PPP poll: Franken still popular, voters say he shouldn't have resigned

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

He should stay. I'm a firm believer of elected officials standing for their entire terms and not bending to public pressure to resign over something that comes out after the fact; an election is a mandate. Obviously the people of Minnesota will continue to re-elect him for as long as they want (and they seem to want him), but an open seat presents unique possibilities - even in a mid-term.

If the broader trends that showed up in 2016 in MN - and the ones we've been discussing for years wrt the Upper Midwest in general - even somewhat play out or intensify next year, Minnesota could fall in an open race and Democrats would have nobody to blame but themselves.

I'm sorry, but the ideological fate and political trajectory of the country is a hell of a lot more important than an instance or two of groping or whatever. People need to get it together.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

It's OK for Democrats. He will run again and win again in 2020. The left will pretend to care 20 years after the fact.

Last time I checked he's still resigning on January 2nd regardless of what some random poll says. But nice try.

Doesn't stop him from running against Smith or whoever holds the seat in 2020.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

If Dems lost in Minnesota of all places, they'd have a lot to more to worry about than that seat. Like the fact that the GOP probably now has a supermajority in the Senate and Dems got few if any House gains.

Well, there are examples of states bucking their usual trends all over the place during midterms (some very good examples in 2006). A very good national climate does not guarantee a very good climate in every state. My home state's a pretty good example of that; relative to the previous midterm, it has went in the opposite direction of the national climate in the past three midterms.

Minnesota is a state where we saw the bottom fall out with a lot of their traditional Democratic coalition in 2016. Couple that with the ouster of a popular Democrat being replaced mid-term by a (very relative) nobody and then throw into the mix somebody like Pawlenty (who isn't a Tea Party darling and has enough moderate street-cred and/or a track record of winning in MN) and you could be in some serious trouble even if the national climate is spectacular.

This post made me feel physically ill. If people tolerate evil people being in office, then the future of the country will be shaped by evil people, and the scope of the damage will be immense even if they campaign on their support or opposition of some hot button issue you care about. You can't let someone who's obviously morally degenerate have massive amounts of power just because they put out campaign literature supporting one or two things you like.

If? Of course people tolerate evil people being in office. Most politicians are evil.

Then why do you hate Hillary so much? Is she really any more "evil" than any other politician?

Hillary's refusal to accept that she is 100% responsible for her loss is evidence enough that she is evil.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Hillary's refusal to accept that she is 100% responsible for her loss is evidence enough that she is evil.

Yeah, and if a meteor obliterated the entire West Coast a day before the election, she still would've been 100% responsible for her loss, right?

Well, no. But no Meteor attack occurred.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Hillary's refusal to accept that she is 100% responsible for her loss is evidence enough that she is evil.

Yeah, and if a meteor obliterated the entire West Coast a day before the election, she still would've been 100% responsible for her loss, right?

Well, no. But no Meteor attack occurred.

The point was that tons of external events influence elections that often have little to nothing to do with the particular candidates involved.

And if Hillary hadn't run the worst democratic campaign since that of Walter Mondale, she would have won despite said external events.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Franken's decision is his own, but when I vote for someone, I view it as voting for them to serve a full term regardless of anything they may do in Office or may have done beforehand. Their past actions (as known at the time), and the risk of them "acting up" was already factored into my vote or endorsement at the time I voted or endorsed. For that reason, if I was in Office, I would not resign unless I was formally convicted of a crime and sentenced to prison time.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Wow, sorry to have offended so many people on a political forum by explaining how politics actually works!

Offending Atlas is very easy and there's nothing wrong with doing it.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Franken's decision is his own, but when I vote for someone, I view it as voting for them to serve a full term regardless of anything they may do in Office or may have done beforehand. Their past actions (as known at the time), and the risk of them "acting up" was already factored into my vote or endorsement at the time I voted or endorsed. For that reason, if I was in Office, I would not resign unless I was formally convicted of a crime and sentenced to prison time.

And this is exactly how the system is designed to function. A huge part of the problem with American politics these days is that everybody feels entitled to force every representative to do exactly what they want. We don't elect people to bend to our every whim: we elect people to represent us, and pick from the candidates the person we believe is best suited to do so. Elections have consequences.

Franken as a Senator is accountable to the people of Minnesota and them alone: not the country, not Democrats at-large and certainly not angsty upper-class Atlas posters who want to put their high morals on display for everybody. If they as a whole are fine with him representing them, then literally nothing else matters (but if they had soured on him mid-term, even they would have no right to demand his removal before the end of his term).

This is a ludicrous mindset. So a Senator is entitled to serve out their 6 year term regardless of anything they do? It doesn't take a wild imagination to see how this could get extremely problematic.

People have the right to demand whatever they want. That includes regular citizens as well as Senators. Franken chose to heed the demands. Nobody forced him to resign at gunpoint.

Unless they're sent to Prison, or the Senate agrees to expel them, Senators are entitled to remain in office no matter what. Period. And 2/3 of the democratic caucus screaming at him to resign is the modern equivalent of being forced at gunpoint.