Posted on 09/19/2014 9:50:44 AM PDT by C19fan
Alex Salmond has left the Scottish Nationalists in turmoil after announcing he is to resign as First Minister and SNP leader only hours their decisive defeat in the independence referendum. Mr Salmond said his party, the Edinburgh parliament and Scotland would “benefit from new leadership” after voters rejected by a margin of 55 per cent to 45 per cent his plan to leave the UK.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
If Texas does this, I’ll move there.
Please delete as missed posting earlier
All those holding my markers, meet me in Yankee Stadium at Midnight, June Teenth.
Just love the way many ‘progressives’ go able-sugar over talk of Scotland (or Texas) seceding in a peaceful way, but go into an absolute swoon whenever a group of their beloved radical muslim “freedom fighters” (ie: ‘Palstinians’) try to wipe out their neighbors, rip off a chunk of a neighboring country or swallow one up whole.
Hope this does not affect the Ryder Cup.
What I like about countries like the UK and Canada is that their "party leaders" actually take the hint and step down after their party has their butts handed to them in a national election.
Good luck trying to get party leaders in the U.S. to read the writing on the wall. I really don't think any of them have done so since Bob Dole (and Eric Cantor running home to Virgina to sulk AFTER he was defeated for re-nomination doesn't count). Meanwhile the RATs still cling to Pelosi and the GOP still clings to Reince Prebius, etc.
Pelosi was a far more effective Speaker for libs than Bohner was for anyone.
She picked up seats in 2006 and 2008 allowing Obama and her to pass Obamacare as well as other liberal objectives.
She never had the problems as Speaker as Bohner does, in most cases she got the votes and didn't hold votes till she had them. She ruled with an iron fist and didn't tolerate funny business from her own liberal caucus .
Yes, she was a more effective Speaker and better at enacting her party’s agenda than Boeher, but she’s been out of power since 2011 and has virtually zero chance of ever becoming Speaker again. She’s also a very polarizing figure and toxic to many “moderate” Democrats running in hotly contested seats. In spite of that, the RAT continue to keep her on as party leader and the face of the House Democrats. Stupid is as stupid does.
A positive feature of the parliamentary system.
Don’t forget Dick Gephardt, he stepped down as Minority Leader in 2003 after he lost seats in 2002 (as did Newt after 1998). He was the first rat House leader to fail to win a majority since Tennessee’s Finis J. Garrett in the 1920’s!!! Hahahahahahaha.
What do you know about Finis? I only heard of him when I went to look up who the last loser rat who never won a majority was.
Despite his high leadership position, he’s obscure to me and largely unknown even in Tennessee. I know he was fairly young when first elected to Congress, just 29 in 1904, defeating the Democrat incumbent, Rice Pierce, in the primary.
He hailed from the old 9th district (now the 8th), in the heavily Democrat area in NW TN (which went from 1874-2010 without electing a Republican, indeed the last rural stronghold to fall, formerly run by ex-Gov. Ned McWherter). Ended up serving 24 years without much of a challenge, and was unopposed by his last terms.
I’d be hard-pressed to tell you his ideological leanings, I couldn’t ascertain them with a cursory glance, appeared to be in that nebulous “moderate” range. He vaulted into the position of House Democrat Leader on the death of Claude Kitchin in 1923 (who died before they organized the 68th Congress), curiously jumping ahead of the Minority Whip, William Oldfield of AR. The Dems made substantial gains with the 1922 elections, taking back seats from the Republicans highest mark in 1920. That obviously led Garrett to believe he’d reach the Speakership within a few cycles.
In 1928, he made the ill-advised decision to challenge Sen. Kenneth McKellar in the primary (McKellar had previously been his seatmate from the adjacent Memphis-based 10th, but arrived 7 years after Garrett and after just 5 years in the House got the Senate seat). McKellar was more of a Wilsonian Progressive in those days (not becoming a Conservative until the last decade or so of his career). It’s possible Garrett might have run to his right (Garrett once made a speech about the “mad rush” to centralize government), but it didn’t much matter. With Boss Crump in full control of the TN Democrat Machine (and hence Tennessee), his candidate McKellar stomped Garrett by a 2-to-1 margin.
That might’ve been the end of Garrett’s career, but he was apparently well-regarded enough by outgoing President Coolidge in 1929 that he appointed him to the U.S. Court of Customs & Patent Appeals, where he would serve (eventually as chief judge) until just before his death 27 years later.
Thanks. It’s always interesting to stumble upon a forgotten figure.
“The Dems made substantial gains with the 1922 elections, taking back seats from the Republicans highest mark in 1920.”
And then some, after 1918 it was a healthy majority of 240 or so in the House. Horrible election, ‘22, it was like a 6th year midterm.
It was actually a whopping 13 months until after the 1922 elections before the 68th Congress convened (almost to the start of the next election cycle). Garrett believed that with such a slim margin for the GOP he could pry off some disgruntled Progressive Republicans to vote for him for Speaker. He almost did.
It took 9 ballots over 5 days to finally get Frederick Gillett the number he needed (215 votes in this case, as there must’ve been a handful of vacancies) in cutting a deal with the Progressives (with Henry Cooper of WI holding 17 votes and Chicago’s Martin Madden (Oscar DePriest’s predecessor, and the last White person to win IL-1) holding 6 at one point — though he declared he was not a candidate and voted for Gillett on all ballots).
Gillett started off with a 3-vote plurality over Garrett (198 to 195) in the first ballot. The 2nd ballot saw both men lose votes (195 for Gillett to 192 for Garrett). It became even more nerve-wracking with the 3rd ballot as Garrett took a 1-vote lead (196-195). On the 4th, Gillett got a 1-vote lead (197-196). The 5th was a tie vote (197 each). Mind you all the while this is going on, 25 members are either voting for the 2 other Republicans or present (Gillett, Garrett, Cooper & WI Socialist Victor Berger).
Garrett continued to have a lead in the 6th, 7th & 8th ballots (either by 2 votes or 1). The 9th ballot was the final breakthrough, with Garrett losing a vote, but Gillett getting Cooper’s and some of Madden’s supporters (adding 18 votes to his total).
Apparently, to date, this was the last Speaker’s contest that required more than one ballot. You can see how Garrett was very hopeful he could get the office before long (if not in 1925, 1927 at the latest - turned out he’d have only needed to hold on for 2 more terms until 1931, and then he, instead of Cactus Jack Garner, might’ve ended up as Speaker and then Roosevelt’s running mate).
Remarkable for a virtually unknown figure today how close he was to the highest offices. A NY Times headline for 1929 pointed out Garrett was the most sorely missed person for that incoming Congress as he assumed his judicial duties.
http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=56312
Wacky.
Crazy how Congress used to convene so long after the election, but the next December, yikes.
That really screwed us in 1931, by the time Congress convened the democrats had won a majority through special elections.
Our campaigns was missed. In it’s absence I had little more than wikipedia to go bye.
Speaking of which I was tracing back the ancestry of the current House districts in Illinois, I found the last Republican before MP Flanagan in 1994 to win what’s now the 5th district was one Peter Granata, in 1930 of all years.
That was the ONLY House seat Republicans gained that year, he beat incumbant rat Stanley Kunz who was first elected in 1920, the rat controlled House eventually overturned his election and sat Kunz (it burns me the GOP has not done this once since taking over the House, when was the last time it was done, for that Indiana rat in 1985?).
He ran for reelection against a new rat in ‘32 and was CRUSHED by over 40 points. Odd. Before that the GOP last won that seat in 1904 and 1906. I don’t know it’s boundaries back then but today is has some of the least hostile to the GOP areas of the city. I guess ethnic Whites in Chi hated Republicans.
And what’s now the third district (home of Mount Greenwood , another non-hostile to the GOP area of Chi), I’m sure it correlates poorly as that seat is largely suburban now, no Republican elected since 1904. Charles Warton, defeated in 1906, he later robbed a train and went to federal prison!
The Granata-Kunz race was pretty odious and it was ascertained that Granata was the beneficiary of election fraud. Granata was linked to Capone and was part of a mafia political machine on the west side for decades. Capone apparently gave the order that Granata was to win that election, and that was that. One source said the election results were so skewed to obviously fraudulent proportions that in 10 wards in the district, Granata got 3,700 votes (more than 1/5th of his entire vote) while Kunz got all of 53 votes in the same.
They might’ve been able to pull that stunt while Big Bill Thompson was still Mayor (which he was in 1930), but with Thompson’s loss to Cermak, the power shifted. Granata, as you pointed out, lost badly in the 1932 race (more in keeping with the GOP performance in the district - 28%), but it appears his efforts were put into running in that same election to the state legislature, which he won.
I was reading bits of a book about Dan Rostenkowski and it mentioned he served with Granata in the legislature, the latter giving him a warm welcome. It sounds like Granata himself deserves a book on his long tenure of protecting the mob’s interests (of course, he wasn’t the only one). Not exactly someone to be revered as a Republican. I’m guessing they were all part of the same extended machine that began with Capone (if not earlier) on to what was left of Cicero’s machine into the past decade.
Checking out Charles Wharton, he apparently won in 1904 solely because a Socialist candidate took 20% of the vote, which likely came out of the Democrat. That’s Lipinski’s district now, although as with all districts in IL, highly augmented.
I’m not sure if Wharton participated in the actual train robbery (he was 53, not exactly a prime age for engaging in such a physical activity), but the charge was conspiracy, so likely he was engaged in aiding the robbers utilizing his legal capacity and/or connections.
Somehow, though, it doesn’t seem all that surprising a member of Congress (or ex-) would be engaged in robbery. :-P
BTW, I have Wharton’s autograph.
That's awesome!
Re Granata: Capone eh? Make sense, Kutz won 70% in the much better Republican year of 1928, I figured there must have been a scandal or something (and according to that link Kutz was accused of bribery). I forgot there actually was electoral fraud by *both* parties in Chi back then. Embarrassing that the last time Republicans were in power here they were owned by Capone. We were "Gotham City". Since Kutz was a crook too I would have opposed overturning the election though. I wonder what he did to piss off Al so bad.
Accusing a Chicago pol of bribery (or virtually any person on the gov’t payroll, including cops) would be like accusing them of breathing, especially in that era. It wouldn’t have had THAT much of an impact. I don’t know what Kunz did that had Capone and his people go all out to take him down. In another year, they might’ve gotten away with it, but in a national climate such as 1930, it was such an audacious theft that even a blind person could see something was wrong.
I remember 20 years ago when I was starting to research the individual Congressional districts (going backwards), and I remember when I first saw that Granata-Kunz contest and it was definitely a WTF ?! moment. I wonder if there is any book or in-depth piece on this contest (beyond that short blurb in the Rosty book I linked). As I said, Granata seems like he himself is deserving of a book, especially someone who spent a whopping 40 years in the IL legislature from that period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.