holt, etcm etc.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

That's a misleading use of the word "national" in the title. The article simply says 'high-level' which could mean almosxt anything. Though what it almost surely does not mean is 'national' dems. Booker is clearly the national party's golden boy.

Even in terms of nj state dems, it's hard to imagine many with real clout pushing Kennedy over Booker, or Pallone, or Holt, etcm etc.

Most primaries in New Jersey are decided by the machine anyway via favorable ballot treatment. And candidates don't win favorable ballot treatment by having a famous family name. They win favorable ballot treatment by bringing contract dollars.

Booker is one of the North Jersey Dem Organization's own. Essex will be turning out the vote for him like nothing you've ever seen. An outsider honestly just doesn't have a chance at a winnable race in New Jersey.

[Benj]

lol

[morgieb]

Why?

I could understand Pallone or Holt, or someone from South Jersey, but this seems weird.

[Keystone Phil]

That's a misleading use of the word "national" in the title. The article simply says 'high-level' which could mean almosxt anything. Though what it almost surely does not mean is 'national' dems. Booker is clearly the national party's golden boy.

Even in terms of nj state dems, it's hard to imagine many with real clout pushing Kennedy over Booker, or Pallone, or Holt, etcm etc.

The story was brought to my attention by someone else that has some involvement. He said "national." It wasn't meant to be misleading so chill.

And for someone that wants to call me out for speaking with such authority and being misleading, I think you probably should back off speaking in certain terms yourself ("What it almost surely does not mean...").

[Niemeyerite]

Seriously?

They must know something I don't, but I think this is a very stupid idea.

[minionofmidas]

This ain't blocking Booker. This is blocking Pallone by trying to split the vaguely racist vote.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

lol

^^^

The correct reaction.

[Badger]

That's a misleading use of the word "national" in the title. The article simply says 'high-level' which could mean almosxt anything. Though what it almost surely does not mean is 'national' dems. Booker is clearly the national party's golden boy.

Even in terms of nj state dems, it's hard to imagine many with real clout pushing Kennedy over Booker, or Pallone, or Holt, etcm etc.

The story was brought to my attention by someone else that has some involvement. He said "national." It wasn't meant to be misleading so chill.

And for someone that wants to call me out for speaking with such authority and being misleading, I think you probably should back off speaking in certain terms yourself ("What it almost surely does not mean...").

 The article doesn't say national. More to the point, the idea that the 'National Democrats' aren't behind Booker (even if it's questioable how overt their support will be, such as the DSCC formallly endorsing him or the like) seek misinformed. With all respect to your friend, the idea 'National Democrats' would seriously back Patrick Kennedy over Booker, or even over one of infinitely more viable S. Jersey challengers, is frankly ludicrous.

I would buyy whoever is floating this trial balloon is a dem outside Jersey, but this sounds more like a slow news day filler than actual non-negligible push from Washington Dems to recruit Kennedy to stop Booker.

EDIT: For that matter, where in the article does it claim that this is part of a 'stop Booker' movement? Yes, he's the presumed front-runner, but that's hardly conclusive of the reason Kennedy's being approached by---somebody.

So yes, a thread title indicating national Democrats are soliciting Pat Kennedy to run in a bid to undermine Booker, when the article claims nothing of the sorty-is indeed misleading.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

This makes no sense. It would be like saying "screw that awesome Lt. Gov we have here in Florida, lets run former NH Senator and failed Presidential candidate Bob Smith for Senate in 2018!"

[Keystone Phil]

That's a misleading use of the word "national" in the title. The article simply says 'high-level' which could mean almosxt anything. Though what it almost surely does not mean is 'national' dems. Booker is clearly the national party's golden boy.

Even in terms of nj state dems, it's hard to imagine many with real clout pushing Kennedy over Booker, or Pallone, or Holt, etcm etc.

The story was brought to my attention by someone else that has some involvement. He said "national." It wasn't meant to be misleading so chill.

And for someone that wants to call me out for speaking with such authority and being misleading, I think you probably should back off speaking in certain terms yourself ("What it almost surely does not mean...").

 The article doesn't say national. More to the point, the idea that the 'National Democrats' aren't behind Booker (even if it's questioable how overt their support will be, such as the DSCC formallly endorsing him or the like) seek misinformed. With all respect to your friend, the idea 'National Democrats' would seriously back Patrick Kennedy over Booker, or even over one of infinitely more viable S. Jersey challengers, is frankly ludicrous.

I would buyy whoever is floating this trial balloon is a dem outside Jersey, but this sounds more like a slow news day filler than actual non-negligible push from Washington Dems to recruit Kennedy to stop Booker.

EDIT: For that matter, where in the article does it claim that this is part of a 'stop Booker' movement? Yes, he's the presumed front-runner, but that's hardly conclusive of the reason Kennedy's being approached by---somebody.

So yes, a thread title indicating national Democrats are soliciting Pat Kennedy to run in a bid to undermine Booker, when the article claims nothing of the sorty-is indeed misleading.

You don't need to state for a second time that the article doesn't say "national" Dems. I've concerned that point.

As for "where does it say that this is a 'stop Booker' movement," it's called reading between the lines, Badger. With Booker all but crowned, it's not crazy to think that recruiting a Kennedy is meant to be a last ditch effort to block Booker. The point about splitting the vote with Pallone is a fair one but that's why someone would pursue someone a little less prominent than Patrick Kennedy.

And while you're dismissing my friend's analysis of this, I must point out that you are being my presumptuous yourself. Yes, the consensus among politicos is that Booker is beloved by the national party. He's their golden boy. That's nice and all but there are also people that aren't too pleased with him and might want to make things a little difficult. I'm not saying most national Dems dislike him but he's hit a few bumps in the road and Lautenberg's parting shots might have resonated with some people. Is it likely that any prominent national Dems would side with Kennedy or anyone else over Booker? No, I agree it is very unlikely but unless you're playing some insider Baseball, I wouldn't write it off as ludicrous.

You're making a bigger deal of this than it is. So again, I'll kindly ask that you chill, my friend.

[Badger]

OK, I'll bite: if you can share it without betraying confidence, what is your friend's analysis--our yours--of who (factions rather than actual names, of course) would be trying to recruit Kennedy and, more importantly, why? He carries (I guess) some of that "leader of tomorrow"/cult of personality vibe that Booker does, but I can't comprhend how Kennedy's base of support (such as it is) would necessarily ut into Booker's. Likewise, he may be from S. Jersey, but he's only lived there a year or so, and accordingly doesn't seem like he'd have any regional base to undermine a Holt and/or Pallone candidacy. And above all 'base of support', either way seems a highly relative term for a guy who, even with reasonable financial backing, probably wouldn't break double digits on primary day (and more likely mid-singles).

Even if there was a significant faction of national Democrats looking to stop Booker, how Patrick Kennedy hit even their top ten list of potential spoiler candidates is beyond me. So what gives?

[Keystone Phil]

I'm not saying it's a good idea; I'm just saying it isn't crazy that people that hate Booker (and believe me, there are some) are desperately searching for someone to stop him. Kennedy would bring money and a big (bigger than Booker's) name to the race even if the Kennedy dynasty isn't going to mean much to New Jerseyans. Desperate people do desperate things.

The corrupt machine Dems that Booker has battled obviously would love to stop him but remember Booker's Wall Street ties. Progressive leaders in DC could very well be the ones saying, "Not so fast" with this guy.

I'll state again that I'm not saying that this is a great idea or that it will even materialize. My point is that it isn't necessarily a crazy thought that some national players could be feeling him out. Maybe I shouldn't have just went with what my friend said about national Dems since the article doesn't explicitly say "national," I will stick with labeling this as an effort to block Booker. You don't try to get a prominent Kennedy in a U.S. Senate race just to split the vote.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

This makes no sense. It would be like saying "screw that awesome Lt. Gov we have here in Florida, lets run former NH Senator and failed Presidential candidate Bob Smith for Senate in 2018!"

He actually tried to run in Florida in 2004.

[Brittain33]

Kennedy would bring money and a big (bigger than Booker's) name to the race even if the Kennedy dynasty isn't going to mean much to New Jerseyans.

Patrick Kennedy isn't a generic Kennedy, though. He retired from Congress shortly after his father passed away and acknowledged mental health issues which led to substance abuse issues in his past. By all accounts he's not cut out for public office and is happier in the private sector. It's hard to conceive of him playing the same role that Caroline Kennedy played in early 2009 for anyone.