Gillibrand unpopular among peers

By PATRICK O'CONNOR & GLENN THRUSH | 1/23/09

Within the high school gossip circle that is New York’s congressional delegation, Kirsten Gillibrand’s nickname is “Tracy Flick” — a not-so-flattering reference to the over-eager, blonde, bubbly and viciously competitive Reese Witherspoon character from “Election.”

Gillibrand, the newly-appointed junior senator from New York, has never been shy about her political ambitions — or her willingness to vault over older, more experienced politicians.

That aggressiveness and self-confidence has endeared her to the powerful politicians who share her impatience to get ahead — including Hillary Clinton, whose seat she’ll take, David Paterson, who appointed her to it, and Chuck Schumer, who’ll be the senior senator to her junior.

But many of those who know Gillibrand best — Democratic members of the state’s congressional delegation — weren’t exactly high-fiving over the pick, and not just because several wanted the job themselves.

“Nobody really likes her,” sniped one New York City-area member, speaking on condition of anonymity.
“She's smart and capable, but she's rubbed people the wrong the way,” said another.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17877.html

So I'm withholding judgment, but she seems like an odd choice for Hillary's seat when there were far more qualified candidates. Whatever........

:eyes:

that she was Hillary's preferred choice for her replacement. I don't know how true that is but it's something I overheard tonight on CNN.

But I haven't heard anything on the grapevine about her being Hillary's choice.

:shrug:

They might be right too, but it wasn't one of the rumors around town. Well, let's just hope that she becomes a good senator.

;-)

I know that I heard it somewhere before.

Hopefully, for the people of New York's sake, that indicates that Gillibrand too will become a damned fine Senator.

If this article is to be believed, Gillibrand is not considered Miss Congeniality by her colleagues.

:eyes:

or vice versa - I may be wrong, but that's what I thought I caught on the news earlier today. Maybe that had something to do with Paterson's choice, since it was after all filling Clinton's seat.

I don't know...does that make any sense to anyone else?

when she volunteered for Hillary's first senate campaign. It makes sense, though we don't know if Hillary actively campaigned Paterson to appoint her (it appears that Schumer did, though).

"Rep. Gillibrand was fiercely loyal to Sen. Clinton when she ran for President, realizing the importance of getting a woman to the highest office, and she refused to fall in the trap of personal attacks aimed at Gov. Sarah Palin," Siskind said in a statement. "This is what feminism looks like. The New Agenda looks forward to working with Kirsten Gillibrand to shatter the highest glass ceiling -- our U.S. Congress."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012301024_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009012301647&s_pos=

I have even seen it here!

Blond hair I guess.

:shrug:

How about we start looking at these men and ridicule them? From today's Wapo:

"Nonetheless, during Kennedy's candidacy, three other Senate vacancies were filled with far less drama by little-known men. Michael Bennet (D), a 44-year-old schools superintendent from Denver who had never held elected office, was sworn in yesterday to take the Colorado seat vacated by Ken Salazar (D), who became interior secretary. In Delaware, Vice President Biden was replaced by his own chief of staff, Ted Kaufman, widely seen as a placeholder so that Biden's son can run for the seat in 2010, after he returns from Iraq.

And in Illinois, Roland W. Burris (D) ultimately gained the seat vacated by Obama, despite being picked by a governor charged with corruption and the open opposition of both the Democratic majority and the incoming president."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/23/AR2009012301024.html?hpid=topnews

on a Committee. She tends to vault over other, more qualified congress critters. She's not even liked by her peers which has nothing to do with the fact that she's a woman. Watch out for a bloody primary battle.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Why are women politicians disparaged and ridiculed - by the left!?

The people in this article sound like high school clique members.....pathetic.

she was described in an article as a proud Blue Dog Democrat.

Her politics should be the question here. Though I find it interesting that some Kennedy supporters question her fitness due to experience

fellow colleagues in the back (Rep NY - Buffalo) MORE SENIOR and IN LINE in order to inappropriately score a coveted Committee Seat.

We all know the men and women who "shine on" the bosses and never do the hard work of networking and team building. She's a lone wolf with friends in the right wing of the democratic party.

Two DLC/Blue Dog Senators from NY State is way beyond the pale. I hope she gets her political ass handed to her and returns to the House to learn how to "play with the team" not grandstand.

she's experienced.

Therefore, anything and everything was used against her even if they were RW talking points. The attacks were vicious in the media and on the LW blogs such as this one.

As for Caroline, I had a beef with her too. But my objections had to do with handing a senate seat to someone who had zero political experience of her own. Her qualifications as such were based on nothing more than her family name and that she had endorsed Obama. I had hoped Maloney, Lowey or Velazquez got the job. I had never heard of Gillibrand before this week.

:eyes:

Accsued of having no experience when she has the following:

15 years as a Securities lawyer
against the Bailout Bills lack of accountability so she voted no
strong feminist
against the war
supports gay marriage

But, my liberal cohorts ridicule and call her Tracy Flick.
If we don't smackdown this sexism we will never see a woman in the White House.

Additionally, I just read this:

Schumer the unseen hand in NY Senate choice
By MICHAEL GORMLEY (Associated Press Writer)
From Associated Press
January 25, 2009 1:10 AM EST

Excerpt:

The other women in contention were all from New York City. And Gillibrand, from Columbia County south of Albany, was the upstate woman who would fix Paterson's New York City-centric, all-male 2010 ticket.

Paterson placed a midday call to Gillibrand on Thursday, told her she was the likely choice, but he still wanted to check with others one last time. The last call, by this time just before 2 a.m. Friday, was to Gillibrand. She would be New York's next senator.

After she screamed in excitement loud enough to be heard over the phone by others in the room, she thanked him and accepted.

Schumer ran the Senate Democrats' national campaign efforts in two successful elections, and he says Gillibrand has the qualities of a winner.


"I found women candidates run better and win more easily," he said Friday at Gillibrand's news conference, also emphasizing the importance of having an upstate resident. "But above all, talent, ability, work ethic are the most important attributes for the U.S. Senate, and Kirsten Gillibrand fits that bill.

Then I find out she's unpopular in our own delegation, is compared to the character from the movie "Election" (a huge insult) and is a blue-dog gun loving moderate of the type I just can't stand. I'm sorry for a state like NY I want 100% progressive. Moderates need not apply. We went through that with that fuck Al Damato, who needs another one?

I can't wait till I get a chance to vote against her in 2 years.

I learn about it...

This doesn't make a lot of sense. Especially if one (hypothetically) assumes that Kennedy was his first choice - there seems to be a vast difference between the two. Is it possible that Paterson consulted Clinton - in a gesture of respect or graciousness - on who she might prefer to fill her seat? Is it possible that, in doing so, he discovered that Kennedy was not someone Clinton would prefer and out of deference chose accordingly?

Even as I right this it doesn't seem like he would just sway to the preference of another, no matter who it was... but perhaps he could have come to his own conclusion, independently, that it would be appropriate to fill Clinton's seat with someone who avidly supports and is supported by Clinton.

A handing over of the torch, so to speak...

This is so confusing...

He's going to need the support of the more conservative, upstate voters when he has to run for reelection. And perhaps because Clinton lobbied for her to be appointed.

Paterson and Gillibrand are targeted for Primaries, Cuomo targeting Paterson; Maloney and McCarthy targeting Gillibrand.

Be careful what you wish for.

1. Neither Mark Green nor RFK Jr (nor Caroline Kennedy) will run for the Democratic Nomination

2. Gillibrand will beat either Carolyn Maloney or Carolyn McCarthy if they run

Name your stakes as contributions to this year's Feeding America DU donation drive

“Nobody really likes her,” sniped one New York City-area member, speaking on condition of anonymity.

She's a damn senator designate not a candidate for prom queen...

That pretty much says it all for me. I don't need to read the link after seeing that.

I'm sure she'll have a tough road ahead of her, but she's tough she'll win em over. :D

because it rubs people the wrong way when a youngish, pretty woman makes waves and might be pretty good at the job. Or it could be both.

If she's good but a jerk, hopefully time and experience will take care of the jerk part. If people are just jealous or have a beef with a woman doing the job, that's their problem. There isn't a woman alive who hasn't had to deal with that kind of crap at one time or another.

I'll take a wait and see attitude on this, but I have to say that I like your choices for the seat, mentioned somewhere above.