I believe the Alaska Congressional Delegation truly wants Stevens to get reelected in hopes that the conviction would be overturned upon appeal (newsflash: any judge would be loathe to overturn such a decisive jury). However, the rest of the Alaska Republicans seem to be hoping to get Sen. Stevens elected for what they are calling their "Plan 'B'." Per KTUU:
Leaders of Alaska's Republican party, who believe Stevens is innocent, are asking voters to consider what might be called "Plan B" -- vote for Stevens next week, even if he later decides to resign.
From a political strategy standpoint, a Stevens victory next week keeps the door open for the state GOP in the future
"If you don't vote for Ted Stevens now, you don't have an option in the future to have a conservative candidate," McHugh Pierre of the Alaska Republican Party said "You're stuck. You're stuck with a liberal who does not represent your views and beliefs."
If Stevens wins re-election, he can still start his new term in the senate. If he later decides to resign, then under state law, a special election would be called to replace him.
First off, does anyone who has ever had any dealings with Ted Stevens believe for a second that he will resign? I believe that if Alaska suffers the further embarassment of a Stevens election victory (God forbid), he'll make the Senate expell him (which they will) and he'll leave a trail of his fingernails digging into the capitol floor all the way from his office to the front door.
However, let's say that Stevens does win (God forbid) and does decide to resign (dream on), who are these Alaska Republicans planning to run in a special election?
Hmmmm...let's think about that...
McHugh Pierre is the person who has kicked this off. McHugh Pierre is on leave from the State Department of Veterans Affairs. He is the "acting" spokesperson for the Alaska Republican Party because Sarah Palin doesn't like Randy Reudrich, the Party Chair.
So, McHugh Pierre is answerable to...Sarah Palin.
Also, John McCain came out with a strong statement asking Senator Stevens to resign:
"It is clear that Senator Stevens has broken his trust with the people and that he should now step down," McCain said. "I hope that my colleagues in the Senate will be spurred by these events to redouble their efforts to end this kind of corruption once and for all."
But what about Palin?
Palin's first statement was rather strange, actually:
"This is a sad day for Alaska and for Sen. Stevens and his family. The verdict shines a light on the corrupting influence of the big oil service company that was allowed to control too much of our state. ... As governor of the state of Alaska, I will carefully monitor this situation and take any appropriate action as needed. In the meantime, I ask the people of Alaska to join me in respecting the workings of our judicial system. I'm confident Sen. Stevens will do what's right for the people of Alaska."
That's downright wishy-washy if you ask me, as she gives no indication what she thinks is "right" for the people of Alaska.
Her second statement came out after John McCain's and was much stronger in suggesting Ted Stevens should step down:
"After being found guilty on seven felony counts, I had hoped Senator Stevens would take the opportunity to do the statesman-like thing and erase the cloud that is covering his Senate seat," Palin said in a statement. "He has not done so. Alaskans are grateful for his decades of public service but the time has come for him to step aside."
It's a move away from her first statement hours after Monday's verdict, when Palin released a statement calling Stevens' conviction "a sad day" for Alaska but stopped short of demanding that he step down.
Yes, she's demanding that he step down but not immediately...only if he wins the election. That would then require a special election.
Which leads into the the most interesting statement that came out in an interview with CNBC:
"But -- and now he needs to do the right thing, and the right thing is, as he's proclaiming his innocence and proclaiming, too, that he will go through the appellate process, OK, then he needs to step aside and allow our state to elect someone who will be supportive of those ideals of America: the free enterprise, the missions that we're on, to win the war...
This interview also encourages Stevens to step down...but more subtly indicates after the election. We know this by the type of person she describes for Alaskans to put in office, indicated by the portions I have bolded and underlined.
First the terms "free enterprise" and "the missions that we're on" are clearly directed at a Republican. Most especially, however, is the phrase "win the war." No Democrat nor anyone who really understands what's going on in Iraq or Afghanistan, including any of our generals, is using the phrase "win the war." So, the election she wants is a "special election." Which Republican did she have in mind to run in this "special election"?
Here's a quote from one of her stump speeches given in Kansas City:
"I want a president who knows how to win the war and wants to win the war."
From a Fox News interview on Oct. 3rd:
I understand what the challenges are. I know what our biggest threat is in America. I know how important it is to win the war.
From her debate with Sen. Joe Biden:
...you're going to have a choice in just a few weeks here on either supporting a ticket that wants to create jobs and bolster our economy and win the war...
So...considering who is pushing this "Plan B" (Palin supporters) and analyzing the remarks Sarah Palin has made, whose "Plan B" is this really, Ted Stevens's or Sarah Palin's?