Sen. Ted Stevens, recently convicted on seven felony counts, has lost his re-election bid today — his 85th birthday.
WASHINGTON - Sen. Ted Stevens, the longest serving Republican in Senate history, narrowly lost his re-election bid Tuesday, marking the downfall of a pillar of the U.S. Senate and Alaska icon who apparently couldn’t survive his conviction on federal corruption charges.
Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, a Democrat, will replace Stevens.
Begich’s victory brings Democrats within two votes of having a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority. If Al Franken beats Sen. Norm Coleman in Minnesota and Jim Martin beats Sen. Saxby Chambliss in Georgia, Democrats will have their 60-vote majority.
Stevens’ loss to Begich also prevents Gov. Sarah Palin from effectively appointing herself to replace the 40-year veteran senator.
Thus, in one swell foop, the country dodges several bullets.
on Nov 19th, 2008 at 1:34 am
Stevens is finally gone and Palin will have to stay in Alaska and not join McCain in Washington. Now I know things are in order.
on Nov 19th, 2008 at 6:51 am
Phew. Doesn’t it seem funny to say “phew” about the candidacy of a felonious senator? It was yet another vote count that was much, much tighter than it should have been. I suppose The People must like confirmation now and then that politicians are crooks.
on Nov 19th, 2008 at 11:23 am
LT, plenty of reform, re-regulation and reordering of priorities are still necessary. But things are definitely looking up.
Jeff, some probably do find satisfaction that way. However, I think it was mostly a case of Stevens having done so many favors and having brought home so much bacon over four decades that many Alaskans couldn’t imagine voting against him. After so long, it gets to be a case of, “He might be an SOB, but he’s our SOB.”
on Nov 20th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I agree with Jeff. I’m relieved about the presidential race and the Alaska race. But the fact that those races were close — what does this say about American voters? 46% of the voters wanted to continue GW Bush’s disastrous policies by keeping the Republicans in the White House. And a corrupt good old boy (with the accent on “old”) and convicted felon just barely lost his re-election bid. What gives?
on Nov 20th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Tom, it is a matter to be seriously concerned about. So is the extent to which the race was not about voting Democratic or progressive because of good candidates and stands on the issues, but about against Bush and neocon Republicanism. Obviously, more mind-changing, playing-field-changing work must be done.
on Nov 21st, 2008 at 9:03 am
There is another option that I prefer, SW. Rarely are elections about the actual candidates, but about what those candidates symbolize when the electorate projects their own wishes onto them. (This is something that people like Sara the Palin and Sam the Plumber forget: they actually think it’s about them and believe it’s their ticket to personal celebrity, but they’re just the ephemeral projection screens.
So, I don’t really think that this election was about Obama & McCain exactly, but there were ideas involved this time. For years the issue seems to have been Republican fear-mongering or not as the issue, but this time I think it was more than rejecting Bush’s brand of non-governance for self-advancement; this time I think many people were energized and actually voting for progressive ideas.
on Nov 21st, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Jeff, I hope you’re right. I was somewhat disappointed in Obama’s campaign because of how lightly he went on advancing Democratic/progressive ideas and approach, conctradicting neocons and their ideology head on. My perception could’ve been skewed somewhat because I’m so acutely aware of how thoroughly the GOP/neocon right has gotten and done virtually everything wrong for years.