I'm following up on this post from last week, on the Senate special election in Massachusetts.
In The Washington Post, E.J. Dionne, who I'm sure would rather be writing about a landslide victory for Democrat Martha Coakley, acknowledges that the polls, and other indicators, cast significant doubt on the outcome.
Nate Silver, on the 538 blog, is also a supporter of Democrats, but he is only cautiously optimistic about Coakley's ability to defeat her Republican opponent Scott Brown.
One reason that I'm skeptical about talk of a Republican upset, is that I remember the regular 1994 election for this Senate seat. Mitt Romney was making his first run for public office and, at some point during the fall campaign, I started to hear excited talk about how Romney was about to overtake his opponent, Ted Kennedy. As it turned out, Kennedy won by a 17-point margin.
The current conversation about Brown reminds me of that 1994 situation. But, of course, this is a different year, and these are different candidates. That doesn't prove anything.
Also, this is a special election being conducted separately from the usual November election day. Turnout will be very low. So it depends on who turns out and who doesn't. Tune in a week from tomorrow.
Showing posts with label Romney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Romney. Show all posts
Monday, January 11, 2010
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Ted Kennedy -- Senate Elections
A proposal to reinstate Massachusetts's prior system of filling U.S. Senate vacancies by gubernatorial appointment, pending a special election, seems to be back on the front burner.
If Massachusetts had not had such a procedure in 1960, the late Ted Kennedy might never have got his start in the U.S. Senate.
Massachusetts reelected John Kennedy to the Senate on November 4, 1958. He resigned from the Senate on December 22, 1960, after having been elected president.
The family seemed to view the Senate seat as their personal property, to be bequeathed to the next brother in line. But that brother, Robert, was instead appointed attorney general, under the more lax nepotism rules in place at that time.
The next brother, Ted, had a problem. He was only 28 years old, and therefore two years short of the constitutional minimum age for senators. John Kennedy arranged the appointment of a family friend to keep the seat available for Ted, in the special election that would be held in 1962.
The 1962 special election was a nepotism-fest. The president's brother faced off in the Democratic primary against Edward McCormack, nephew of Speaker John McCormack. Having cleared that hurdle, Kennedy's unsuccessful Republican opponent in the general election was George Cabot Lodge, son of Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., the incumbent whom John Kennedy had defeated to originally take the Senate seat in 1952.
Ted Kennedy successfully ran for a full term by proxy, in 1964, while recovering from a broken back.
After that, he continued to be reelected quite easily. His most difficult reelection contest came in 1994. A transplanted Mormon who had made millions in the investment world, and was a political neophyte, gave him a bit of, if you'll excuse the expression, a run for his money. That neophyte was Mitt Romney, later governor of Massachusetts, and a Republican presidential candidate. (Another nepotism case, Mitt is the son of former Michigan Governor George Romney.) Kennedy won with 58%.
Kennedy was lucky in the sense that 1994 was the only time he was up for reelection in a year with a general pro-Republican trend. He was able to sit out such strong Republican years as 1966 and 1980.
If Massachusetts had not had such a procedure in 1960, the late Ted Kennedy might never have got his start in the U.S. Senate.
Massachusetts reelected John Kennedy to the Senate on November 4, 1958. He resigned from the Senate on December 22, 1960, after having been elected president.
The family seemed to view the Senate seat as their personal property, to be bequeathed to the next brother in line. But that brother, Robert, was instead appointed attorney general, under the more lax nepotism rules in place at that time.
The next brother, Ted, had a problem. He was only 28 years old, and therefore two years short of the constitutional minimum age for senators. John Kennedy arranged the appointment of a family friend to keep the seat available for Ted, in the special election that would be held in 1962.
The 1962 special election was a nepotism-fest. The president's brother faced off in the Democratic primary against Edward McCormack, nephew of Speaker John McCormack. Having cleared that hurdle, Kennedy's unsuccessful Republican opponent in the general election was George Cabot Lodge, son of Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., the incumbent whom John Kennedy had defeated to originally take the Senate seat in 1952.
Ted Kennedy successfully ran for a full term by proxy, in 1964, while recovering from a broken back.
After that, he continued to be reelected quite easily. His most difficult reelection contest came in 1994. A transplanted Mormon who had made millions in the investment world, and was a political neophyte, gave him a bit of, if you'll excuse the expression, a run for his money. That neophyte was Mitt Romney, later governor of Massachusetts, and a Republican presidential candidate. (Another nepotism case, Mitt is the son of former Michigan Governor George Romney.) Kennedy won with 58%.
Kennedy was lucky in the sense that 1994 was the only time he was up for reelection in a year with a general pro-Republican trend. He was able to sit out such strong Republican years as 1966 and 1980.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Whither Barracuda?
Sarah Palin's explanation of her resignation as governor of Alaska seems to have been coyly crafted, so that it could be read in either of two very divergent ways.
Is she abandoning elective office entirely, or is she shedding the impediments that the gubernatorial office places in the way of her path toward seeking the 2012 Republican presidential nomination?
Two of her major potential opponents for that nomination, if they go ahead with their candidacies, would also be running as former governors. Mitt Romney has not held public office since he left the governorship of Massachusetts in 2007. And Tim Pawlenty will end his tenure as governor of Minnesota in 2011.
How is the blogosphere looking at this?
On the right, John Hinderaker, who is a strong Pawlenty supporter, seems to kinda-sorta lean toward the notion that she's not planning to run for president.
In the center, Andrew Sullivan also seems unsure. But his tentative conclusion appears to be that this is a move toward a presidential candidacy on Palin's part.
On the left, Daily Kos will never pass up a chance to go overboard in criticizing/ridiculing the governor. No sign there as to an opinion about her future intentions (assuming that they don't really expect her to pick lettuce in Yuma).
I've made no secret on this blog of my opposition to Palin, and my support of Pawlenty. Be that as it may, I suspect she is still planning to run for president. If she really were planning to withdraw completely from electoral politics, I would see no reason for her to be as coy as she was, in talking about it.
The type of vague language that she has used, is typical of potential candidates at this stage of the cycle. She would look too ambitious, if she announced a presidential candidacy 3 1/2 years in advance. Also, presidential hopefuls who have not fully declared their intentions, have a face-saving out if they later find it necessary to withdraw from the race.
Is she abandoning elective office entirely, or is she shedding the impediments that the gubernatorial office places in the way of her path toward seeking the 2012 Republican presidential nomination?
Two of her major potential opponents for that nomination, if they go ahead with their candidacies, would also be running as former governors. Mitt Romney has not held public office since he left the governorship of Massachusetts in 2007. And Tim Pawlenty will end his tenure as governor of Minnesota in 2011.
How is the blogosphere looking at this?
On the right, John Hinderaker, who is a strong Pawlenty supporter, seems to kinda-sorta lean toward the notion that she's not planning to run for president.
In the center, Andrew Sullivan also seems unsure. But his tentative conclusion appears to be that this is a move toward a presidential candidacy on Palin's part.
On the left, Daily Kos will never pass up a chance to go overboard in criticizing/ridiculing the governor. No sign there as to an opinion about her future intentions (assuming that they don't really expect her to pick lettuce in Yuma).
I've made no secret on this blog of my opposition to Palin, and my support of Pawlenty. Be that as it may, I suspect she is still planning to run for president. If she really were planning to withdraw completely from electoral politics, I would see no reason for her to be as coy as she was, in talking about it.
The type of vague language that she has used, is typical of potential candidates at this stage of the cycle. She would look too ambitious, if she announced a presidential candidacy 3 1/2 years in advance. Also, presidential hopefuls who have not fully declared their intentions, have a face-saving out if they later find it necessary to withdraw from the race.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
