Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Missing Candidates: I Blame Harry Reid

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Wayward Episcopalian Donating Member (133 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:22 PM
Original message
The Missing Candidates: I Blame Harry Reid
Edited on Fri Nov-09-07 04:00 PM by Wayward Episcopalian

Bill Richardson is having a field day blasting the four Senate candidates for President for missing the floor vote on Michael Mukasey. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth, for several reasons. One is that it takes 51 votes to confirm a nominee, and Mukasey had 53 - four more "no" votes wouldn't have made a difference. Two, there were 41 no votes, so four more wouldn't have made a difference in preventing cloture, and besides, not even Russ Feingold called for a filibuster. Three, this is the independent-minded Senate, not the pack-mentality House. "Leadership" rarely changes votes, Biden's outstanding efforts on the 1988 Bork hearings being the rare exception. Which individuals do you think would have flip-flopped to parrot Clinton or Obama? Do you really think Schumer or Nelson are that fickle? And if so, why wasn't Richardson on the Hill lobbying harder than ever to show such leadership? Four, I very much doubt that if Richardson were a Senator, he would have made the vote. Dole missed major votes, Kerry missed major votes, Edwards missed major votes, and so on. Richardson would not escape the same trap that all other Senators fall into, and it's quite arrogant for him to suggest otherwise.


But above all, it's not really the four Senators' fault that they missed the vote. It's Harry Reid's fault for scheduling a last-minute vote with no regard whatsoever for his party's future leader and nominee (whoever that might be). I'm currently in New Hampshire, and it would be near impossible for me to get to the Capitol Building in DC within the next five hours, even if I had $70 million and my own private jet. Greg Sargent at TPM writes,

According to Senate sources, as the Dem Senate leadership remained in closed-door negotiations with their GOP counterparts over whether to hold the vote, Senators were getting mixed signals throughout the day as to whether the vote would happen by the end of yesterday. The actual notification that there would be a vote didn't come from leadership until at least 6:30 or 7 PM last night -- catching aides on the staffs of the presidential campaigns and on the staffs of other senators off guard.


"I had my coat on and was walking out the door when I first heard about the vote," one staffer said.


The senators were notified that there would be five hours of debate, and that a vote would be happening at midnight, or possibly before, sources said.


Aides to one of the senators running for President said they were surprised at how adamant the leadership was that a vote would be coming so quickly -- with or without them present. One aide to this senator said that his staff told leadership that they couldn't get back for a vote until later in the night.


But, this source says, the leadership told this Senator's staff that they could not promise to hold the vote for his return. Leadership said that the vote would happen at the end of debate whether or not this senator got back in time for it, this source tells us. So this senator gave up the effort to return for the vote.


So basically what happened here is that leadership was adamant that the vote take place by midnight last night. And the senators running for President, who were scattered far afield, either couldn't make it back in time for the vote, or decided that it wasn't worth returning. The thinking apparently was that Mukasey's confirmation was assured, and they were already on record against him. As Robert Gibbs, a spokesman for Barack Obama, put it last night: "He's already announced his position on it. I don't think the vote will be close."


None of the other senators' campaigns has commented on record about this.


As for the possibility of a filibuster, it was never likely that anyone other than Dodd would have gone through with it at any rate -- again, because all the Senators can say that they're on record against him. Even if any of them had been willing to filibuster, it seems clear that the timing of the vote was such that it was unlikely that any of them could have gotten back to the Senate floor in time to do so.


Meanwhile, it still remains unclear exactly why the leadership suddenly declared at 6:30 P.M that there would be a vote -- and that it would have to happen by midnight at the latest.


Update 3:26pm: Richardson's attacks are here (the source for my "field day" comment above): http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/post/joaquinguerra/CLtT

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Harry Reid has done a piss poor job of leadership
Mukasey should never have come to a vote without the full Senate present. They could easily have alerted the campaigning Senators and held the vote this morning instead of ramming it through late last night.

This is disgraceful and Reid let it happen. The outcome was inevitable. However, the numbers should have been much worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wayward Episcopalian Donating Member (133 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Not just the numbers...
...but now a potential "laying down on the job" attack for the GOP against our future nominee!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. no one is getting the story from Harry as to why the quick vote!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. And he's not talking! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. It's possible some candidates didn't WANT to have to be on record for the vote
and likely gave Reid the go-ahead despite what they have to say to primary voters.

Who would triangulate on torture?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. I blame Harry Reid, too. It's almost like the Republicans sabotaged it with
Harry carrying out their agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
youthere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. I saw a movie one time where evil robots brainwashed people...
Edited on Fri Nov-09-07 03:46 PM by youthere
into doing their bidding.Wait a minute..you don't think....do ya'? :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. What did Bill Richardson say on his " field day"? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wayward Episcopalian Donating Member (133 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Called for "leadership"
Sorry, I just added the link to the end of the post. Here it is. http://action.richardsonforpresident.com/page/community/post/joaquinguerra/CLtT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. Your link in post 5 worked, but your new link in the original post did not
It may be because you cut and pasted the DU/abbreviated version from post 5. Now you have to do a double edit to fix it.

As for your content, you have a good point. This whole story is hard to sort out. I dread hearing how the news presents it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wayward Episcopalian Donating Member (133 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Thanks eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. This might come back to bite Richardson, which I actually would hate to see. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. This is one of the reasons that Reid should not have done this
Every election year, the Senators/House Members who are running are at a disadvantage since they sometimes have to choose between campaigning and making votes (or, as in this case, have the choice made for them by their leadership). The non-incumbent members always take advantage of this. In 2004, John Edwards and John Kerry caught hell about this - Sharpton and Dean raked them over the coals when they missed votes and also when they made the vote but missed the campaign event.

The difference was that in 2004, 2000, and 1996, the schedule was determined by the Republicans, who went out of their way to schedule votes so that the candidates either had to miss the vote or come off of the campaign trail to the detriment of their campaign, while ensuring that their own guys had plenty of notice to get back if necessary. One of their tricks was to schedule a vote knowing that Edwards and Kerry couldn't get back in time and then manipulae the vote so that the measure won by 1 or 2 votes - knowing full well that knee-jerk Democrats (many of them right here on DU) would eat their own, blaming Edwards and Kerry for letting the bill pass. However, even if they had made it back for the vote, Frist would have simply back pulled one or two of the Senators he had conditionally released to vote no and still won the vote.

Sadly, Reid is putting his own side in the same predicament they found themselves in under a Republican majority. With friends like these . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. ...acknowledged...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spotbird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
6. Maybe the presidential candidates
wanted it this way. They are off the hook, and you don't hear them complaining.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wayward Episcopalian Donating Member (133 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I doubt it
All were on the record as opposing Mukasey, and what's the difference in the press (which is what counts on a campaign trail) between a quote and a vote?

And do remember, Biden voted against him in Committee, the vote that really counted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. How are they "off the hook?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
9. As well you should.
I hope everyone reads and understands what you are saying before they engage in any more attacks on ANY of the candidates over this!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
11. With the way we can do secure stuff over the net, surely presidential candidates should...
...be able to vote on critical issues with 21st Century technology.

A secure video phone with encryption and multiple passwords to vote and an additional secure login to a dynamically produced encrypted web site for vote redundancy... Jefferson would have been all over that if he was around now.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wayward Episcopalian Donating Member (133 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Perhaps...
...but that's a criticism of the system, not the candidates.

I was thinking about that earlier today, actually, but it occured to me that while the votes would be possible, it would stymie the deal-making. Maybe they should implement such a system only for hospitalized and presidential-campaigning Senators.

Didn't JFK once vote from a hospital room by phone or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Not a good idea - then Senators would never be in Washington
Voting in person is critical to our process. They need to be together where they can interact and, just as important, where they can be seen.

Do you really want your Senator "phoning in" his/her vote sight unseen?

I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. Would every Senator be running for President?
The secure remote voting would only be available for Senators and members of Congress running for President.

As for being "unseen", they would be recorded on video phones. Additionally, they would have to have a redundant vote via a secure encrypted dynamic web site ( a page on a site that can't be hacked)...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beaconess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-09-07 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. That's a real slippery slope
Why just presidential candidates? Why not Senators and Members who are running for other offices? A Senator running for Governor? A House member running for the Senate?

And why just candidates? Shouldn't a Senator who had to go home to bury her mother get to vote from home via computer? And if she can, what about the House Member with a sick kid? How sick goes the kid have to be before the Congressman dad qualifies for the exception?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC