Our next senator

I would have Paterson impeached if he did that.

Or Paterson could name Bloomberg and end the latter's stranglehold on the mayor's office.

witch-king wrote: Or Paterson could name Bloomberg and end the latter's stranglehold on the mayor's office.

There is absolutely 100% NO FUCKING WAY that a New York Dem is going to appoint a Republican to the Senate. Even someone who's just barely a Republican like Bloomberg.

Idlewild wrote: I would still tap someone like Leticia James to be Senator.

Tish James time will come and I will happily vote for her.

I hope she sends that hack Ed Towns packing.

Dynasties run in this country. If you don't like it, go live in a proportionally representative democracy.

Subject: Mario

How about Mario Cuomo? He's 76, i think. Still working, writing books, and lecturing. I feel like he would command respect in the Senate "from day 1" and contribute to the dialogue about the enormous challenges that face our nation right now.

Maybe this has been mentioned here already--and if so, apologies for rehashing it--but there's been talk of two factors that might determine Caroline Kennedy's appointment as NY senator:

1) she is a politically convenient choice for Gov. Patterson, due to her strong political connections and fundraising abilities, which would benefit him when he has to run for his own job in 2 years;

2) The Democrats in the Senate will be losing three big names: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. I've heard a few pundits say that party leaders may not want them replaced with relative unknowns regardless of their experience. Kennedy brings her last name plus the aforementioned connections and ability to raise cash. It's no surprise Senate Majority leader Harry Reid--"We have a lot of stars from New York. Bobby Kennedy. Hillary Clinton. I think Caroline Kennedy would be perfect"--has been so outspoken in his support for her.

Subject: Re: Mario

sandcastler wrote: How about Mario Cuomo? He's 76, i think. Still working, writing books, and lecturing. I feel like he would command respect in the Senate "from day 1" and contribute to the dialogue about the enormous challenges that face our nation right now.

Hopefully Scalia or Thomas will die and Cuomo can take one of their spots on the Supreme Court.

Subject: Re: Mario

Carnivore wrote: [quote=sandcastler]How about Mario Cuomo? He's 76, i think. Still working, writing books, and lecturing. I feel like he would command respect in the Senate "from day 1" and contribute to the dialogue about the enormous challenges that face our nation right now.

Hopefully Scalia or Thomas will die and Cuomo can take one of their spots on the Supreme Court.

Aw, Carnivore...such a sweetie.

Give it to Charles Baron, he'll shake up the senate and they may finally do something

the economy has to be bad ,when Clinton who has collected over $540 million dollars for his foundation, has to still have his wife work.

Caroline Kennedy just withdrew herself from consideration for Senator, according to the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/nyregion/22caroline.html?_r=1&hp

so, any one have any guesses who it will be now that we know who it won't be?

Cuomo.

I think Cuomo is too downstate. ...and might be too old.

Andrew Cuomo, not Mario.

It is too bad the Democratic party hacks have driven Kennedy away.

Give me a break....what an arrogant little baby she is...

"You're not going to pick me!!!! Fine then I withdraw!!!"

Sounds like George Costanza...You can't fire me, I quit!

her stature was declining anyway.

One of my original posts explained that she didnt know much about the city as a whole.

That lack of knowledge was apparent by her unwillingness to answer certain questions pertaining to NYC, followed by her way of talking "umm...well, you know".

People started questioning her and thinking less of her.

WTF? Gillibrand?

Bad choice.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/22/kirsten-gillibrand-new-yo_n_160195.html

I agree, Carni. Let's hope she has some strong competition in a 2010 primary.

Gillibrand is an NRA-supported, gun loving, Blue Dog Democrat - an embarrassment to any real progressive, and another underachievement by our stand-up comic of a Governor.

The reality is that Gillibrand is a rock star upstate where she defeated a Republican that was starting to gain a lot of attention in DC. She's the Governor's way of placating all those disenfranchised upstaters who don't feel like they get paid any attention to and she's as democratic as many upstate D's who tend to be more centrist than far left. No one here knows her, but that is no different than any of the other upstate politicians.

(How many of you can name the Mayors of Albany, Syracuse, Buffallo, Rochester and Yonkers which are the next five largest cities in the state?)

Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan, but I understand the choice.

Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo, Rochester and Yonkers combined don't have even half as many people as Brooklyn alone. It's time we stopped pandering to the upstate vote. They're increasingly irrelevant.

They are irrelevant to NY'ers, not to politicians. Republicans have proven that even with the disproportionate amount of registered democrats in the state (I think its like 8:1), its possible to win by putting together a coalition of republicans, conservatives and centrist upstate democrats. You have to keep them in the fold if you hope to win the state, its as simple as that. And when you are in office, the upstate caucus is a necessity to get anything passed. Even though the Speaker and Assembly leader are both from downstate, without the votes of the members none of the Governor's bills get passed, period.

That makes them pretty relevant to the Governor.

homeowner wrote: They are irrelevant to NY'ers, not to politicians. Republicans have proven that even with the disproportionate amount of registered democrats in the state (I think its like 8:1), its possible to win by putting together a coalition of republicans, conservatives and centrist upstate democrats. You have to keep them in the fold if you hope to win the state, its as simple as that. And when you are in office, the upstate caucus is a necessity to get anything passed. Even though the Speaker and Assembly leader are both from downstate, without the votes of the members none of the Governor's bills get passed, period.

That makes them pretty relevant to the Governor.

I'm not sure that's true anymore with the recent shift in the State Senate. I guess time will tell, but upstate's population is shrinking every year. I think their power will diminish accordingly.

Senate is 34-28 downstate to upstate with majority of upstaters being republicans and downstaters as democrats. Assembly is 86-64 with again the majority being democrats. So as a democrat if you were to write off all of the upstater, you need all the downstate democrats and a few downstate republicans as insurance to get anything done. If the recent selection of the senate majority leader shows anything, its that its impossible to get all the dems to do anything, even whien its in the best interest of the party.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/24/nyregion/24record.html?ref=nyregion

Times has some selections from Gillibrands voting record.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/g000555/

Sorry, didn't see that there was more detailed info here.

I hope the liberals who trashed Kennedy are happy with the gun-nut Paterson just selected.