McCaskill Goes Into HRC Cabinet...

[BuckeyeNut]

Let's say McCaskill winds up somewhere in the Clinton cabinet, and as is likely, Kander wins the governor's race. Who does he appoint of fill the seat if Kander beats Blunt?

[windjammer]

Not going to happen,
Maybe Carnahan?

[BuckeyeNut]

You mean Koster, right? Anyway, maybe Kander (if Blunt wins) or Clint Zweifel. Whoever it is will likely end up being a sacrificial lamb, though.

Right, Koster.

Obviously, a major what if.

[Kingpoleon]

Russ or Robin Carnahan, Lewis E. Reed, and Clint Zweifel all seem like potential choices.

[henster]

If I were Kander I'd want the cabinet position instead of fighting it out in a midterm in a deep red state.

[heatcharger]

Koster should pull a Manchin and appoint some young Dem and then run two years later in attempt to salvage the seat.

[Heisenberg]

Koster should pull a Manchin and appoint some young Dem and then run two years later in attempt to salvage the seat.

IF he wanted to be a Senator more than Governor, he would have ran against Blunt.

[Kingpoleon]

Koster should pull a Manchin and appoint some young Dem and then run two years later in attempt to salvage the seat.

Jeff Harris, Nicole Gallaway, and Stephen Webber would all make sense. Joshua Peters would be perfect, except he's not 30 until August 2017.

If Koster wants someone with Missouri ties and major foreign policy experience, W. Stuart Symington, IV, would be a good choice. That's assuming he isn't Ambassador to the U. N., National Security Advisor, or Deputy Secretary of State.

[JMT]

I think Koster would likely appoint Kander if he comes up short but keeps the margin really close. He could argue that Missouri voters almost elected him anyways.

If Kander wins, I'm not really sure. Possibly a Carnahan

[Maxwell]

If Kander wins, then probably Robin Carnahan. If Kander loses, obviously Kander.

[DavidB.]

Greitens better win the governor's race: Hillary will think twice before appointing McCaskill.

[Sir Mohamed]

Nah, won’t happen, especially if Democrats win a narrow senate majority next week. In a state like MO, a special election with low turnout will likely be lost to the GOP. Strategically unwise. I also expect McCaskill to seek another term in 2018.

[Brittain33]

I disagree. This actually makes a whole lot of sense. Clinton and McCaskill get along, and unless she's gifted with an Akin again she is toast in 2018.

[syntaxerror]

What is the law on appointing replacements in MO? Will there be a special election or does the appointment see out the rest of the term until the seat is up in 2018?

[Blair]

Isn't she on the list for saying back in '08 that she didn't want Bill near her daughter

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Hillary won't appoint more than one Senator to the cabinet. The pros of having McCaskill as Secretary of Department of Whatever surely aren't worth the cons of losing her seat.

I can't see Hillary appointing a lot of incumbents to the cabinet. She's too smart to do that, and she has a massive network of qualified supporters and yes-men within the federal bureaucracy.

[KingSweden]

Hillary won't appoint more than one Senator to the cabinet. The pros of having McCaskill as Secretary of Department of Whatever surely aren't worth the cons of losing her seat.

I can't see Hillary appointing a lot of incumbents to the cabinet. She's too smart to do that, and she has a massive network of qualified supporters and yes-men within the federal bureaucracy.

I predict she appoints 0 Senators

[BuckeyeNut]

Hillary won't appoint more than one Senator to the cabinet. The pros of having McCaskill as Secretary of Department of Whatever surely aren't worth the cons of losing her seat.

I can't see Hillary appointing a lot of incumbents to the cabinet. She's too smart to do that, and she has a massive network of qualified supporters and yes-men within the federal bureaucracy.

I predict she appoints 0 Senators

This is getting pretty off-topic, but I'd could see Klobuchar getting appointed to something.

Again, this specific scenario wasn't meant to be taken too seriously.

[Brittain33]

Hillary won't appoint more than one Senator to the cabinet. The pros of having McCaskill as Secretary of Department of Whatever surely aren't worth the cons of losing her seat.

I can't see Hillary appointing a lot of incumbents to the cabinet. She's too smart to do that, and she has a massive network of qualified supporters and yes-men within the federal bureaucracy.

I'm going on the assumption a Dem governor appoints a Dem senator to serve until 2018 anyway, and McCaskill wants to get out of the Senate rather than risk a loss. In that scenario, no net loss in the Senate and Clinton gains a strong female cabinet secretary.

If Koster loses or Missouri senate vacancies don't work that way, forget it.

[Virginiá]

If Koster loses or Missouri senate vacancies don't work that way, forget it.

Governor appoints someone to serve the rest of the term.

If there is someone who has a better shot than McCaskill at winning in 2018 and Koster wins, I'd say there is a strong argument in her moving on up so the better candidate can weather that storm.

Regarding what Sanchez said, the point of avoiding incumbents is that you risk your majority for a position one easily could have filled with someone else. In this case, there is no risk if Koster wins. He appoints a (hopefully) stronger replacement who still has the benefits of incumbency 2 years later.

I wouldn't put it beyond Hillary. After all, she picked Kaine for no good reason and effectively put a Senate seat in play for the next 2 years, once during an off-year low turnout election and next in a midterm that was already looking ugly for her party.