I feel like liberals are overwhelmingly opposed to Kerry vacating his seat.

[beachmom]

Based anecdotally on comments and tweets I have read throughout this week.

I'm just putting it out there, that there will be a lot of anger if he leaves the Senate. Most think this will amount to handing Scott Brown his seat back, and will lead to Democrats losing the Senate in '14.

I'm not concern trolling here. I think it is so unfair. But that is what I am seeing.

Example:

http://www.dailykos.com/comment/1161805/48433838#c4

86 Recommends.

[leveymg]

1. I think Kerry would be a great SOS, but have a problem with Rice

She's certainly intelligent enough, but unfortunately she's been leading the charge on sanctions and tensions leading to war with Iran. We've been neoconned enough, already.

[blm]

16. The whole dog and pony show is so apparent it just pisses me off.

Harkens back to Clintonites sabotaging Kerry at every turn. Like Hey John!

[Kalidurga]

2. I think Kerry should be allowed to do what he thinks is best...

If it is holding onto his seat then he should do that. If it is becoming Secretary of State or Secretary op Defense he should do that. It's not like we have a poverty of leadership, because we don't. Someone of with talent and leadership skills can step up. It's not like Scott Brown is some kind of undefeatable monolith. At this point I think it is all about a lot of work and GOTV.

[Mass]

3. And? Who cares?

To be cynical, if Kerry leaves the Senate, he wont seek reelection after that. So, why should he care? Same for Obama.

Some people are always going to be unhappy. Hopefully, Obama will just choose who he wants and not be stopped either by McCain/Graham's whining or people who are afraid of Brown. Choose the best for the job. That is all that should matter.

[beachmom]

8. Because it affects things, that's why. It happened last time when

Hillary went to State. It was all the CW that she was a great choice, etc. And what do you know, she was picked. I actually think the media does tend to give us tea leaves on what is to come. I'm not naive, but I don't automatically dismiss articles in the WP. Those leakers are powerful and skilled in shaping debate.

[Mass]

9. Listen, I think that you may be right on Rice being named, but

I cannot seem to feel there is something important there, so I am ready to wait until the choice is made. As I said, I am fine with both Rice and Kerry. As for some liberals and some powerful people not liking Kerry, it is hardly news.

Frankly, I have spent the last 8 years saying that (and so have most people here), so I am feeling less and less concerned by what these people think.

[blm]

15. Those same skilled 'leakers' are doing exactly what they did in 2004, 2006, 2008 - preventing Kerry

from a position that would serve the country best instead of the interests of the elite. How many have forgotten that Clintonites worked against Kerry as much as Bushies for so many years?

[ProSense]

4. Who says they're liberals?

The mention of Kerry draws out a lot of his detractors. They're no different from some on the right.

In fact, President Obama dealt with similar reactions during the last four years.

The Senate seat justification in a few instances are sincere, but it's being used by a lot of people who don't want to see Kerry advance. They're loud, but there are not that many.

[ProSense]

5. Here:

I never cared for Scott Brown, and neither does Harry Reid. After losing his senate race to Elizabeth Warren last week, Brown wasn't willing to close the door on any open office in the very near future. Particularly in running for the other Massachusetts seat, which will almost certainly be open, as President Obama is likely to tap Sen. John Kerry for either Secretary of Defense, or Secretary of State.

<...>

As far as the possibility of him running for Kerry's seat, when it becomes open. Harry Reid showed no concern, and said the following:

"We feel very comfortable -- if, in fact, something does happen -- we feel comfortable about Massachusetts," Reid said. "I think that I've already told you how I feel about Scott Brown."

Right on!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/14/1161805/-Harry-Reid-Lays-The-Smackdown-To-Scott-Brown

That thread has 458 recs.

[beachmom]

7. People are rec'ing Harry Reid's comments on Brown.

They are liberals. A lot of liberals have never liked JK, that is true, but many others do respect him but are really worried about that Senate seat. Frankly, the most positive comments I have read about JK going to State come from Republicans. They also think they can get that seat back.

[ProSense]

10. A lot of liberals

don't like Obama either. A lot of them spent the first three years of his term demanding that he be primaried. Having said that, I do believe detractors tend to be louder than supporters. I strongly believe that Kerry has a lot more liberal supporters than detractors, as does the President.

I don't care what Republicans think. These are the same people who convinced their base that Mitt was winning, not that he could win, but that he was going to win. They like to bluff a lot. With Kerry and Rice, they're playing head games. They need to spend some time resolving the issues that led to their embarrassing defeat.

I believe Democrats can retain Kerry's seat if he is selected.

[wisteria]

39. I agree with you, as do many others. n/t

[karynnj]

30. What is slightly illogical is that they are concerned about 2014 - but ignore that

if Brown wins, which is NOT a sure thing, he will have to run again. It seemed that Warren's strongest argument was that though Brown might vote with MA some of the time, she would vote with them all the time. That and the fact that Brown even said McConnell would "have to win his vote" for majority leader - something NO ONE believed - shows that 2014 with any Democrat would be a replay - especially if the Senate is really in question.

The MOST positive comment I read was from Ben Cardin in an article in Politico that included many positive Republican comments. The difference was major the gist of the Republican comments was that there was no reason Kerry would not be confirmed and that he was a "qualified" candidate. Cardin spoke of Kerry's integrity and diplomatic skill.

[karynnj]

6. Not Kerry's peers in the Senate - like Ben Cardin per the quote that I posted in the other thread

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83771.html

The other comment I would have is that there were very few on Daily Kos who EVER supported Kerry for anything. I suspect that there is not just concern on Brown, but the latent anti Kerry nonsense that is prevalent even when he is doing good things that they agree with.

Think back to the DK thread in 2005 that whined that Reid and others in the Senate were angry that Kerry was acting as if he were ONE of the Democratic leaders - when he was the most recent standard bearer who game within a very small number of votes in Ohio to being the President.

Remember ALL the diaries that suggested Obama needed to give Hillary something - or that Kennedy needed to create a special sub committee of the HELP committee that would create the health care bill - chaired by Hillary. Consider all the people (not liberals) suggesting that Obama find an important use for Romney. The fact is that neither the internet or the pundits of the beltway have ever advocated for Kerry.

They might actually make a better case if they argued that he was too valuable in the Senate - rather than effectively saying that he is a D seat warmer.

I do agree with you that for many BAD reasons Kerry will not get SOS. I hope, if offered, he turns down SOD. Why walk into a mess where you will be the likely scapegoat if the military gets too angry over Obama's choices to revamp the military. He owes Obama nothing and it is clear that Obama and others likely led him on - both this year and in 2008 - on SOS.

Not to mention - even if Brown did run and win, he needs to run again in 2014. So, he will have had 4 elections within 4 years. The 2014 election is at the same time as the Governors race in MA, so the turnout would be higher than normal. In the first, it was not just that it was a special election, but that the Democrats were complacent. Additionally, he ran as a blank slate, claiming he was moderate - even verging to the left (on a national spectrum). His ads used JFK and did not say he was Republican. He now has a record -- and it is so unpopular in MA that he ran on Warren being a fake Indian and for big companies! He is not the "nice" guy of 2010.

Brown might not even run. The fact is that for Senate, party matters. Not so for Governor. If he ran for Senate and lost, he would likely after 2 losing elections not get the nomination for Governor.

[wisteria]

11. I find it stunningly stupid that people think he should stay where he is,

simply because Brown "might run" or might win" if he did run. This is like saying you can't retire, or vote independantly because it might change the outcome of one bill or another. So in dramatic fashion, they expect him to take the sword for the good of the Senate.

[Noisy Democrat]

12. But JK's current job is important

This is what bothers me about the people who say that he might as well become SoS. Becoming SoS will be the end of his career. I know he's 68 years old, but he's always been so energetic and athletic, I thought he'd stay in the Senate well into his 70s. I want JK to be happy and to do what he wants to do, but I wish there was more appreciation for the fact that he's a damn good senator with an important position, and that the country will be poorer when he retires.

[MH1]

13. ^^^ THIS. ^^^

I think Kerry would probably be the BEST choice for SoS, especially as I'm learning more about Rice. But I agree with what you are saying here, and if when it all shakes out JK is not nominated for SoS, that does not diminish one whit the value of his service to this country.

[Blaukraut]

14. You said it best

That's exactly how I feel about it. I want JK to be offered SoS and believe he is the best qualified person for the position, but I also want him to turn it down so we get to keep him as our Senator for a few more terms. Selfish? Yes.

[MBS]

19. YES.

[wisteria]

40. No doubt, he is a great Senator and his work in the Senate is extremely important.

He isn't rcognized enough for all he does.

[politicasista]

17. Was watching "Basic Black"

a show geared towards social issues in the AA community. The panel repeated the same media meme, but kinda came across as a lack of respect for the Senator and and his FP/environmental, etc. creds. IDK.


http://www.wgbh.org/basicblack/episodeDetail.cfm?programid=20&featureid=42917&subonstate=studioB

[wisteria]

18. I wonder why?

I don't know how anyone could attack Senator Kerry's environmental record, uless it was just to make a major push for Rice.

[Mass]

20. They did not do anything like that.

Kerry is not the topic of this at all. Rice is. In a 17 mn piece, may be 30 sec were about Kerry, and it was to say that Scott Brown is a problem. Nothing original. They go to the same journalism schools anybody else goes to, so nothing different comes from their mouth about that.

The senator's record is not at all in this piece. This is not the issue.

[politicasista]

21. Ok n/t

[Mass]

22. I found this show very interesting, and at least trying to defend Rice on the merit.

I find very sad that most Rice supporters are not trying to state she is more qualified for a reason or another (there are arguments to be made for Rice on the merit. I understand they may not please the progressive community, but these arguments exist), and for the most part push either the fact that Obama should fight back or the strawman argument that Brown would be reelected (something that came from the Rice camp). I also think this is very patronizing. We have an impressive woman. She may be too interventionist for my taste (as is Samantha Powers), but she has solid qualities. Is it because she is a woman that these people cannot seem to be able to make the arguments on the merit.

The other extremely surprising thing is that these Öbama supporters do not seem to think that Obama can choose who he wants. It is turning the argument on his head (and to a point this show makes the same analysis) and saying Obama has to do what they want. How is it respecting him more than the GOP?

[politicasista]

23. Makes sense

It's a good show. While they have constructive criticism of Obama; Councilwoman Ayanna Pressley has been on the show twice as a panelist. Gov. Patrick has been on there too for an interview. They discuss a wide variety of issues from entertainment to politics.

Do agree with your post tho.

[wisteria]

24. Go easy on me, I didn't open the link.

Thanks for filling me in. It's the holiday season and I have a lot to do.

[Mass]

25. I guessed you did not open the link

Did not want to offend you, but to inform you.

Yes, it is the holiday season, though it is a lot less busy here that it was during previous years. My oldest is in Europe and my youngest is still in college until Tuesday. Strange how I never expected to suffer from the empty nest syndrome, but I really miss him now that the house is empty.

[wisteria]

31. My daught was away at school and she just came home,

it so nice to have a "friend"as well as a daughter to do girl things with.

[politicasista]

27. Me opened up a small can of worms

Enjoy the holiday season.

[wisteria]

32. Ah, it is all good.

You injoy the holidays too.

[politicasista]

41. Same to you n/t

[babylonsister]

26. They are on DU;

I posted this recently and got no love (maybe it was the subject line):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021941180

1, I think it's totally unfair.

2, Nice to see you, beachmom. It's been a long time!

[politicasista]

29. ...

[wisteria]

34. I didn't see your post at the time you posted it, or

I would have agreed with you. I have now left a comment for what it is worth.

[MBS]

35. thanks

I hadn't seen this-- I haven't been following GD lately.
I liked the article, especially when I read the entire thing. Will go add something in your GD post : )

[Mass]

36. Thanks, great find.

[AldoLeopold]

28. I don't know if its a certainty

Kerry would lose his seat - but Mass is TWITCHY politically lately. I dunno, since the Kennedy's all kicked the bucket. I don't think its worth the risk.

[wisteria]

33. The times are not right for Republicans.

If Senator Kerry were to be asked to serve as SOS, his seat would for sure go to a Democrat. There were no concerns in NY when Hillary was appointed, that seat went to a Democrat. The same would happen in Mass. This entire talking point has been way overblown.

[Mass]

37. Amusing. We just had two elections with a full slate of Dems (and true Dems, not Pryor)

We even reelected John Tierney (twice after his wife got in trouble with the law).

So, if people from red states could stop insulting us, it would be so great. Work on fielding and electing Democrats, if you can.

Jan 2010 was a bad election when everybody from the candidate to the White House were caught asleep at the bar. Nobody thought Brown could win, he did. We know that now. So, should Obama choose Kerry, we are ready for Brown or anybody else.

[AldoLeopold]

38. I'm not insulting you

I'm sorry you took it as such, though I suppose I would take it as so if I were from Mass. Arkansas is a red state now. Its not going away. If you lived here and knew these people, you'd know it was always destined to be so and the President's election and re-election only galvanized that effect. Perhaps if I lived in your state, I might know that Kerry's seat was safe?

Something else, though, which you omitted from your success list - he ran for President in November and he was recently governor of your state.

I can't quite place his name - what was it? Roberts? No. Rotisserie? No, that's not it either. Mitch something or another. Help me out here.