+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: How come when Kerry ran for President and MASS had a Republican governor, Dems voted that the governor should?

  1. #1
    Level 16 - Colossus godet's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,200

    How come when Kerry ran for President and MASS had a Republican governor, Dems voted that the governor should?

    not appoint a Senator's replacement, but it should be left to special election...but now that there's a Democrat governor, Dems say that the governor SHOULD appoint Kennedy's replacement, and it's not right to leave it in the hands of a special election? Surely they wouldn't try to have it both ways.

  2. Sponsors
    Super ModeratorPeeje's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    164
    Videos
    139

  3. #2
    Level 16 - Colossus kageyama's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,197
    Because Mass doesn't like Republicans

  4. #3
    Level 16 - Colossus jmulato's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,303
    I completely agree with you. they're playing politics.

    Good thing I don't live in mass., so you can't blame me for them.

  5. #4
    Level 16 - Colossus mariner's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,292
    Because partisanship is the cancer that is killing the political process in the US. That, and money.

  6. #5
    Level 15 - A Legend daichi's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,708
    I know. It's just as bad as how back in 2004, Republicans fought to allow the Republican Governor of Massachusetts to appoint a replacement for Kerry, but now they adamantly demand the need for a special election. Those Democrats are almost as hypocritical as Republicans.

  7. #6
    Level 15 - A Legend yangjun's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,701
    Guess what, they can have it both ways. If the Gov. were to appoint someone to fill the seat it would only be an temporary move and there will be an election to fill it.

  8. #7
    Level 7 - I know you and your Friends eiichi's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,306
    They are appointing somebody temporarily and will have the special election in mid-January. The Massachusetts legislature didn't want Romney to appoint a republican to Kerry's senate seat. They didn't make a secret of it.

  9. #8
    Level 16 - Colossus eromero's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,287
    They say that you should not speak ill of the dead, but Senator Ted Kennedy was an important force in achieving both actions. He was a partisan politician. What else is new?

    Chewy Ivan, Republicans were against changing the law to fit the occasion, just following the law as it exists at the time.

  10. #9
    Level 16 - Colossus mobilej's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,235
    They want it both ways - heads we win, tails you lose. They want to make sure they have control. When there was a Republican Governor he would have appointed a Republican so since the Democrats had a majority they changed the law to insure a Democrat would be elected. Now there is a Democrat as governor, so they want to change the law back and have the governor appoint someone and not allow an election because the voters might elect a Republican. As others have said it is today's politics, do it our way or else.

  11. #10
    Level 7 - I know you and your Friends george's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,365
    Surely, you are not so naive that you don't know the answer. Changing the rules to suit your needs is a very old tactic.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts