NO! No more Kennedy's...PLEASE!

Only if she wins it in a real election.

Who is Vicki Kennedy and why should she fill his seat just because she is a "Kennedy?" Why keep this "tradition" alive? We need new blood in Congress, not the same old blood. Why not leave the seat open for 5 months like Ted fought for five years ago when Romney was Governor of MA and he was afraid that if flip-flopping Kerry was elected president that Romney would appoint a Republican? What politics! Ted wanted things his way five years ago. MA passed the law to have a special election and it should remain that way in honor of Ted since Ted was the one that had it changed that way in the first place.

It is up to Massachusetts how it wants to be represented in the Senate.

For some strange reason, ever since Hillary Clinton's comment that she was qualified to run for office because she was a spouse, this keeps coming up. A spouse who does not perofrm the job, cannot do the job merely because they hear the other spouse talk about it at dinner.

You should be in office by election.

We do not pass office positions down to family members

Wouldn't that be nepotism?

Only if she wants it. I would like to see a Kennedy in that seat.

No, the people of the state should elect somebody to fill it. It's in a document some of you may have seen, called the Constitution, and last time I heard, it still applied even to people named Kennedy. Actually it's probably a pretty safe blue seat, given the nature of Taxachusetts, and if Vicki wants to run, more power to her. For wives to take over the Senate seats of dead husbands has not been unheard of, and so far the experience with it has been mixed (a few have been excellent senators, a few have been, um, not).

With an exception of a two-year period, that seat has belong to the Kennedys since 1953. So MA has no beef about a Kennedy having it. So yes, she should have the seat, but only until an election is held. This is also not the first time, nor last time, a widowed spouse fill a Senate seat.

Being originally from Massachusetts I'm sure they will end up doing much worse, but the only reason her name is being floated is because it ends with Kennedy.

No! I have nothing against the Kennedys, but I'm uncomfortable with legacy politicians. No more Bushes, Kennedys, Bidens, Pauls...American politics has too little turnover, especially in the Congress.

I don't think it should automatically should to a Kennedy. The voters should "speak" to say who they want to represent them in Congress. That IS the process even for an flip-flopper like Mitt Romney. who said what he needed to say (i.e. I'm FOR abortion) to get into office; then flip-flopped last year during the presidential campaigns to gain favor with the far right and pulled a self-serving Arlen Specter move, by saying he was suddenly against abortion. Typical republican!

From what I gather she's not interested in that idea and I support her stance. Being a Senator is serious business and such a post should be bestowed on who has the knack for legislation as well as advocating for the constituents they represent. So we should not force nepotism in place of true interests and doing what's best for the people of Massachusetts.

Time to implement term limits on both houses. I'm sick of the elite being paid big bucks just to maintain status quo.

Didn't we just recently discuss how this was STUPID with another criminally unqualified Kennedy?

Of course the answer to the poll question is NO. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO x 10

And I think THREE Kennedy related poll questions in a row is enough, isn't it??

Grumpy Gordy,
"No, the people of the state should elect somebody to fill it. It's in a document some of you may have seen, called the Constitution, ..."
Actually in the time of the founders the U.S. Congress was chosen by the state House and Senate and those people were chosen by the people of the state, but in recent history it was changed so that the people elect the members of the U.S. House and Senate.
chris,
You forgot Dodd who got his position from his father.
MTL,
You forgot Kerry in 2004 when he made different campaign promises to different states when he was running and this is why I did not vote for that flip-flopper, but I guess people from MA like that sort of thing since they had Governor Romney and continue to have Senator Kerry. Both parties do it you Lemonade Licking Liberal. Open your eyes for once.

No, unless she chooses to run and the voters of Massachusetts pick her to be their senator. Ms. Kennedy should not get the job just because of her name, but she shouldn't be denied the chance to campaign for the office if she wants. It's really up to the voters.

I would vote for term limits for members of both houses. Can we ask for salary caps too? I think we (of our own reps) should vote on their raises annually and not allow them to vote on their own raises.

Anonymous @ 2:15 PM,
I agree, but they should only get raises when they are revoted into Congress every two years. If the President is limited to 8 years, why not Congress?

With the level of corruption and incompetence among the neocons (as well as the Speaker of the House), the Dems cannot afford to have an amateur filling Kennedy's seat. There are too many pending bills that are critical to America's ability to compete in the global marketplace.

As for term limits in the House and the Snenate, humm Oren Hatch, Kit Bond, Sam Brownback, Lindsay Graham, Chuck Grassley ... If you set term limits all of these guys and more are gone too. Be careful what you wish for.

Not only do we need to set term limits, we also need radical campaign finance reform. Without lobbyists and their big corporate paychecks, We the People may get what we need.

Better topic:
People from Massachusetts who would make better Senators than Vicki:
Bill Buckner, Randy Moss, Sam Adams, That M.I.T. kid in "21", Charles Stuart, or the girls from the Salem witch trials.

MildlyMisanthropic,
Set term limits and throw all the bums out (Democrats and Republicans alike). We need a clean slate.

With the level of corruption and incompetence among ALL OF CONGRESS AND ALL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP...

There, I fixed that for ya. (And anyone who disagrees is just a partisan, biased apologist for political criminals.)