New Poll Could Give Paterson Cover For Kennedy Appointment

New York's next Senator will be picked by Gov. David Paterson and Paterson only. But on Tuesday, Quinnipiac University released a public survey on the opinion of Empire Staters in regards to Caroline Kennedy and other potential Senate aspirants. And the results were moderately optimistic for the former first daughter and political novice.

"New York State voters split 40 - 41 percent on whether Caroline Kennedy is qualified to be a U.S. Senator, but they expect by a 48 - 25 percent margin that Gov. David Paterson will name her to the Senate seat being vacated by Hillary Clinton, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today."

The findings, which come as pressure mounts for the Governor to make a choice, could provide the political cover Paterson needs to choose Kennedy as Clinton's replacement. Criticism of Kennedy has ebbed and flowed and ebbed again, with Democratic Rep. Gary Ackerman comparing her to Sarah Palin on Sunday and Republican Rep. Peter King (a 2010 Senate contender) offering harsh, often personalized, criticisms of her candidacy on a daily basis.

There were some other good nuggets to farm from the Quinnipiac study as well. If the state were to decide the seat via a special election, Kennedy wouldn't be that poorly positioned. In a hypothetical race against Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and Rep. Kristen Gilibrand, 33 percent of respondents chose Kennedy, 29 percent went for Cuomo, four percent backed Gillibrand, 24 percent preferred anonymous and 10 percent said they had no idea.

A Siena poll from last week had Cuomo leading Kennedy by a slim margin of 30 percent to 26 percent. In that same poll 31 percent of respondents said they felt Paterson would pick her to succeed Clinton -- nearly twice as many as expected Cuomo to fill the vacancy.

Comments

[1Marie23]

So, did she make this part of the deal for supporting Obama? Inquiring minds want to know.

[meko]

There are a host of other experienced, qualified, committed talented people who could be considered for this position. Cuomo is one (and he's demonstrated an ability to get things done. Others are Byron Brown, Carolyn Maloney, Elizabeth Holtzman, Thomas Suozzi, Nydia Velazquez, Kirsten Gillibrand, Steve Israel.

Why hasn't Caroline Kennedy campaigned for any democrats besides Obama (6 weeks) and her family members? Why can't she campaign and raise funds to re-elect whomever is appointed if money is such a concern? Where were her ideals during the 40 years of adulthood when she could have been putting them into action? And why should we disregard all the other candidates just because their parents were less famous and wealthy?

[CarolynBichonHMB]

First of all, Caroline Kennedy shows enormous personal courage to wish for this seat given the concerns for her safety. Her books are passionate about the Bill of Rights and discuss angles and stories that I'd never heard before. Our country needs her voice (I'd like to see her on the Supreme Court even more)

Of course the children of veterans (slain or not) deserve every position of honor and every benefit we can give to them. JFK was a veteran who risked his life on the battle field as well. Every life counts and the loss of that life causes ripples throughout their family, community, and world.

However, you are missing the point. When an elected official is assassinated, the will and vote of millions of people, of everyone who voted for that person is stolen away. The other party benefitted and history was altered forever, when these powerful, inspiring, leaders, RFK and JFK, were murdered. This has never been corrected. It never can be fully. But this would be a good start. I believe this scenario is one of the reasons that the concept of appointing someone to a vacant senate seat got written into our laws .So that a thoughtful executive can consider the most artful and just way to fill that seat.

[meko]

You'd like to see an attorney who's never practiced law on the Supreme Court? Someone who's never filed a brief evaluating them? Someone who only CO-WROTE books on the Bill of Rights.

She is not JFK. She is not RFK. I'd like to see someone who's worked toward the ideals they've espoused appointed to senator. I'm not interested in someone who's just discovered them, who hasn't even done her civic duty in voting regularly, suddenly undermining them by "inheriting" a seat.

[Oldtt]

It seems apparent that Patterson will appoint Caroline Kennedy to Clinton's vacated Senate seat for reasons unrelated to her basic qualifications. By the 2010 special election she will have served 2 undistinguished years, giving her the power of incumbency and little in her record to attack in a Dem primary, so she will again be elected in 2012 unless the NY GOP regains enough credibility to offer a legitimate challenger. Meanwhile, the much better qualified Andrew Cuomo will set his sights on replacing Patterson in 2010. Hillary Clinton will serve one 4-year term as Obama's SOS and then retire from politics to work on issues relating to women and children, probably as part of Bill's foundation.

Just my opinion, but I'll bet most of it works out this way.

[ibsteve2u]

Me, I like the occasional wealthy - and liberal - Senator.

It is a lot easier to stick to your guns - and resist the temptation of "Everybody does it!" that "K" Street will undoubtedly throw at you - when you can afford to buy all the ammo you will ever need out of your own pocket.

[robertjames]

Great Father - JFK
Great Uncles - RFK & Ted
Great Legacy.
Great Fortune.
Seems Nice.

Is that all it takes?

[JohnTalbutt]

You forgot uncle Joe who also died for his country, in WWII

[JoeDoorman]

She is not in the running for a senate seat because she’s a Kennedy.
She got herself in this position because she openly backed Obama at a critical time in his campaign.
Whether she made a difference, nobody knows, but the timing was perfect.
Obama's future changed the night the Kennedy's endorsed him.
People took notice, and the rest is history.

[meko]

There were a lot of people who backed Obama. Not all of them are asking to be handed senates seats.

[JohnTalbutt]

But there is a lot of grass roots support for Caroline because she can win. If this fact is not lost on a numbnutz like Pete King, why can't you understand it?

[pupbayer]

I agree...it is out and out payback...and they say you shouldn't be able to buy a Senate seat. LOL!!!

[cayuse]

Carolyn is not running for a crown. That is the current Administration job for their Monarcy and Feudalistic Policies

She is running to help her fellow man and is not interested in royalty. You cannot see that the last Administration emptied the piggy bank. The new Administration is for the common man once again. As is Carolyn.

The risk is little tand he reward can be GREAT. Nice for the people to have a riskless investment for a change, is it not?

[Turtleposer]

Memo to Paterson: Find a qualified person to put in the Senate seat--someone with actual political experience and has run a successful campaign. Then have that person change her or his last name to Kennedy. Problem solved.

[TheKiddy]

But they didn't include Caroline Maloney in the poll? I find that weird and interesting.

[bubbuh]

Caroline Maloney is lumped into the "someone else" category. Here's the full release:
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1318.xml?ReleaseID=1244

[meko]

People who are bothered by the lack of disclosure, the appointment without legislative or election experience, the ignoring of the talented people in the Democrat Party are not all Republicans. A lot of people, like myself, who campaigned for Obama (for more than 6 weeks) and other Democrats, do not feel excited about this candidate.

[demrepub]

She ought to take some of that undisclosed money and go visit one of those high priced specialists in Beverly Hills. She needs it and more importantly we need it since we are going to be seeing a lot more of her in the future. That seat is her birthright, she's a daughter of Camelot.

[bubbuh]

Sit on a ttack.

[meko]

Bah. She's a nice, real-looking woman. The lines on her face are those of a person who's led a happy life. There's nothing wrong with her face.

[orangepetal]

I agree. She looks extremely real and looks lovely. This battle against aging and extreme focus on physical beauty has costs. I get trying to look good, putting your best foot forward and living a healthy lifestyle but getting obssesive about physical beauty is IMO shallow. It is very good for the market though, I think beauty is a massive industry.

[dutchess2]

Republicans always appoint vacancies, never have special elections..

What is Peter King's problem?

Just another dog in the Manger republican... not getting what he wants.

[dutchess2]

Sarah Palen promised full disclosure, then refused to turn it over...

She ran for VP of the US and never did disclose anything...

Now the republicans are all upost that Kennedy isn't even running and said she will
not disclose anything until she is appointed, and knows that it is necessary.

Of course she will get the appointment. She will win the seat in 2 years, and it will be hers\
until she retires... It was Bobbie's seat before it was Moinenhan's and it was Hillary's after that..
it has only been used by very successful democrats, and she will be one too.

Good for her.

[philosopherkingtomas]

its the Senator's staff that runs the show and knows the issues! the Senator is a spokesman (or woman) and thats it !

[harriscrl3]

You got to love how Nepotism is somehow OK but name recognition is frowned down upon. I mean tell me is this any different than fathers giving their son the congressional seat they vacated or brothers giving it siblings or husbands to wife. I mean give me a break were they the only ones qualified or the best one for the position the answer is NO.

This is why I'm a little bit hard pressed to be shocked by Blago selling his Senate seat whats the difference between getting the highest bid in terms of campaign money among several qualfied for the senate seat Vs passing it on to a family member. Other than the fact that Blago use obvious vulgar terms than more subtle sophisticated language. Either way there is no meritocracy involved. Whats the difference between Blago getting money contributed his campaign Vs lobbyist giving money to people in congress to get them to support a bill.

Carol

[DeniseD]

You have a very good point. This is something I have pondered myself.

I honestly don't know how they are going to get a conviction in the Blago case. Did any money change hands? Even though I think he is a slime ball, it certainly doesn't seem that he actually got anyone to donate to his campaign, he only suggested it. I am not sure of the law, but is this enough to get a conviction? Doesn't this quid pro quo stuff go on all of the time in politics? And if it does, why are they only going after Blago?

[bubbuh]

Name recognition plus a high positive rating will get you elected. Appointment does a candidate no favors. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/appointed-senators-rarely-win-re.html
Nepotism today: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29415-2005Jan22.html