Looking to the future....near term and far term...
1. if the Obama-Biden ticket wins, when do they resign their Senate seats?
2. Is Jesse Jackson. Jr. the favorite in IL? What about Tammy Duckworth? Speaker of the House Michael Madigan?
3. What about Delaware? Beau Biden?
4. Do potential Obama voters see the huge crowds and think to themselves, nah, I don't need to vote because he's got it locked up.
5. Will Obama exceed 40% of the remaining undecideds?
6. Is Allen Buckley going to be the most important endorser in the universe after November 4? (Senate candidates need more than 50% to win; libertarian Buckley currently draws a couple of percentage points. A runoff election last took place in 1992.)
7. Who would appoint more Republicans to his cabinet, John McCain or Barack Obama?
8. Will Democrats take a prohibitive lead in early voting in Nevada?
9. Will Terry McAuliffe primary Brian Moran in Virginia?
« Obama's "Forward-Looking" Week | Main | The Transition: Podesta Nixes Speech Rumors » Burning Questions, 10/2727 Oct 2008 07:59 am Comments (36)
My big question: Does Pennsylvania move even an inch -- a single point -- in McCain's favor? (Speaking in polling averages, of course.) If so, maybe a glimmer of hope. If not, I'd be ready with Pepto Bismol on Nov. 4 instead of champagne. 
They'll definitely resign early so that their replacements can be sworn in before the large freshman class, giving their states just a little more seniority. Dunno about 2 and 3. I think people will vote to be a part of the historic election, same reason why there are such big crowds. Everyone wants to be a part of it. For 5, don't care. Just want him to exceed 270 electoral votes.
Beau Biden? No. John Carney has to be considered the most likely replacement for Joe Biden in the Senate. Maybe if Joe Biden were appointing his successor it'd be Beau, but he isn't -- Ruth Ann Minner is, and she'll pick Carney (she's still very bitter about the fact that he lost the governor's primary to Jack Markell, and that Markell did it by campaigning against Minner).
#4 I can only speak to personal feelings, but as an Obama supporter the crowds feel more like "us" not "them." As in "look what we can accomplish, we can do this" not "they seem so energized, they've got this in the bag." I live in Illinois and I've talked to a lot of people here who've waited in lines to early vote and I've answered people's questions about voting hours and locations on Nov 4th, so I would say that people are going to get to the polls. I'd like to think we all remember 2000 and know not to take anything for granted. Plus it's kinda human nature to want to be on the winning side of history. If you're a passive supporter or persuadable I'd think part of the reason to vote would be to be a part of that movement. But I guess we'll see Nov 4th.
I think we Democrats are immune to over-confidence given our party's penchant for losing. I also think people want to be part of this. I live in one of the bluest parts of New York State. My vote will make no difference because Dems will win up and down the ticket. But I still CAN'T WAIT to go cast my vote for Barack Obama. I've never felt like this before.
4. Some probably do but this is just one effect of huge crowds. It makes voting for Obama seem at the margin more exciting, it causes a positive bandwagon effect, it is also likely disheartening to some McCain voters and makes voting for McCain seem pointless. All of these effects are probably small. I see no reason to assume that they would together constitute a net negative for Obama. 5. Probably, but I think that many undecideds will just not vote for anyone. People aren't undecided because they really love both candidates people are undecided because they are trying to decide which candidate is less bad. If Obama leads McCain 50-42 with 8% undecided that means that he leads McCain 54.3-45.7 among decided voters. Undecided voters might be more conservative than the median decided voter but they would have to deviate 4.3 points from the median decided voter in order for McCain to break even adding the additional 10 points needed to drive McCain to 60 seems pretty unlikely. I think McCain will take undecided voters by a fairly slim margin. 7. Obama, this is one of the easiest questions ever. Even if you pretend that Lieberman as a democrat it would still be Obama easily. I think this question borders on absurd.
re: #9 I believe that you are missing the fact that Creigh Deeds ran a very close race for Atty Genl here and is a real contender for Gov and will easily beat McAuliffe and I would not just assume that Moran is way ahead with democrats.
#2 - Gov. Blago gets to decide so Lisa Madigan (state's attorney) has to be the favorite. She is thinking about running for governor so he will send her to Washington to get her out of the way. Jesse Jackson Jr. will not play well downstate and Blago is always very careful to make those voters happy. Tammy Duckworth has never been elected to office--doubt she will catapult directly to the Senate. #4 - Early voting in Chicago has been brisk. No really long lines but the polling places are definitely busy. We have nothing else to vote for this election but Obama. We aren't staying home.
IMHO: 2) Jackson Jr. is probably the odds-on favorite. I doubt E Rohm will put his hat on the race; he's probably looking to succeed Nancy sometimes in the future 3)As qualified as Beau Biden may be for the job, it will smell too dynastic or too much of nepotism. 4) Not the democrats; independents may (either by huge crowds now or long lines on E-day) 5)yes 6)No - Martin wins outright. (look for surprise GA visit by Obama/Clinton this week) 7)is it a trick question? 8) yes (DEM already leads the REP by 55%-28% in Clark county and 52%-32% in washoe county) 9) who cares? 7)
Re Question 7. It should have been McCain I doubt Obama will have more than a couple cabinet positions in republican hands. McCain would of course have virtually all in republican hands maybe one token dem and Lieberman.
#3 - I'm from Delaware, currently live in Philly. It can't be Beau because he's out of the country for a little while. People have talked about the possibility of someone filling a placeholder role until a special election could be held in 2010, which is when Beau will be back. People like Beau and it would be acceptable in Delaware to engineer such a dynastic move. It's certainly possible that Minner would appoint Carney, as jbryan suggests, but what's the justification for selecting someone who just got rejected so overwhelmingly by the Democratic party? Joe doesn't have to quit until Inauguration Day, so he can negotiate for what he wants. #4 - Obama is trying to become the first black President; no one is going to get complacent. Also, the news makes clear that the Republicans are trying to steal the election. Everyone at those rallies wants to prevent that. Lastly, people may not be able to grasp how extensive the volunteer-run Obama ground game is. If you're in our GOTV universe, we will find you.
Burning question number one is not a burning question at all--when did Kennedy and Johnson, who were both Senators, resign their seats? It'll be before January 6, when the new Congress is sworn in, so the governors of Delaware and Illinois can appoint interim replacements (most likely in the latter half of December)--and McCain is ALSO a Senator; is your neglect to ask when he'll resign his seat should he win an oversight on your part?
I don't see Obama appointing more than one Rkepublican to his cabinet. He needs Dick Lugar to stay in the senate, where he'll provide a friendly Republican shoulder to lean on for close votes. Hagel, maybe, but I really don't see a specific job for him either. Perhaps there's a lower ranking R he'll find for one of the less important positions, like transportation or agriculture. There are more than enough Dems with resumes growing moldy who will fill the vacant positions, and to go over them to reach across the aisle won't be much of a temptation.
Marc-- There are two gubernatorial candidates for 2009 here in Virginia, Brian Moran and Creigh Deeds. T-Mac would make it a three man race.
4 is a concern but more for first time and swing voters--as Snarky points out, Dems have learnt to be paranoid. The rest I don't much care.
Re: #2. Michael Madigan? Are you nuts? Maybe Lisa Madigan, his daughter and the attorney general. But the speaker is never leaving Illinois, nor would Blagojevich ever name his nemesis for a promotion. Especially when it doesn't do him a lick of good eliminating potential rivals for the 2010 gubernatorial race.
Michael Madigan is not even in the picture for Obama's Senate seat. Like Dan, I assume you meant, perhaps, Lisa Madigan, who is well-liked and authoritative (and as Klem said, would like to be governor, so if Blago can get her out of the way so much the better). Jesse, Jr., is a putz, but he has some pull where it counts -- Chicago. Tammy Duckworth is a joke -- she not only got trounced in her one bid for the House (running for Henry Hyde's old seat, in a district she didn't live in, eliminating a far more qualified Democrat, Cegelis, in the primary(thanks, Rahm!)) -- but her only political qualifications are that she lost both legs in Iraq. She is the poster-child for Democrats' failed 2004 "strategy" of running disabled vets to capture some Republican votes and make themselves feel better about national security issues. Again, Duckworth is an absolute joke. I don't know where you got that idea that she could be a Senator.
Another question, has the B-hoax hurt Obama this weekend? Both Research 2000 and Rasmussen picked up a day by day meltdown in Obama's numbers over the weekend; with an awful day for Obama yesterday. The fact is a lot of the media has done a very poor job of portraying just what a blatant lie this was on the part of the McCain campaign, filing a false police report, drawing a B backwards using makeup, and then calling the media before the police had even investigated to make scurrilous allegations against the Obama campaign. On the Illinois Senate race, my money's on Duckworth. Our governor is nuts, and so you have to penetrate the tortured psyche of his mind and figure out who he'll find it the easiest to appoint. Bottom line, she has a compelling story, she fits the governor's fondness for single-issue-interest politics, she's ethnic minority, and she hasn't crossed him. There's not another Democrat in the state who presses all the buttons.
The only thing I'm worried abt is (4). However, I just don't see it happening - Democrats and Independents and some Republicans are hungry for change and a new direction for America. Let's also not minimize the effect this historic election is going to have on alot of people. I think young voters, hispanics and of course, african americans are going to vote in record nos this week and on Nov 4th and put Barack over the top. I think McCain should be more worried that Republicans will stay home after looking at the poll nos.
It's certainly possible that Minner would appoint Carney, as jbryan suggests, but what's the justification for selecting someone who just got rejected so overwhelmingly by the Democratic party? Joe doesn't have to quit until Inauguration Day, so he can negotiate for what he wants. First: Minner doesn't need a justification. She's the governor, and it's her choice. She's retiring from politics this year and she's made it pretty clear over the course of this campaign that she doesn't really care anymore -- she's going to do what she wants.
I can see Gov. Blagojevich putting in Tammy Duckworth or Lisa Madigan. Given his longstanding feud with the Madigans, he would be wise to ship Lisa off to Washington to fend of a challenge for governor. Can't see Jesse Jackson Jr.; no real political upside for Blago. Of course, given how crazy he is, Blago might appoint himself to the Senate.
I don’t know jack about Chicago politics, but I have to think some people regard Obama’s as the black seat. So Jesse, Jr. seems plausible, and it might be seen by some as a way of honoring the old civil rights guard, whose time will be regarded as largely passed with the election of Obama. (Even though Jesse, Jr. has shown that he’s not the old man’s proxy – remember his reaction to “Cut his nuts off-gate”). It goes without saying that it will go to someone from Chicago since Durbin is a downstater. What’s with the Tammy Duckworth obsession – she couldn’t even win a House seat in a Democratic wave year? (Though I’d disagree with the commenter who commented on the DCCC Iraq vets strategy – pretty sure that was ’06 not ’04, and weren’t there a few wins like Patrick Murphy?) I agree with a previous commenter on M. Madigan. Local pol powerbrokers rarely covet Washington sinecures. Can you imagine Willie Brown or Sheldon Silver in the U.S. Senate? Or, for the parochial east coasters among you…George Norcross or Vince Fumo? A. Madigan OTOH makes sense. What about Bill Daley? #6 is interesting. I remember the Fowler-Coverdell runoff quite well. That loss sort of laid the predicate for a whole slew of downballot special election Democratic losses in ’93 (K.B. Hutchison over Bob Krueger by 60 points or something for Bentsen’s seat; Bill Natcher’s House seat in KY) that led up to the ’94 debacle. The runoff rule is silly, and of course a Jim Crow remnant. Fowler got something like 49.5% in a high-turnout general election, but somehow the seat goes to a guy who gets 51% in a low-turnout runoff. And if Fowler wins, maybe he doesn’t die in office (as Coverdell did) and we are spared the terrifying spectacle that was Sen. Zell Miller. #7 is a silly question, Marc. How long is Beau Biden in Iraq? That would seem to take him out of the running. (To borrow a hilarious Jon Stewart riff…if not Beau Biden, what about his brother Banana Fana Fo Fiden)? I think the Macker in VA is a foregone conclusion…alas. Great party cheerleader (and, of course, fundraiser) but he does not have the substance/policy chops to be Governor of an important state. He makes Sarah Palin look like a Brookings fellow.
2) While Jackson is definitely in the running for the Senate seat, there are a few other favorites as well. While his ties to Obama and the fact that he's African-American would help him out (since Obama is the only African-American in the Senate), it's not clear that he could win reelection in 2010. He's seen very much as a Chicago pol, and while Chicago pols can win statewide (see, e.g., Obama), I'm not sure he's built up the statewide support needed. Of course, he would be running as an incumbent in 2010, but it would also be a midterm election when voters would be tempted to punish the Dems. In that respect, Lisa Madigan is probably the safest bet for the seat, since she's already run and won statewide office.
4) Huge crowds: I know the Obama campaign is exhorting rally goers to GOTV. If the campaign thought this might be some kind of karmic pablum that didn't roust the peeps to the polls, do you think the campaign would continually drum up these crowds? If anything, I think these crowds serve to remind the world what a HUGE moment this is. This isn't like not bothering to vote for Kerry or Gore in a Blue or Red State or something; this is the chance to cast your ballot in a historic election, in any possible sense. How could any self-respecting voter not want to cast their ballot on Nov. 4th? Especially dems? No, I think we will see historic voter turn outs, and any that don't show up because of ennui or apathy will be countered by the thousands of new voters eager to be part of this moment.
Re #4: As an Obama voter, I can say that huge poll leads and event attendance make me more likely to go vote. Issues aside (and I disagree with BHO and his party on a number of things), I feel connected to this candidate in a way that I never have with any other, and the level of community participation in the campaign has a lot to do with that.
#1. Not a big problem since both Illinois and Delaware will still have Democratic governors after the election. Here are some recent precedents: Quayle. Resigned on January 3, 1989. Kennedy. Resigned on December 22, 1960. Johnson. Resigned January 3, 1961. Nixon. Resigned on January 1, 1953. Harding. Resigned March 4, 1921 (which was then inauguration day.)
Ditto the cynic and the Duke. Creigh Deeds wants Kaine's seat. And my money says he'd do better against McDonnell (who is definitely the overall favorite) than would Moran. A McAuliffe run would be a disaster for the Virginia Democrats.
As someone with a pretty close ear to the inside of Illinois' power structure - I can tell you that while Jesse Jr. seems like the outsider's obvious choice, it isn't a done deal by any means. Just an FYI - There are several high-level African Americans in Illinois not named Jesse Jackson. Some have already said No (Secretary of State Jesse White), and others may see it as a demotion (Emil Jones). But what about the African American women? Cheryle Jackson, president of the Chicago Urban League, was mentioned. Don't know how likely that is, though. Probably the most powerful African American woman in Illinois Government is the State's Deputy Governor Louanner Peters. With a long track record on key progressive issues, she may be the dark horse. Plus, she is close as close can be with the Governor, obviously. Some have also mentioned State Senator Kwame Rauol. He may be too new, though. I think the outsiders like to point to Jesse Jr. because that is the only person they know or recognize. But there are several other African American politicos in Illinois Dem Party bench. Take a closer look.
Does Lieberman get an appointment? Just as a way to get him out of the Senate and then we can fire him in six months?
2. Is Jesse Jackson. Jr. the favorite in IL? What about Tammy Duckworth? Speaker of the House Michael Madigan?
2. I'll second Lisa Madigan. (Louanner Peters and Tammy Duckworth just don't have a record of political substance. They would be vulnerable and leave people crying foul at having a joke pulled on them.) 3. Carney.
Most interesting insight from Martin's link above is IMO not Duckworth but Schakowsky's possibility: One person who I long dismissed simply because I didn’t see the upside to Blagojevich is Jan Schakowsky. However, she has been fundraising for him and represents a liberal base in the primary that Blagojevich would covet. The liberal base tends to distrust machine politicians and so such group of progressives would be a natural alliance against LMadigan and Hynes. She’d be insane to endorse him, but if you can’t take his appointment and screw him, you aren’t fit to be a US Senator.
Rahm threw millions into the Duckworth race in the late stages, and when you think of the ultra-close races in 2006 (Kissell-Hayes, Jennings-Buchanan), it comes across as a something of a vanity project. Blago might pick her, but that frankly makes the seat vulnerable.
What's the modern-era record for appointed members of the Senate? [Looks like 10 were appointed in 1953-54.] Plausibly vacated seats include Obama, Biden, Stevens, Kennedy. Add an Obama cabinet appointment or two, and a couple more for health reasons, it's still a stretch.
I expect Duckworth and Chambliss in the Senate next year. Illinois and Georgia do not look to one another for validation.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
The only thing that is a genuine concern for Obama is (4).
I think, however, the shock of 2004 where so many people talked themselves into assuming Kerry would win might negate that somewhat.
You should have had an equivalent for McCain - how many (R) votes will simply stay home?
Posted by James | October 27, 2008 8:26 AM