Polls: New York Dems Like Caroline Kennedy For Hillary's Senate Seat
Caroline Kennedy has quickly become the new favorite of New York's Democratic voters to be their new Senator, eclipsing the previous big name Andrew Cuomo, the state attorney general and son of former Gov. Mario Cuomo, according to two separate polls.
From Public Policy Polling (D): Kennedy 44%, Cuomo 23%, with all others in single digits. And from Marist: Kennedy 31%, Cuomo 21%, and all others way behind.
Of course, the real authority in picking the next Senator is Gov. David Paterson, who doesn't have to be guided any polls as he makes the appointment. Then again, he could certainly take the popularity of candidates into account as he seeks to win votes for his own 2010 campaign.
One other important caveat: Neither of these polls included Fran Drescher.
Those stupid sheep-like New Yorkers. Can't think beyond a last name.
December 10, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel more insulted coming from a state where Liebermann is the last name for one of its senators.
I'm glad we're thinkimg beyond the Coumo last name though. As I said earlier, I'll take Caroline Kennedy over Coumo. He had shady deals with lobbyists as HUD seceratary in the Clinton administration and we don't have to thank him for the current economic mess.
Anyways, I think the Illinois scandal will pressure Patterson to think out of the box, and we may have someone less familiar rise from the trenches.
December 10, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was being sarcastic. Someone from CT has no reasonable right to criticize voters of another state, given 2006. (I didn't vote for him, of course).
December 10, 2008 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on Greg... Kennedy isn't the favorite at all. These are purely name recognition polls, just as Clinton led Obama by 30% in national polls in early 2007.
December 10, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's your point? Right now, Kennedy has the highest name recognition, by your comment. But she's not the favorite?
December 10, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
It means that Kennedy's leading has little to do with voters preferring her over Velasquez or Israel or Gillibrand or whoever else could be appointed. If this were a primary, all these people would eventually introduce themselves to the public and the polls would slowly start reflecting more than name recognition. That will not be the case this time since there is no campaigning except to Paterson - so these polls are useless and misleading.
December 10, 2008 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
the differences between hillary's poll lead in 2007 and kennedy's poll lead now are:
a) that was a run-up to an election, so public perception was a better indicator of future success- this case is an executive appointment which is not necessarily governed by public perception (but would most likely be)
b) there were to follow public events, campaigning and debating to help bolster or weaken that public perception...because of the small window before gov patterson makes his decision, there will most likely be very little jockeying or campaigning (especially in the wake of the political scandal here in illinois)
c) the office of the president is much different than the office of u.s. senator and people might be more willing to allow someone they are somewhat familiar with be their senator rather than their president
d) (similar to points b and c) gov patterson might be well suited to pick someone that people are familiar with as to not "rock the boat" by picking someone with very little name recognition or accomplishments to succeed one of the most important names in american politics
what do you think?
December 10, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I assume snark?
December 10, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Call me a sexist but I don't want that voice- like a goat being escorted to the slaughterhouse-come out of my senator. LOL!!!
December 10, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can anyone even imagine enduring a speech by her in the Senate?
December 10, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
She doesn't actually speak like her character; I heard her giving a speech on women's health once and, other than the thick NY accent, she didn't sound bad.
December 10, 2008 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
But that's why the Dems need her.
The mere THREAT of a Drescher filibuster will get the GOP to cave on every major legislative initiative Obama wants! :-D
December 10, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I think Drescher is a spoiler that will make any other candidate seem better. I certainly can't imagine her in the senate. I am imagining she just wanted some free publicity. Caroline Kennedy seems the most likely to be chosen and the reality is she could probably win the seat in an election right now riding her association with President Elect Obama.
December 10, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who knows? Who cares?
December 10, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
is there the same necessity to replace a female senator with another female as there is replacing a black senator with a black person?
i know the ratio is better for women in the u.s. senate than for blacks, but could we foresee people becoming upset if sen. clinton was replaced by cuomo?
December 10, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coumo should be disqualified not based on his gender but because of his role as a HUD seceratary in the Clinton administration.
December 10, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to the NY Times, women's groups are apparently pressuring Patterson to appoint a woman, and, (again, according to the Times) if he doesn't, it will simply reignite the disappointment and anger women felt when Clinton lost the nomination.
December 10, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
And here's the portion I was thinking of:
Link: Clinton's replacement
December 10, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks for the quote and link!
December 10, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
God, some people are going to pull out the resentment card for everything, aren't they?
December 10, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I almost want to go see what the loonies at HillaryIs44 are saying about this. But only almost.
December 10, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever, Fran Drescher is totally going to Nader Kennedy out of the race.
December 10, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess Cuomo needs to do more "shuckin' and jivin'" if he really wants the job.
December 10, 2008 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, at least kennedy was a new york resident for a while. She didn't parachute in like clinton to take the seat as a stepping stone to run for president.
I like kennedy for the seat by the way, based on her campaign statements and performances, I think that she would serve new york very well. Intelligent and very caring. New York could do alot worse.
December 10, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's get past celebrity politicians in NY, please. There are plenty of qualified people who have been working hard on behalf of NYers for years and years. Letting people repeatedly parachute in and take one of the top political jobs in the state must be dmoralizing for everyone who has been working their way up for years and causes the entire political heirarchy to just stagnate. As a NYer, I'd like to see an upstate female politician appointed. I don't have a candidate in mind, though, and I think geography is more important than gender or race - upstate needs to feel they are in the game, not just passive recipients of pandering in election years.
December 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno, picking a Senator based on his or her last name beats "letting the free markets decide" as they do in Illinois.
December 10, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe Caroline's mostly interested in knocking out Cuomo, her hated ex-brother-in-law, twice removed.
December 10, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
lets see.
the senate has set the bar so high that a Kennedy needs to be dismissed based on her name.
and we are sooooooooooooooooooooo sure someone else would be better ,baseD on EXACTLY WHAT?
December 10, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Consider this... Caroline Kennedy has lived foremost a very private life. She has virtually stayed away from the direct political limelight. That is why when she stepped out to endorse Barack, it was a big surprise. Caroline has never taken as strong a political stance like this. I was in a conversation yesterday morning with my sister debating why Caroline was not qualified to be a candidate for the senate seat. By the end of that debate, I had another point perspective to consider. Soon after it was followed by listening to a pundit on wolf blitzer who enlighten my perspective even more. And finally another relative just sealed the fate of my initial take.
Here's what changed my perspective:
1. She's a Kennedy. But she's not just any Kennedy, she's the daughter of John F. Kennedy. That automatically garnishes respect and influence. Everyone should know that she is NOT a Sarah Palin because when Caroline opens her mouth substance will follow - a folksy response is not in her DNA.
2. A Wolf Blizter subtitle questioned "Celebrity" vs Experienced. Caroline is only a celebrity in the political world. She is not a "Hollywood" celebrity at all. Big difference. Caroline knows a lot of people of influence in the political and business spectrum. These are contacts that will prove resourceful and supportive.
3. Experience. I was told of the many charitable and local new york community and social interests that she has sponored and lobbied for to promote good change. Caroline is so quiet and behind the scenes, that unless you are involved or paying attention, you just don't know her many accomplisments.
4. Education. She has the academic credentials for politics. Again, because she is so quient and behind the scenes, not too many people know that she has a JD from Columbia.
5. Family Life. Her kids are teenagers/young adults. Her first career is complete and now it is time for her to embark on a 2nd career.
In closing, I think it is a case of the sleeping giant. Many people have always wanted her to engage in politics but because she strongly refused to do so and said that was not her thing, people just assumed she stayed away and just carried on Caroline Schlossberg. But as my sister said, this campaign season, she got stung by the bumble "B". The political bug invigorated her, and
December 11, 2008 3:45 AM | Reply | Permalink