Reid says ‘Hell, no’ to VP pick from state with GOP governor

Posted by | May 23, 2016 12:59 | Filed under: Politics

Republish
Reprint


That’s because the Republican governor would get to pick the senator who replaces the Democrat.

“If we have a Republican governor in any of those states, the answer is not only no, but hell no. I would do whatever I can and I think most of my Democratic colleagues here would say the same thing,” Reid told MSNBC, asked about the possibility of Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) or Sherrod Brown (Ohio) as being named Clinton’s No. 2.

Reid added that he would “yell and scream to stop that.”

Democrats are fighting to regain control of the Senate majority in elections. They’ll need a net gain of four seats to win back the chamber if they retain the White House and five seats to win it back outright.

Both Warren and Brown, as well as as Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), are considered potential VP picks for Clinton and hail states with Republican governors. If they were picked and Clinton won the White House, they would need to step down.

That could pave the way for a GOP governor to temporarily appoint a Republican to fill the Senate seat, giving Democrats an extra hurdle to win back the majority.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

9 responses to Reid says ‘Hell, no’ to VP pick from state with GOP governor

  1. Budda May 23rd, 2016 at 13:07

    Good point! The last thing we need is another RW idiot in the Senate.

    • mistlesuede May 23rd, 2016 at 13:34

      It’s a sticky wicket. There are some good VP choices there. I like Warren and Brown especially.

      • anothertoothpick May 23rd, 2016 at 13:47

        The VP is mostly a ceremonial post. (except for Chenney)

        I would prefer to see Warren as the senate majority leader.

        She would be more effective.

        • mistlesuede May 23rd, 2016 at 14:08

          Warren seems so humble to me, I don’t think she would take the VP slot anyway. Brown could help insure we keep Ohio which is of the utmost importance, but it would be terrible to lose that seat in the Senate.

  2. robert May 23rd, 2016 at 13:19

    I think the people who live in those states have the final word when it comes to who sits in the Senate. Congrats to Reid for not mentioning this

  3. mistlesuede May 23rd, 2016 at 13:35

    She could pick Sanders and solve that problem. :)

  4. CandideThirtythree May 23rd, 2016 at 14:29

    He is right about that and we have already seen governors try to put off special elections for replacements just so they could send one of their own in as a replacement. Or worse, there are a few states that say the seat must remain open until the next election for that seat. It would really suck if one of them had just been reelected!

  5. DogsRgoodpeople May 23rd, 2016 at 14:44

    reid is right in more ways than one. we need the senate and wh to get a damn thing done. the obstructionists aren’t going to disappear after the election.

  6. jybarz May 23rd, 2016 at 15:26

    The Grandmaster of Senate Politics Chess declares “Stalemate” on that idea, guys!

Leave a Reply