The Lost Frontier?
Without a doubt, it seems hard to believe that even Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) could possibly be re-elected a mere 8 days after being convicted of a felony. Sure, in the most recent round of pre-conviction polling, Stevens trailed Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich (D) by just one or two points. But let's remember that the first set of polls taken immediately following Stevens' indictment showed him losing by 20 points or so. A similar dip is almost certain to occur again... but with only 7 days to campaign, he'll have almost no time to claw his way back from electoral oblivion.
Clearly, any betting man or woman would be well-advised to place a lot of money on Begich right now. But if GOPers have any hope to retain this seat, here are some possible hail-mary strategies for Stevens:
1.) Question the process, appeal the verdict, and claim a credible, realistic level of victimhood. The key is that he can't go overboard with any of these claims. But as we all know, the judge had to reprimand the prosecution several times during the course of this trial. Regardless of whether or not such an appeal would actually work, there might be sufficient irregularities in the conduct of the trial to give Stevens and his supporters some cover if they wish to claim the process is not yet complete, as they appeal the verdict.
2.) Show contrition for "mistakes that were made" and promise to resign if the appeal fails and/or if actual jail time is involved. While it's one thing to question the overall fairness of the trial, completely denouncing the entire case might smack of arrogance and could seem somewhat out-of-touch. Voters might (just might) be willing to give Stevens the benefit of the doubt a bit longer, if he can make a respectful case why the verdict was erroneous.... but he has to show that he'll be willing to step down gracefully at some point in the future and not drag things out indefinitely.
3.) As Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) has already done in one TV ad, campaign on the theme of not giving Barack Obama a "blank check" by electing a filibuster-proof majority of 60 Dem senators.
4.) An even more radical approach might involve a combination of (2) and (3). Stevens could ask Alaskans for their votes, on the grounds of denying Democrats another Senate seat, while pledging to resign shortly after the election (regardless of any appeal). Gov. Palin might then have the option to pre-name a successor or a list of possible successors before Election Day. This would be somewhat similar to the FL-16 race in 2006, when voters were told to cast their ballots for "Mark Foley" because they'd really be electing "Joe Negron." And "Mark Foley" only lost by 2% in an otherwise terrible year.
To be sure, all of these options are long-shots, and Democrats are almost certainly one seat closer to reaching 60 seats on November 4th. The likelihood is that Alaska voters are fed up and will simply refuse to cast a ballot for a convicted felon, regardless of any other political or judicial considerations. But if Stevens and/or the GOP want to avoid completely punting on a race they can't afford to lose, they may attempt to "campaign" using methods similar to those described above.
In the meantime, this could also cause headaches for other GOP candidates if they have any association with Stevens. OR House Speaker Jeff Merkley's (D) camp has already put out a release claiming that Sen. Gordon Smith (R) still has Stevens-related money that he should give up, and you can bet other camps will follow suit.
(QUINN MCCORD)
If he's re-elected then he gets expelled. Big difference.
If he's re-elected then he gets expelled. Big difference.
I don't think the governor has the power to name the successor in Alaska. I believe the law was changed after Murkowski named his daughter to the Senate.