Should the Dems Lose the Senate Because of This?

[Metroid]

I think there should be temporary replacement and a new emergency vote in the next few months to let the voters be heard once again.

as for replacing a dem with a dem or rep with a rep is kinda silly IMO because were talking about people here, with personality not some strict party hard line person that fits the mold on paper, so while a gov may be forced to replace him via laws, who's to say there won't be a big unliked douche appointed just to protect a seat. it's ludicris.

I dont care for his music either but I wouldnt call him a douche.

[Twisted Sister]

Sounds like he's going to be ok, so there will be no issue.

[Redskins Win]

I think there should be temporary replacement and a new emergency vote in the next few months to let the voters be heard once again.

as for replacing a dem with a dem or rep with a rep is kinda silly IMO because were talking about people here, with personality not some strict party hard line person that fits the mold on paper, so while a gov may be forced to replace him via laws, who's to say there won't be a big unliked douche appointed just to protect a seat. it's ludicris.

I dont care for his music either but I wouldnt call him a douche.

I'd vote for that guys Fro

BTW I knew you'd come strong with the ludicris pics

[joelamosobadiah]

I agree with most of the people in here saying that he should be required to put in a Democrat, BUT, the other side to the whole thing (not saying that this changes my mind) is that the governor was elected too.

Just kinda makes you think. I mean, they wanted him there as well.

[Metroid]

I think there should be temporary replacement and a new emergency vote in the next few months to let the voters be heard once again.

as for replacing a dem with a dem or rep with a rep is kinda silly IMO because were talking about people here, with personality not some strict party hard line person that fits the mold on paper, so while a gov may be forced to replace him via laws, who's to say there won't be a big unliked douche appointed just to protect a seat. it's ludicris.

I dont care for his music either but I wouldnt call him a douche.

I'd vote for that guys Fro

BTW I knew you'd come strong with the ludicris pics

I cant help myself. I think thats like the fourth time I've pulled that one. The word ludacris doesnt come up very often in everyday conversation.

[Matthias]

I agree with most of the people in here saying that he should be required to put in a Democrat, BUT, the other side to the whole thing (not saying that this changes my mind) is that the governor was elected too.

Just kinda makes you think. I mean, they wanted him there as well.

Yah, but even if you boil elections down to just political parties and ignore the personalities involved, there are different issues that you're concerned about for state governor and US Senator. And you're not electing your governor to pick your Senator.

[roninmedia]

In November 1969, Sen. Karl Mundt, R-S.D., was stricken by a severe stroke but he served out the remainder of his term — staying in office through January 1973. Mundt was stripped of his committee assignments but he remained in office, though "his responsibilities were shouldered by members of his staff," according to the Mundt Archives at Dakota State University.

More recently, in 1988, surgery for a brain aneurism kept Delaware Sen. Joe Biden away from the Senate for seven months; a heart attack kept Sen. David Pryor, D-Ark., away from the Senate for five months.

And, even in poor health they can use their political will.

In the spring of 1964, Sen. Clair Engle, D-Calif., was partially paralyzed from surgery to remove a brain tumor but he refused to resign.

Dramatically, in June of that year — one month before his death — Engle was wheeled onto the floor of the Senate to break the filibuster of the Civil Rights Act. Unable to speak, he motioned towards his eye, signifying an "Aye" vote. It counted.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2727431


We gonna wait and see for his recovery.

[Karoz]

To me, it seems as if most people outside of South Dakota, who were complaining about this, were concerned merely with the control of the senate.

I am a Republican, so I personally didn't have a problem with this particular issue. However, if it had have been a republican seat at risk, then perhaps my opinion would be different. My observations have lead me to conclude that this is the case for most people who are complaining about this issue. The majority of those that are upset, are Democrats who are afraid of losing that seat.

So, considering that this boils down to being a partisan complaint, and not a complaint that is looking out for the voters in South Dakota, then I wouldn't give it much scrutiny.

Besides, if we were to change this law, then it would open up the floodgate for other political based laws to be changed more easily.

[Madison]

Perfect example of why our government is all screwed up.

Who cares what political party someone is from? Either they can do the job, or they can't. Simple as that. Political party is irrelevant to that, and shouldn't be such a big deal. However, since it is such a big deal, it definitely shows that we are not electing people to do the best job they can for us, we're too worried about which political party they belong to.

[Matthias]

To me, it seems as if most people outside of Virginia, who were complaining about this, were concerned merely with the control of the senate.

I am a Republican, so I personally didn't have a problem with this particular issue. However, if it had have been a republican seat at risk, then perhaps my opinion would be different. My observations have lead me to conclude that this is the case for most people who are complaining about this issue. The majority of those that are upset, are Democrats who are afraid of losing that seat.

So, considering that this boils down to being a partisan complaint, and not a complaint that is looking out for the voters in Virginia, then I wouldn't give it much scrutiny.

Besides, if we were to change this law, then it would open up the floodgate for other political based laws to be changed more easily.

Ummm..... dude? He's a Senator from South Dakota. Not sure where you pulled Virginia from.

And this is a huge deal. This is whole control of the U.S. Senate. Which the country in an overwhelming fashion said they wanted in the hands of the Democrats this past November. You throw off people, "are merely concerned about control of the Senate" as if this was choosing your town's dogcatcher or something. I stayed up until 3.30am Election night watching the returns and the updates. And then followed the twists and turns of the remaining elections as they resolved themselves. Of course people are concerned about it. And it's only a concern for the voters of South Dakota. The U.S. Senate effects me. It effects you. It effects all the voters who swept the Republicans out this past November. It effects everybody.

But in this discussion specifically, I don't see anyone (except maybe you) making their decision on explicit political grounds. Time to turn off Limbaugh and turn on NPR.