Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not official, yet <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in the party? It will be interesting to see how things go here when she returns, defeated. Any of the patrons have experience with a governor returning to complete a term after losing a national election?
On Nov 4, 10:47 pm, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not official, yet > <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in the party? It will be > interesting to see how things go here when she returns, defeated. Any > of the patrons have experience with a governor returning to complete a > term after losing a national election?
Not one that was under corruption/ethics charges back at home. The day after the election, that may become her primary time consumer. Or it may not.
There was Mike Dukakis. A very decent man; he lost by being too noble to respond to negative campaigning. The very next morning, Wednesday, he was back in his office, doing the routine governor stuff he had done for years: making sure there was some money to do next year's highway litter cleanup, that sort of thing. And he never ran for anything ever again.
McCain's concession speech was gracious enough, in that he said enough good things about Gov. Palin that she might not be blamed for the loss.
On Nov 4, 7:47 pm, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not official, yet > <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in the party? It will be > interesting to see how things go here when she returns, defeated. Any > of the patrons have experience with a governor returning to complete a > term after losing a national election?
Harry Mary Andruschak wrote: > Erin wrote: > > Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not > > official, yet <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in > > the party? It will be interesting to see how things go here > > when she returns, defeated. Any of the patrons have experience > > with a governor returning to complete a term after losing a > > national election?
[Tom: Dukakis]
> I'll go you one better. Richard Nixon.
But he was governor of California *after* he lost the election to JFK. Right? What did he do before he was Eisenhower's Veep? I was young and living in Texas then. It's like a whole other country.
Still, I'd rather buy a used car from Palin than from Nixon. And at least for a while now, here in the UK, Palin will mean Michael Palin (of Monty Python fame) again.
> Harry Mary Andruschak wrote: > > Erin wrote: > > > Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not > > > official, yet <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in > > > the party? It will be interesting to see how things go here > > > when she returns, defeated. Any of the patrons have experience > > > with a governor returning to complete a term after losing a > > > national election?
> [Tom: Dukakis]
> > I'll go you one better. Richard Nixon.
> But he was governor of California *after* he lost the election > to JFK. Right? What did he do before he was Eisenhower's Veep? > I was young and living in Texas then. It's like a whole other > country.
Nixon's path, according to Wikipedia, was "Representative" then "Senator", then "Vice President". Then he lost the presidency.
Two years later, 1962, he lost the bid for Governor of California. Six years after that, he became president.
* * * * *
Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- vote.com, said at 4am:
In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will probably be expelled in January leading to an election, most likely between Begich and Sarah Palin. Given the heavy Republican dominance of Alaska, Palin would probably win that one. With four years in the Senate, she would make a much more plausible candidate in 2012. If, on the other hand, Begich wins, then Palin goes back to Alaska to shoot moose.
[Later this morning, Stevens was still leading by 3,353 votes.]
[On Nixon again, Wikipedia points out: "Nixon is the only person in American history to appear on the Republican Party's presidential ticket five times, to secure the Republican nomination for president three times, and to have been elected twice to both the vice presidency and the presidency."
[If Palin emulates him, she could be around a long time. It could be crucial, still, for Bristol to get married. Sigh.]
> On Nov 5, 5:50 am, Joyce of Pendle <pen...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > Harry Mary Andruschak wrote: > > > Erin wrote: > > > > Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not > > > > official, yet <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in > > > > the party? It will be interesting to see how things go here > > > > when she returns, defeated. Any of the patrons have experience > > > > with a governor returning to complete a term after losing a > > > > national election?
> > [Tom: Dukakis]
> > > I'll go you one better. Richard Nixon.
> > But he was governor of California *after* he lost the election > > to JFK. Right? What did he do before he was Eisenhower's Veep? > > I was young and living in Texas then. It's like a whole other > > country.
> Nixon's path, according to Wikipedia, was "Representative" then > "Senator", then "Vice President". Then he lost the presidency.
> Two years later, 1962, he lost the bid for Governor of California. > Six years after that, he became president.
> * * * * *
> Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- > vote.com, said at 4am:
> In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 > votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will > probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has been done in other states.
> [On Nixon again, Wikipedia points out: "Nixon is the only person in > American history to appear on the Republican Party's presidential > ticket five times, to secure the Republican nomination for president > three times, and to have been elected twice to both the vice > presidency and the presidency."
Tragic man. The most savvy foreign policy president we have ever had. Also probably the most intelligent prez of the 20th century. Too bad his devils spoke to him in the night. Of course, being hated by most media didn't help either.
Consensus at the time was that, if he had said: "Hell yes, I authorized the theft. But I didn't authorize the break-in and I fired their asses. Now, let's get on with the election", it would have blown over (except in the NY Times).
I, however, always thought it was as stupid as stealing the plans for the Edsel. The election was a slam-dunk.
On Nov 5, 4:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 9:35 am, Tom the Alien Cat <TomTheAlien...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> > Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- > > vote.com, said at 4am:
> > In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 > > votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will > > probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
> Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a > replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has > been done in other states.
No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
I gotta thank Erin, for a real interesting question, from an Alaskan.
And Major Oz...
On Nov 5, 8:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> oz, who respected Nixon for a number of reasons
I also have some appreciation for Nixon, for his intellect and his struggles to understand how things work.
And, even though he was never "a governor completing a term", I think he is the answer to Erin's question, as to where Palin could go from here.
Years back, I latched onto Nixon's book, "In The Wilderness" (an Old Testiment reference to the time the Jews had to exist in the desert, without a country). He writes of the times he was out of office, once because he was losing elections (another after he resigned in disgrace). I had been laid off from one job, and had not yet been hired for another -- it was a strong "Wilderness" time of my own.
Palin should read the book -- maybe she has. (One interviewer on MSNBC said he had asked her if she had studied any of the former Vice Presidents. She indicated 'yes' and gave a hint that she had been very interested in the ones that had gone on to be President later.)
"Nixon ``Lessons Learned'' for after Losing":
One would be 'never express your frustration with the media with the cameras running'. Nixon's line after losing the governor race ('You won't have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore!') took the better part of a decade to live down. ... I think Palin is already onto this one. The current stories about her tantrums and concern for her image are not reflected in her public statements.
Another rule, or strategy, is 'use this time to go around doing favors, which you can call in later'. Palin can keep herself busy with this alone. There are a lot of republicans that may want her to speak on their behalf. Nixon did do this a lot, 1963-1967, and it paid off in 1968.
And a third is to 'work on building up your image as a statesperson'. Nixon wrote books. Perhaps Palin can, too, perhaps a "Conscience of a Hockey Mom Conservative", to counter her image as a lightweight.
Come January, the Republicans won't have a sitting president, or speaker, and don't have a charismatic minority leader in either house (neither Mitch McConnell nor John Boehner). In this situation, McCain is the official head of the GOP...
. . . Only he probably has a "lame duck" sort of status -- he lost, and he probably won't run again. That very possibly leaves Sarah Palin as the actual GOP leader, for the near future, if she does the legwork.
* * * * *
> I, however, always thought it was as stupid as stealing the plans for > the Edsel. The election was a slam-dunk.
RN agreed with you -- when he found out about it, he said as much, and hurled an ashtray across the room.
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 00:57:24 -0800 (PST), Harry Mary Andruschak
<adoptsoldc...@aol.com> wrote: >On Nov 4, 7:47?pm, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote: >> Assuming that McCain/Palin lose this election (it's not official, yet >> <g>), I wonder how Palin's standing will be in the party? ?It will be >> interesting to see how things go here when she returns, defeated. ?Any >> of the patrons have experience with a governor returning to complete a >> term after losing a national election?
>I'll go you one better. Richard Nixon.
Who we were never going to have to kick around any more.
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
<Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote: >> [On Nixon again, Wikipedia points out: "Nixon is the only person in >> American history to appear on the Republican Party's presidential >> ticket five times, to secure the Republican nomination for president >> three times, and to have been elected twice to both the vice >> presidency and the presidency."
>Tragic man. The most savvy foreign policy president we have ever >had. Also probably the most intelligent prez of the 20th century. >Too bad his devils spoke to him in the night. Of course, being hated >by most media didn't help either.
>Consensus at the time was that, if he had said: "Hell yes, I >authorized the theft. But I didn't authorize the break-in and I fired >their asses. Now, let's get on with the election", it would have >blown over (except in the NY Times).
>I, however, always thought it was as stupid as stealing the plans for >the Edsel. The election was a slam-dunk.
>cheers
>oz, who respected Nixon for a number of reasons
I did as well--but I also despised his underhandedness. He was, as you say, the most savvy foreign policy president--he also was a damned good executive. As to his being hated by the media--I think he very much brought that on himself by hating them first.
Today's Republican party would consider Dick Nixon far too liberal for its taste. (they'd feel the same way about Eisenhower, of course)
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
> On Nov 5, 4:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> > On Nov 5, 9:35 am, Tom the Alien Cat <TomTheAlien...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- > > > vote.com, said at 4am:
> > > In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 > > > votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will > > > probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
> > Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a > > replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has > > been done in other states.
> No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment > pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in > 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor > and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
MajorOz wrote: > On Nov 6, 2:21 am, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 5, 4:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
>>> On Nov 5, 9:35 am, Tom the Alien Cat <TomTheAlien...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>>> Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- >>>> vote.com, said at 4am:
>>>> In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 >>>> votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will >>>> probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
>>> Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a >>> replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has >>> been done in other states.
>> No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment >> pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in >> 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor >> and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
> Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
> cheers
> oz
I believe this is complicated by the fact that the law on replacement of Senators differs in the various states as well.
>> No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment >> pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in >> 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor >> and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
>Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
WHAT??? Oz, you don't know the laws about such things for each state?? I'm disappointed. <g> and <wink>
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
> On Nov 6, 2:21 am, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 5, 4:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> > > On Nov 5, 9:35 am, Tom the Alien Cat <TomTheAlien...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > > Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- > > > > vote.com, said at 4am:
> > > > In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 > > > > votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will > > > > probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
> > > Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a > > > replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has > > > been done in other states.
> > No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment > > pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in > > 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor > > and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
> Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
> cheers
> oz
I realize my response may have come across as snotty and snarky. I assure you, I didn't intended it to be such.
I think that most other states DO provide for an appointment rather than a special election. There's a good chance that, if a special election were called, the governor could file a lawsuit against it as being unconstitutional. It hasn't been tested, yet.
> On Nov 9, 11:46 am, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> > On Nov 6, 2:21 am, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 5, 4:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> > > > On Nov 5, 9:35 am, Tom the Alien Cat <TomTheAlien...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- > > > > > vote.com, said at 4am:
> > > > > In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 > > > > > votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will > > > > > probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
> > > > Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a > > > > replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has > > > > been done in other states.
> > > No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment > > > pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in > > > 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor > > > and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
> > Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
> > cheers
> > oz
> I realize my response may have come across as snotty and snarky. I > assure you, I didn't intended it to be such.
No offense taken. I also sounded teddibly cool in reaction.
> On Nov 9, 7:11 pm, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 9, 11:46 am, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> > > On Nov 6, 2:21 am, Erin <karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Nov 5, 4:30 pm, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> wrote:
> > > > > On Nov 5, 9:35 am, Tom the Alien Cat <TomTheAlien...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > <snip>
> > > > > > Regarding Palin again, one of my favorite bloggers, electoral- > > > > > > vote.com, said at 4am:
> > > > > > In Alaska, Ted Stevens was miraculously leading Mark Begich by 4000 > > > > > > votes with 81% reporting. If Stevens is elected to the Senate, he will > > > > > > probably be expelled in January leading to an election,
> > > > > Actually, leading to Palin being called upon to appoint a > > > > > replacement. The smart move would be to appoint herself. which has > > > > > been done in other states.
> > > > No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment > > > > pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in > > > > 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor > > > > and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
> > > Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
> > > cheers
> > > oz
> > I realize my response may have come across as snotty and snarky. I > > assure you, I didn't intended it to be such.
> No offense taken. I also sounded teddibly cool in reaction.
<karenan...@hushmail.com> wrote: >> > No, not a permanent replacement. She'd make a *temporary* appointment >> > pending a special election (this was changed here in Alaska back in >> > 2004 when Frank Murkowski resigned his senate seat to run for governor >> > and appointed his own daughter to fill his seat).
>> Thank you; I did not (obviously) know that was the law.
>> cheers
>> oz
>I realize my response may have come across as snotty and snarky. I >assure you, I didn't intended it to be such.
I don't believe Oz took it as such--he was happy to have the information.
>I think that most other states DO provide for an appointment rather >than a special election. There's a good chance that, if a special >election were called, the governor could file a lawsuit against it as >being unconstitutional. It hasn't been tested, yet.
It is, as Margo said, a state-to-state thing.
-denny- -- "...our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'" - Carl Schurz, in 1899
|
