What would you rather be?

[Beet]

Which is it? And why?

[Speed of Sound]

Senator for 20. Good experience and cash to run for pres.

[WI_Dem]

I would actually rather be governor of Wisconsin for 8 year, but since that's not an option I will go with Senator for 20 years.

[patrick1]

Current job. 

Politics is a whorish profession.  SCJ would not be bad after the nomination process.

[Gabu]

Current job.  You wouldn't catch me dead in real-world politics.

[Everett]

Current job.  You wouldn't catch me dead in real-world politics.

^^^^^

[John Dibble]

Well, if I can be gauranteed the 20 years, senator - I wouldn't have to be a whore if I was given the gaurantee, and could work on principle.

[A18]

SCJ for 5 years. Unless you're saying I die after that.

[TomC]

I pick Rep for life, but much more for the rep than the life.

[Beet]

Well, if I can be gauranteed the 20 years, senator - I wouldn't have to be a whore if I was given the gaurantee, and could work on principle.

True but you wouldn't be able to get as much done.

[The Duke]

Senator, not the least because it would put a centrist Senator in place of one of our two current leftist radicals.

[muon2]

These are an interesting set of choices.

President for 6 months might not be that effective. Unless there is a new Congress willing to rapidly enact a mandate, the legislaive process tends to be too slow to get much done in 6 months. Adminsistartive policy also takes much more than 6 months to create effective long-term changes.

SCJ for five years could be interesting. I assume that the appointment is guaranteed since I am not a lawyer. However, I work a lot with the law and my ability to absorb details and nuances is good, so there would be some contribution I could make. OTOH, I don't start with a the wealth of knowledge of case law that a SCJ should have, so my learning curve would be slow at the outset.

Senator for 20 years would be attractive. It's a enough time to build the seniority needed to be a leader, and to use that leadership. For me it also would have me leave at a natural retirement age of 67. I'm in a big state and I would enjoy representing the diverse interests.

Representative for would for me match the Senator in many ways. I don't want to serve in office for ever, so I'd rather be done a a point that allows me to enjoy time after public office. Like the Senatorial post there should be plenty of time to provide leadership in selected areas to make a difference for the future.

My current jobs are both extremely rewarding. It would be a shame to abandon my teaching career for a full-time political one, but I could do it if the opportunity presents itself. In politics my natural inclination is to serve long enough to make a difference to for my constituents, but realize that others will eventually follow with a sense of service and new ideas for those same constituents.

[J. J.]

Appellate Courts are nice because you can listen to crafted arguments and you are not going to be pressured by interest groups.  That would be my choice.

[MODU]

I would stay as I am.  I'm not much for the public lime lite.

[Rin-chan]

I'd stay where I am cuz I hate confrontation... the other jobs would require such confrontation...

Rin-chan

[Tory]

Not having to face re-election, then 20 years in the Senate.

[Josh/Devilman88]

Senator for 20. Good experience and cash to run for pres.

[Sam Spade]

For the simple fact that my life would probably be long (25), I would say Rep for life because during those years, I could probably get up the ranks to be Majority/Minority Leader or Speaker of the House, both extremely powerful positions.

However, if this is one of those cruel choose Rep for life and you die at 29, I would obviously choose Senator for 20 years.

[Lincoln Republican]

Senator for 20 years.

I could work to enact legislation to cut out waste in government, and to redirect resources to help those who are most in need.   

[AkSaber]

If I were appointed, I'd like to the the President.