If You Fail to Plan, Then You Plan to Fail

[sheshe2]

Under current Massachusetts law, a special election to fill a vacant US House or Senate seat must be held at least 145 days (but not more than 160 days) after the seat becomes vacant. Between the time the vacancy commences and the day of the special election, the governor–in this case, Republican Charlie Baker–must appoint an interim US Senator.

In the two most recent Bay State US Senate vacancies (the passing of Ted Kennedy in 2009 and the resignation of John Kerry to become Secretary of State in 2013), the appointed interim Senators–former Democratic National Committee head Paul Kirk and prominent attorney Mo Cowan, respectively–agreed not to run for the office while serving as interim Senator. It is quite likely that Baker will also have his interim appointment agree not to run for the office–because Baker, highly popular in Massachusetts, will not be able to resist the urge to run for the seat himself.

snip//

Unless Democrats can find a strong candidate, Baker will likely win Warren’s vacated Senate seat–and it may not be as easy to dislodge him in 2018 (when he would have to run for a full six-year Senate term) as it was to dislodge Scott Brown (the Republican winner of the January 2010 special election to fill Kennedy’s seat) when he tried to run for a full term in 2012. Even if one accepts the premise that Baker isn’t a wingnut, he’s manifestly not a progressive either–and the thought of Baker spending several years occupying the same seat Kennedy and Warren used to deliver dignity to the disadvantaged should horrify those who admire both Democrats.

Republicans and conservatives gained power and privilege in part by thinking several years and several election cycles ahead. Are Democrats and progressives doing the same? At this point, there is scant evidence that Democrats and progressives in Massachusetts are taking seriously the prospect of Baker ultimately becoming the state’s next Senator, and thinking about the problems Baker could cause on Capitol Hill. Are they assuming that a Democrat will win a special Senate election? (Yeah, that worked out well in 2010). Or are they assuming that if he’s elected, a Senator Baker wouldn’t be that bad from a progressive standpoint? And if the answer to either question is yes, can we assume that they’re fooling themselves?

Read More: http://washingtonmonthly.com/2016/06/25/if-you-fail-to-plan-then-you-plan-to-fail/

Scares me, yet I fully believe Warren wants to be where she is.

[BlueMTexpat]

1. I believe that she wants to

stay there too ... and I believe that we need her there.

[sheshe2]

2. Trust me Mass Dems are in deep shit if she leaves. So will our Dem Senate.

As we agree on, she ain't going nowhere.

Thanks Blue, glad someone actually read this.

[oasis]

3. Gotta have that senate seat. No rolling the dice.

[sheshe2]

4. We do NOT want Charlie Baker.

Lol~ I was in a class for unemployment training/ benefits. They were trashing him for all the cuts in Mass and it is hurting us.

Senior Senator of Massachusetts. love ya!

[oasis]

5. (1)When is the Governor up for re-election? (2) How did he

get there in the first place?

[sheshe2]

10. We had Martha Coakly

She has never been a strong candidate. She lost to Scott Brown for Teddies seat as well.

Sorry.

That is why Warren must stay in her seat, well not the only reason she will kick every dayum GOP ass! She knows she can. I met her, it is where she wants to be.

[oasis]

14. When Rachel asked EW if was she would be ready to take over the

duties of Chief Executive, she answered "yes". I really believe Warren was a bit irritated about Ed Rendell's comments, so she reacted accordingly--as if to say--"in your face Ed Rendell".

I'm thinking she'd rather stay put in the senate where she can be of much more service to the Clinton Administration.

[sheshe2]

15. Oh I can see....

so she reacted accordingly--as if to say--"in your face Ed Rendell". Good for her!

Ya know. My sister and I talked about work. She is an ICU nurse about to retire, so are most of her coworkers. Then they have a few newbies. There is no one ready to fill their shoes. No one.

The point of this article we need to start thinking ahead. Mass needs to groom someone all the states do. Most importantly we must be readying our next Presidential candidate now. Today. We need a VP that could make a strong run in 8 years. Goddess forbid four if need be. We need some youth as well as our elders to lead us. We need to ready them now. It is one of the reasons I believe Castro would be a good choice for VP.

Tired, hope some of that made sense, oasis.

[oasis]

16. Makes sense to me. Thanks for the insightful OP and

Good night.

[sheshe2]

17. Night~

[Cha]

6. Thank you for this, she.. it certainly answers a lot of questions about

whether Elizabeth's Senate seat would be in trouble if she were to be the VP nom.

This should scare progressives in Massachusetts; as I have previously noted, the state Democratic Party seems uninterested in confronting Baker on the more offensive aspects of his record, presumably due to his tremendous popularity. It is difficult to imagine the state party suddenly moving from lethargic to lithe when it comes to making the case against a Senate candidate Baker–and it is also difficult to imagine the national Democratic Party and/or progressive Super PACs doing enough damage to Baker to substantially diminish his popularity going into a special election.

Many of us think it would be more beneficial if she were to stay in the Senate.

[sheshe2]

7. Yes, and thanks Cha.

People give us to much credit here. We elect far to many Repukes.

This!!!! Horrifies me.

Baker spending several years occupying the same seat Kennedy and Warren used to deliver dignity to the disadvantaged should horrify those who admire both Democrats.

I am sure in their meeting they talked a lot about the issues. Yet I don't really think they talked about her leaving her seat. Obama asked her to run for the Senate and ran she did. She is not stopping now.

[Cha]

8. This was a great find, she.. We need as many Dems in the Senate as possible..

We've seen how a majority of repubs have blocked the progress of a Democratic President.. and hurt our Country for 6 years now.. we do not need a repub taking over her seat!

[sheshe2]

12. Thanks Cha.

Agree.

Lol....my mandatory training for re employment class the other day. They trashed him for all the cutbacks.

We do not want Charlie in that seat.

[Cha]

13. Aha! Exactly.

[William769]

9. I believe she will stay right where she is at.

[sheshe2]

11. I do too William.

Hillary also knows how important the Senate is. She will not be picking a Senator for VP.

Ohhh Those 'womens....they did chat. I think they have some strategies in place, GOP won't know what hit them. Not being complacent here, yet I think this will be fun to watch.