Is Chris Dodd After Harry Reid's Job?

[tekisui]

Is there anything to the *rumors* that Chris Dodd is going after Harry Reid's position as Senate Majority Leader. Dodd has been calling out the Leadership for failing to produce on the will of the American People. Dodd is also threatening a filibuster for the new surveillance bill, because Reid won't recognize the hold. I think it's time we have change Leadership.

How does a change in Senate Majority Leader, within a Party, take place?

[brentspeak]

1. The only "rumors" I hear about it are the rumors you're creating here

[The Stranger]

5. That's good enough. We have to start somewhere.

[TornadoTN]

8. I'm all for it - so let the rumour mongering begin!

Dodd would make a good V.P. on a ticket or a Majority Leader if that's what he's after.

He's saying the right things at this time, lets hope he keeps it up.

[The Stranger]

11. I heard the same thing. It seems to be the rumour about town.

[King Coal]

34. I heard it from a friend who knows his sister's appliance repairman.

[Warpy]

2. We can sincerely hope so

It would be nice to have a majority leader instead of a wimp.

[Mass]

3. I have not heard the rumors, so I have no clue where they come from.

I do not think there is any chance to that. It would take a majority to change the leadership, and I do not hear the majority of the Democrats in the Senate protesting against Reid's leadership (or absence of ...). If anything, if others, (Boxer, Feingold, Kerry, ...) have tried to lead in the past, the rest of the Democratic caucus has spend more time criticizing them than standing with them.

What Dodd is after, I think, is either a VP place or a chance to be the surprise winner in Iowa.

[TornadoTN]

6. Bingo - but it's still a welcome voice

I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing him in charge of the Senate. At least he actually takes the role of being a Majority Leader somewhat seriously.

[NewJeffCT]

32. Dodd challenged Dachle several years back

and lost.

[Mojambo]

4. It is way past time for a change in leadership in both houses. n/t

[MADem]

7. That's not how you get that job. You get that job by networking with the people who VOTE for the

majority leader. And that ain't you, or me, unless one of us bears the honorific title SENATOR.

What putz is floating this absurd and plainly dumb rumor to you? Clearly, it's someone who doesn't know how the Hill works!!!

Go slap the shit out of that person who fed this to you, and call him or her a nitwit.

[tekisui]

16. I'll divulge. Ed Schultz is getting this rumor going.

I know he has a tendency to pump up his ego, rather than get things exactly right. That's why I floated it out here, to see if there was anything to it. I guess it's just ego pumping. He has a sound bite of Dodd criticizing our Leadership.

However, I think we DO need new leaders in the House and Senate, and I think Dodd would be an improvement.

If you'll excuse me I have to go find Ed and start slapping.


:spank:

[MADem]

25. Jesus, he knows better. That's just goofy talk, to get people riled and

angry. There's a fine line between energizing the base and shitting on our own.

Here's the thing. The Senate, as Ed and everyone knows, is the 'cooling saucer.' They don't go off half cocked, and thank God for that. Imagine what BushCo might have done with an EFFICIENT Senate.

Most of the members of the Democratic caucus REALLY, REALLY like Harry. He does a lot behind the scenes that people don't see, and he doesn't terribly WANT people to see. Keeping that asshole Lieberman in our caucus (we don't like him but we need him) has been an onerous, full time job and I do not envy him it. When he gets pissed, which isn't often, he can be a sonofabitch. In a good way, of course.

I like Harry, even though I will admit I am not normally enthralled with pro-life Mormons (to clarify, I'm not "bigoted" against the people, but the religion? I think it's stupid. I think it's tenets are a really bad fable, poorly written and plain goofy. I won't be mean to anyone who believes that crap, they have every right to believe it and enjoy it, but I think it's crap. I find the stories of most religions pretty idiotic, but I think they take the cake for way-out-there and off-the-page). Anyway, to get back on point, I think he's doing a damned good job with a razor thin sorta-majority (we know that Lieberman sits with us and votes with THEM, so it's really a tie, with us getting to set the calendar).

I know plenty of folks don't like Harry, but I'm not one of them. Neither are most of the Democratic caucus in the Senate. So Harry ain't going anywhere, unless Harry gets sick of the extra workload and wants to step down...

[mmonk]

9. President.

[movonne]

10. Well I would think that the DLC is not going to let that happen..they

have just who they want...

[OzarkDem]

15. DLC doesn't control the party

though they would like everyone to think so.

[movonne]

20. It sure seems like they are...they are the ones all over the media..

[OzarkDem]

12. Sounds good

Dodd does have the experience and he seems more willing to get things done.

[onenote]

13. Not. Going. To. Happen

Reid was chosen 10 months ago, unanimously. There is not a scintilla of a chance that he's going to be replaced. I'd be interested in seeing a link to these 'rumors'.

[The Stranger]

17. Don't. Be. So. Sure.

Harry Reid isn't getting the job done. He just let another Right Wing Extremist judge get through the Senate. Right. under. his. nose.

[Mass]

19. And I did not hear people IN THE SENATE protest against his lack of leadership.

People IN THE SENATE choose the majority leader, not you and me.

[The Stranger]

21. Oh yeah? Then who chooses the people IN THE SENATE?

[Mass]

22. Not before 2008, and you would need to replace more than a few for that...

With a conundrum: if we win seats, it will make Reid look good.

I have no issues with replacing Reid. I have been for it for more than 2 years now. But it is not going to happen anytime soon.

[MADem]

27. You don't understand the system, I don't think. Only a third of the Senate seats are up for grabs

in 2008. TWENTY TWO of the 33 are REPUBLICANS.

You aren't going to see a dramatic shift in the Democratic caucus as a result of the next election in terms of changing out incumbents. The same crowd, by and large, will sit in the Senate after the elections are done.

We'll also pick up some seats, hopefully a lot of them, but those freshman are going to sit down, shut up and listen to leadership.

Why? Because they will have been RECRUITED by leadership. Leadership will have helped them run their campaigns, helping them fundraise, finding them good advisors, leading them through the media and public appearance landmines.

You never bite the hand that feeds you.

The Senate is collegial by nature. It's why John and Theresa Kerry sent planeloads of aid to Trent Lott when his house blew over. And the DEMOCRATIC caucus is collegial in the extreme.

There will be no 'revolt.'

[The Stranger]

28. Actually, I wasn't being entirely serious. I thought the "Oh yeah?" would give it away.

[MADem]

29. Ah, pardon me then--I am sometimes 'sarcasm impaired!' nt

[OzarkDem]

24. You won't hear them

that's not the way members of the senate do things. That's not to say there isn't talk going on behind closed doors about the need to change leadership.

[high density]

23. We've only been putting up with him for 10 months now?

It feels much longer than that...

[MADem]

26. You. are. CORRECT!!

The Senate LIKES him. A LOT. There's no one else with the temperment to deal with asshole Lieberman, who needs his hand patted every other week and wants to be told he's a clever and special boy!

Look upthread, it's just off-the-cuff radio talk...signifies nothing.

[LSK]

14. Please?

[backscatter712]

18. You thought Reid was a wimp,

and certainly, when it comes to promoting progressive ideas and opposing the GOP, he is a wimp.

Try to take his crown, and watch the claws come out. Those claws he refuses to use on Republicans...

Who, me? Cynical?

[MiniMe]

30. He is after *'s job.

[lonestarnot]

31. Please let it be!

[MODemocrat]

33. That would certainly be a welcome change

We need someone who's not afraid of "offending" George W. Bush, and get this country rolling again.
:beer: