The speculation is starting to sound like reality. President-elect Barack Obama is poised to nominate Sen. Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, sometime after Thanksgiving. CBS 2 has learned exclusively some of the names that are on the short list to replace her in the Senate.
Just 17 days ago, Clinton told CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer unequivocally that she would not join Obama’s administration if he won the election.
“I’m not interested in serving in the administration,” she said Election Day morning. “I want to roll up my sleeves and be a good partner in the Senate for the agenda that I hope will be successful in the next two years.”
But power is seductive and Clinton obviously did the math. Junior Senator from New York has a lot less clout than Secretary of State, and although the Obama people are guarded, it’s clear they want her.
“She’s obviously a talented public official and someone who would enhance any team,” said David Axelrod, an Obama senior advisor.
With Clinton appearing to have one foot out the door, speculation is rampant about who Gov. David Paterson will choose to succeed her. Sources tell CBS 2 he’s intent on doing what’s politically expedient for himself, picking someone who will enhance his chances of reelection.
On the front-runners list are:
Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, who gives Paterson Long Island support
Brooklyn Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez, a “two-fer” as a woman and a Latina
Hudson Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand
Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the favorite in a recent Marist poll
And the dark horse, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a sentimental choice who spoke only two days ago at the renaming of the Triborough Bridge for his father.
Paterson, of course, won’t have to pick until after Clinton officially resigns her seat.
Whoever replaces her will only serve a short time before having to face voters twice in a special election in 2010 to fill her unexpired term, and again in 2012 for a new term.
(LINK to WCBSTV)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
11 Responses
Patterson will give it to Cuomo because of the Democrats considering running against him Cuomo has the best chance in a primary.
Patterson needs to save his $ for the general election, which at this point appears will be against Rudy.
I, personally, would love to see Andrew Cuomo replace Senator Clinton and before all the Hillary bashers start with their nastiness, I will be sorry to see her go as our Senator from New York!
to number #2 u obviously are not a ben tora because when one looks at her immorality(defending her husbands actions Qualifies)then 1 ought not be so bent on finding her “good Points” there is no mitzva in the tora to find good in goyim and certainly not with scandal riddled goyim
paterson is gonna take it for himself
I agree with #1..I didn’t like her for many reasons…but the fact is the kehila at-large has much to be makir tov to her.
Well it is true that I am sorry to see my friend and confidant Hillary go onto bigger and better opportunities.
#4 – i hope that you are right. Paterson should just take it for himself. Considering that he’s black, he’d be the only black senator, now that Obama is gone, and he is blind, isn’t that a historic move?
OK, but Cuomo will get it. Anyone for RFK?
What about Dov Hikind?
Nydia Velasquez would be a disaster. She has expressed support for Louis Farrakhan. People should write to Gov. Paterson urging him not to appoint Velasquez.
What about slick Willy?
I don’t know NY politics, but about RFK: there’s something fundamentally decent about him but he is really extremely to the left.
And of course gratitude is owed Hillary. When it comes to national elections, we get all up in arms about pork but face it, when it gets closer to home we like officials who take care of us. How else would you explain Ted Kennedy’s long tenure?
#3 – you caught me dead to rights, I am not a ben-torah! But I’d like to think of myself as a bas-torah, and as such, I think the midah of hakaros hatov is extremely important. By the way , I do not recall any occassion when Senator Clinton “defended” her husband’s actions. She simply “stood by her man”. Haven’t we seen, in our community, wives standing by their husbands after they are jailed for white collar crimes, or wives standing by their husbands (for the sake of their family, no doubt) when they are accused of abusing innocent children. Does that mean that they are necessarily immoral too?