Obama Picks Senator Gregg for Commerce
Sun, 01/18/2009 - 12:41am — John Martin
The official announcement will come today, along with an announcement by New Hampshire's Governor, who is expected to name a Republican to Gregg's Senate seat:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18325.html
Technorati Tags: Bookmark/Search this post with:
- John Martin's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
I had heard that Gregg
I had heard that Gregg wouldn't accept unless a Republican was appointed to his seat. I think I read it in the newspaper.
"For those who plan with audacity and execute with vigor,
progress is the magnificent by product."
If Gregg puts conditions on
Heh -- I had the same
Heh -- I had the same thoughts as I was posting it. Let me see if I can find a reference.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/02/02/gregg_open_to_commerce_post_--.html?hpid=topnews
"For those who plan with audacity and execute with vigor,
progress is the magnificent by product."
The "deal" is a bit
The "deal" is a bit different than Blago. For one reason, he was not selling the seat. Also, the appointment is someone who will NOT run for re-election in 2010.
The person who will fill the seat is Gregg's chief of staff, therefore fulfilling the term with the positions that reflect the will of the voters when they elected Greg. In 2010, the seat will be up for grabs, and my guess is that the Republicans will lose it then.
Is the guy any good? Is
Here's a quote from the
Here's a quote from the cited article:
The guy's a three-term United States Senator, and the ranking member of the budget committee. He also happens to be a former Governor and House Member. I don't think there's any question that he's qualified.
Admittedly I do not know
Suzi, I respectfully
My understanding is that
My understanding is that Gregg did not say WHO he wanted named, just that it should be someone with a similar political stand...ie a moderate Republican, as that is what the people of his state voted for and elected.
Think about it for a minute jupitor...If Gregg had been replaced with a Democrat, causing a change in the balance in the Senate, everyone would have accused President Obama of choosing Gregg simply for political expediency. This way, that charge cannot be levied.
Also, the replacement was not with a Republican who would run for re-election in 2010, so that does not give a Republican candidate the advantage of running as an incumbent.
I see it as an all around win. Obama gets someone who is tough on spending, the people get what they voted for, and the seat is open again in 2010 for the voters to make the decision as to who should fill it.
I stand by my opinion that there is no comparison with the Blago situation. I feel pretty sure that Obama was aware of Greggs position, and obviously the President was ok with it, or the nomination would not have gone forward.
I'm with Suzi on this one.
I'm with Suzi on this one. This is a win for Dem's. Obama furthers his bipartisan appointments-which is one less thing for Republicans to complain about, he gets a well-qualified person in the job, and the new Rep. senator does not wish to run in 2010, almost a guaranteed victory for Dem's in 2010 given the leanings of NH. I don't call it unethical, I just call it smart politics. Actually, I've heard many pundits saying that they truly feel Obama just liked Gregg's resume, he wasn't playing a political game at all.
If Gregg was replaced with a Dem, Gregg would get heat and Obama would be called every name in the book for his "scheme" so it's best that it worked out this way.
I should have read to the