Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 19, 2014, 08:03:21 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Congressional Elections (Moderator: Joe Republic)
| | |-+  Control of the 110th Senate could be in Republican hands
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Author Topic: Control of the 110th Senate could be in Republican hands  (Read 5497 times)
bullmoose88
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14589


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2006, 09:09:36 pm »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Hah...not a bad plan.

Logged

A Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative NE Republican with some Left-Libertarian/3rd Way Leanings. Simply, a Rockefeller Republican.

According to one poster, I represent a...

Dying bread of Americans.
Saxwsylvania
Van Der Blub
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1543


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: December 14, 2006, 09:21:41 pm »
Ignore

How about George McGovern?
Logged

okstate
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 383


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: December 14, 2006, 11:04:38 pm »
Ignore

Chafee? That would be bizarre
Logged
Smash255
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14530


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: December 14, 2006, 11:20:47 pm »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Hah...not a bad plan.



As long as its after Jan 5yh, in which it would have no impact on Majority leader and Commiitieships thas not a bad idea.  Unfortunley the chances of Rounds appointing someone even remotley moderate is rather slim.

However, hope this discussion is all mute & Johnson makes a speedy & full recovery.
Logged

jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5916
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: December 14, 2006, 11:40:42 pm »
Ignore

If he were unable to serve as Senator, the new majority leader could actually be Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) instead of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV).  South Dakota Governor, Mike Rounds, a Republican, would likely appoint a Republican replacement for Johnson, thus bringing the Senate to a 50-50 tie and giving Vice President Dick Cheney the tie-breaker.
South Dakota law is rather odd.

First, it states that if there is a primary or general election within 6 months of a vacancy for a representative or senator, that the election be held concurrently with those elections.  If there is no near term regular election scheduled, then the special election is held with 80 to 90 days of the vacancy.

But then it later states that a election to fill a senate vacancy will be held at the next general election, and that no election be held to replace an appointed Senator whose term ends just after a general election.  So in the case of Johnson, there would be no election since his term ends in 2009.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 32482


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: December 14, 2006, 11:47:19 pm »
Ignore

If he were unable to serve as Senator, the new majority leader could actually be Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) instead of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV).  South Dakota Governor, Mike Rounds, a Republican, would likely appoint a Republican replacement for Johnson, thus bringing the Senate to a 50-50 tie and giving Vice President Dick Cheney the tie-breaker.
South Dakota law is rather odd.

First, it states that if there is a primary or general election within 6 months of a vacancy for a representative or senator, that the election be held concurrently with those elections.  If there is no near term regular election scheduled, then the special election is held with 80 to 90 days of the vacancy.

But then it later states that a election to fill a senate vacancy will be held at the next general election, and that no election be held to replace an appointed Senator whose term ends just after a general election.  So in the case of Johnson, there would be no election since his term ends in 2009.

Yeah, I'm not sure if anyone has figured out what would actually happen. In most states, the governor gets to appoint a replacement, and then since the next federal election is when the seat is up, anyways, there might not be a special election (at least Coleman didn't take office early).
Logged
jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5916
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: December 14, 2006, 11:50:01 pm »
Ignore

The people of South Dakota chose a Democrat at the last election and it would be subverting their will to replace a Democrat with a Republican.
The last time the people of South Dakota elected a senator, they chose a Republican over a 3-term Democrat incumbent who was at the time Senate minority leader.

Presumably, they chose Johnson as a person rather than as a Democrat.

Quote
The people of the United States voted in November to give the control of the United States Senate to the Democratic party, and their votes should be respected.
There are only 49 members of the US Senate that were elected as Democrats, 49 as Republicans.  In Connecticut, the voters rejected the candidate nominated by the Democrat party.  In Vermont, the Democrats did not even nominate a candidate (the Democrat candidate for Governor was defeated by 15 percent).
Logged
jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5916
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: December 14, 2006, 11:56:07 pm »
Ignore

How about George McGovern?
How about Larry Pressler?
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4426
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: December 15, 2006, 12:13:29 am »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Didn't Chafee say he was gonna switch parties?


Quote
The people of the United States voted in November to give the control of the United States Senate to the Democratic party, and their votes should be respected.
There are only 49 members of the US Senate that were elected as Democrats, 49 as Republicans.  In Connecticut, the voters rejected the candidate nominated by the Democrat party.  In Vermont, the Democrats did not even nominate a candidate (the Democrat candidate for Governor was defeated by 15 percent).

The people of Connecticut also rejected the nominee of the Republican Party.  Schlesinger wasn't even able to net more than 10% of the vote!  At least Lamont was within 10 points of Lieberman.  What CT voters DID choose to elect was a self-declared Independent Democrat so essentially they voted for another Democrat.  In Vermont the Democrats DID nominate a candidate and he won the general election, however he declined to accept their nomination.  So again, another Democrat is elected.  To even suggest that the people of CT and VT or the majority of the US didn't want the Democrats in control is absolutely ridiculous.

Furthermore, the Vermont Governors race has absolutely no relevance to the topic at hand whatever the result.  Its like mentioning the Freudenthal (D) landslide in the Wyoming Governor's race in the same sentence as Senator Thomas's (R) win there.  Totally irrelevant.
Logged

Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8893
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: December 15, 2006, 12:19:06 am »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Didn't Chafee say he was gonna switch parties?

It sounded like he might consider it in the future, but he hasn't jumped ship yet.  That's why he's a FF, and not the HP he would be if he gave in to the enemy.
Logged
Smash255
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14530


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: December 15, 2006, 12:59:51 am »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Didn't Chafee say he was gonna switch parties?

It sounded like he might consider it in the future, but he hasn't jumped ship yet.  That's why he's a FF, and not the HP he would be if he gave in to the enemy.

He would be a HP if he became a Democrat because extreme nutballs in your party drove him away??
Logged

Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15225
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P

View Profile
« Reply #36 on: December 15, 2006, 01:09:31 am »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Didn't Chafee say he was gonna switch parties?

It sounded like he might consider it in the future, but he hasn't jumped ship yet.  That's why he's a FF, and not the HP he would be if he gave in to the enemy.

For the record, I've never called the opposite party the enemy. Smiley

In addition, I don't see why someone would go from massive FF to massive HP just because their opinion of which party they fit in changed, when their actual views didn't change at all.

Chafee is a Republican out of some sense of duty and honor rather than because they are the party that actually fits him best ideologically. The same reason that Zell Miller is a Democrat; it's a family tradiition for both of them I'm sure, and a lot of people feel like it would dishonor their parents and ancestors to be in a different party than they were, I think.

So long as Johnson doesn't die, I highly doubt he'd resign, given the implications of the possibilty that would give the GOP the Senate. If he does pass on, Governor Rounds is certainly free to appoint a Republican and I won't begrudge him that if he does, but hopefully at the very least he'd appoint a caretaker who would refuse to run for the seat in 2008. In addition, I feel it would be fair to have even numbers of seats on all committees for both parties and a power-sharing agreement rather than a GOP majority (since the majority itself would only be dependent on the Vice President's tiebreaking vote to begin with, added into the factor that Democrats won 51 of the 100 seats).

I do agree that voters vote for the man just as much if not more than they do for the party in Congressional races, but thusly a very conservative Republican certainly shouldn't be nominated as they would be very unlike Johnson.

I think it's all moot anyway (moot, not mute....that's one of those pet peeves of mine). Johnson almost certainly will survive, but the main implication here is that he almost certainly will retire in 2008, thus giving the GOP a possibility of a pickup. Hopefully Herseth runs.
Logged
HardRCafé
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4402
Italy
View Profile
« Reply #37 on: December 15, 2006, 04:01:07 am »
Ignore

And Rounds better appoint Herseth to this seat if it becomes vacant...

Good news!  Your threat here convinced him.
Logged

Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14671
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: December 15, 2006, 09:18:14 am »
Ignore

sh**t,he is not even 60...

Anyway,as the article says,he could be removed only in the event he died...even if he had to spend a year in that hospital,he'd be a senator and democrats would have control of the senate.

Correct. Everyone seems to be overlooking this. Unless Johnson actually dies, the chances of a replacement being appointed to fill his seat are next to zero. The Senate throughout its history has often held seats for Senators who are forced away by illness for months, even years.

There may come a time when the senator feels that he can't continue his duties on health grounds and vacate his seat. Be that the eventual case, then he should request Governor Rounds appoint a Democrat to serve out his term. And if the Governor has any integrity, he'd do exactly that

Dave

I was sure you'd say this. Why should he? The people of South Dakota voted for Tim Johnson because he is Tim Johnson...I find it highly unlikely they voted for him because he was a democrat. In this case (unlike other states) Tim Johnson has a mandate, not the democratic party.

You know me fairly well then Smiley

Were Tim Johnson to resign on health grounds and request that Rounds appoint Stephanie Herseth to replace him, given the margin of her statewide re-election victory for the House seat, she is clearly popular with South Dakotans. Still, it's all hypothetical

Anyway, I most sincerely hope that it doesn't even come to this and the senator will make a speedy recovery and continue to represent South Dakota in the Senate

Dave
Logged

Moderate Liberal Populist Smiley [Personal 45%/Economic 42%] / Defense 'Hawk'

Registered in Georgia for Fantasy Politics
Sheriff Buford TX Justice
AndrewCT
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7245


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: December 15, 2006, 10:04:56 am »
Ignore

How about George McGovern?
How about Larry Pressler?

I never thought about that one. That would be an intersting one.
Logged

My parents are pretty good about smelling a rat. 
Let me put this as clear as I can (saying this to myself, as well, so I can see it): I WILL get a job with CADD and I WILL keep the job.
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8893
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: December 15, 2006, 11:04:08 am »
Ignore

He would be a HP if he became a Democrat because extreme nutballs in your party drove him away??


For the record, I've never called the opposite party the enemy. Smiley

In addition, I don't see why someone would go from massive FF to massive HP just because their opinion of which party they fit in changed, when their actual views didn't change at all.


When someone is fighting along side you in the trenches, he is an FF.  When he decides that he wants to go fight for the opposition and start hurling arrows back at you (as he would presumably be used by the Dems to defeat moderate Republicans), that would make him a huge HP.
Logged
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29022
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: December 15, 2006, 01:02:17 pm »
Ignore

I think that Rounds should do exactly what Roy Barnes did.  Appoint a very very moderate member of his own party.  Someone call the moving van to help Lincoln Chafee move to Sioux Falls Smiley

Hah...not a bad plan.



As long as its after Jan 5th, in which it would have no impact on Majority leader and Commiteeships that's not a bad idea.

Not quite.  Unlike the House, where the Speaker once elected stays the Speaker no matter what, the Senate leadership does change if the Majority Leader no longer commands a majority.  Surely June 6, 2001 is not so long ago that you've forgotten what happened when Jeffords crossed the aisle and Lott went from being Majority Leader to Minority Leader.  For the GOP to retake the Senate does not depend on when the Senate goes from 51-49 to 50-50, if such an event should happen during the 110th for any reason.
Logged

People find meaning and redemption in the most unusual human connections. — Khaled Hosseini
HardRCafé
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4402
Italy
View Profile
« Reply #42 on: December 15, 2006, 07:13:48 pm »
Ignore

When someone is fighting along side you in the trenches, he is an FF.  When he decides that he wants to go fight for the opposition and start hurling arrows back at you (as he would presumably be used by the Dems to defeat moderate Republicans), that would make him a huge HP.

Chafee is about the last Republican I would trust in a trench.

As soon as the morning light has broken
Then we attack
If nobody tries too hard to kill you
I got your back
Across the desert
Back to brave the burning sand
Back to question to every effort
Back to challenge your command
Logged

Harry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19214
United States


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: December 15, 2006, 09:09:45 pm »
Ignore

Could Johnson say something like "I resign, effective when Gov. Rounds appoints Stephanie Herseth to my seat?", thus gauranteeing a Dem seat?
Logged

It's always darkest before the dawn.
jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5916
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: December 15, 2006, 09:55:26 pm »
Ignore

How about George McGovern?
How about Larry Pressler?
I never thought about that one. That would be an intersting one.
Abourezk is still alive as well.
Logged
jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5916
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2006, 10:06:21 pm »
Ignore

There are only 49 members of the US Senate that were elected as Democrats, 49 as Republicans.  In Connecticut, the voters rejected the candidate nominated by the Democrat party.  In Vermont, the Democrats did not even nominate a candidate (the Democrat candidate for Governor was defeated by 15 percent).
The people of Connecticut also rejected the nominee of the Republican Party.  Schlesinger wasn't even able to net more than 10% of the vote!  At least Lamont was within 10 points of Lieberman.  What CT voters DID choose to elect was a self-declared Independent Democrat so essentially they voted for another Democrat.  In Vermont the Democrats DID nominate a candidate and he won the general election, however he declined to accept their nomination.  So again, another Democrat is elected.  To even suggest that the people of CT and VT or the majority of the US didn't want the Democrats in control is absolutely ridiculous.

Furthermore, the Vermont Governors race has absolutely no relevance to the topic at hand whatever the result.  Its like mentioning the Freudenthal (D) landslide in the Wyoming Governor's race in the same sentence as Senator Thomas's (R) win there.  Totally irrelevant.
Did the DSCC send any money to Lieberman?  Did any Democratic senators campaign for Lieberman during the general election?  Did Harry Reid do any joint campaign appearances?

Further, the people of Connecticut elected a Republican governor, knowing that she would appoint a Republican in case Lieberman was appointed Secretary or Defense. 

Similarly, the people of Vermont elected a Republican governor in case that something should happen to Sanders.  If they really wanted to ensure the Democrats held power nationally, they would have elected a Democrat governor.
Logged
Deano963
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1870


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2006, 10:13:58 pm »
Ignore

There are only 49 members of the US Senate that were elected as Democrats, 49 as Republicans.  In Connecticut, the voters rejected the candidate nominated by the Democrat party.  In Vermont, the Democrats did not even nominate a candidate (the Democrat candidate for Governor was defeated by 15 percent).
The people of Connecticut also rejected the nominee of the Republican Party.  Schlesinger wasn't even able to net more than 10% of the vote!  At least Lamont was within 10 points of Lieberman.  What CT voters DID choose to elect was a self-declared Independent Democrat so essentially they voted for another Democrat.  In Vermont the Democrats DID nominate a candidate and he won the general election, however he declined to accept their nomination.  So again, another Democrat is elected.  To even suggest that the people of CT and VT or the majority of the US didn't want the Democrats in control is absolutely ridiculous.

Furthermore, the Vermont Governors race has absolutely no relevance to the topic at hand whatever the result.  Its like mentioning the Freudenthal (D) landslide in the Wyoming Governor's race in the same sentence as Senator Thomas's (R) win there.  Totally irrelevant.


Further, the people of Connecticut elected a Republican governor, knowing that she would appoint a Republican in case Lieberman was appointed Secretary or Defense. 

Similarly, the people of Vermont elected a Republican governor in case that something should happen to Sanders.

Yeh......I'm sure that's exactly what the people of Connecticut and Vermont were thinking when they elected Rell and Douglas......

B/c people who knowingly vote for an avowed socialist like Sanders usually vote for a Republican Governor with the specific intent of having him name the socialists' replacement....

That was the dumbest argument ever.
Logged

I'm still going out on a limb here and predicting that Tom Vilsack will eventually become the Dem nominee. 

The others--Edwards, Hillary, and Obama, have peaked WAY too early

THE BUCKS ARE GOING TO THE FINAL FOUR!!!

zorkpolitics
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1047
United States


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: December 15, 2006, 10:24:46 pm »
Ignore

If needed,  maybe Rounds can appoint Zell Miller:  A Democrat who would vote to support the Republican as Majority Leader, a perfect compromise, better than Chafee!
Logged

"Scientists are treacherous allies on committees, for they are apt to change their minds in response to arguments" C.M. Bowra
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14671
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: December 15, 2006, 10:30:58 pm »
Ignore

Imagine I was a Democrtatic Senator from Georgia and I was asked by the President to, for example, accept a Cabinet nomination and Georgia had a Republican governor, then my accepting that nomination would be conditional on me privately recommending a fellow Georgia Democrat, for example, Rep. Jim Marshall, to be my replacement until such time as an election to fill the seat

It's either that or I'd be staying put in the Senate

For that matter, in the event, of severe incapacity forcing me to resign or in the event of my passing, the Governor would have a letter from me requesting he appoint a Democrat of my recommendation

I'd feel the same way were I Republican

Dave
Logged

Moderate Liberal Populist Smiley [Personal 45%/Economic 42%] / Defense 'Hawk'

Registered in Georgia for Fantasy Politics
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14671
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: December 15, 2006, 10:35:46 pm »
Ignore

In fact, I think there should be a law common to all states mandating the Governor to make an interim appointment from the party with which the previous incumbent was affiliated. That way the Senate does not change and the will of the electorate stands until such time as they elect a new senator

What can be any fairer than that, I ask?

Dave
Logged

Moderate Liberal Populist Smiley [Personal 45%/Economic 42%] / Defense 'Hawk'

Registered in Georgia for Fantasy Politics
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines