U.S. Rep. Gibson considers statewide run
Chris Gibson won't seek 4th congressional term
January 6, 2015
Updated 10:25 a.m.
By Haley Viccaro (Contact)
Gazette Reporter  
Text Size: A | A

Rep. Chris Gibson, R-Kinderhook, who cruised to re-election in November, will not seek a fourth term in 2016, according to a press release from his office....

My prediction is that Representative Chris Gibson will run for the U.S. Senate in 2016.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

U.S. Rep. Gibson considers statewide run
Chris Gibson won't seek 4th congressional term
January 6, 2015
Updated 10:25 a.m.
By Haley Viccaro (Contact)
Gazette Reporter  
Text Size: A | A

Rep. Chris Gibson, R-Kinderhook, who cruised to re-election in November, will not seek a fourth term in 2016, according to a press release from his office....

My prediction is that Representative Chris Gibson will run for the U.S. Senate in 2016.

He runs for re-election and on the day that
he is sworn in, he announces he is going to retire!
Sorry, that's not the kind of person I want representing
me. He obviously knew he was going to retire and only
ran to preserve the REP position, not because he truly
is interested in the people. False pretenses seems to fit here.

Quoted from joebxr

He runs for re-election and on the day that
he is sworn in, he announces he is going to retire!
Sorry, that's not the kind of person I want representing
me. He obviously knew he was going to retire and only
ran to preserve the REP position, not because he truly
is interested in the people. False pretenses seems to fit here.

Your perception of the situation is mistaken.

1st - He has consistently told everyone beginning when he ran for his 1st term in Congress that he believed in term limits and promised that, if elected, he would only serve 3 2 year terms. (He believes Federal reps should serve no more than three 2-year terms.)

2nd - He was just elected to and sworn into office for his 3rd term AND he will be serving the entire 2 year term to which he was elected.

3rd - By announcing that he is not going to seek a 4th term in the House of Representative NOW - rather than a year or so from now - he is allowing others who might be interested in running for this House seat to begin making preparations for a campaign.    Many Congressman wait until it is so late that only a "hand picked successor" is ready to run for the seat.  

4th - He isn't announcing that he is retiring.  He is only 50 or 51 years old.  Like I said - he is either going to run for the U.S. Senate or for Governor of New York.  He would be great in either office.

Chris Gibson has always been and is an honorable man.  By making his announcement now, he is clearly sending the message that he a) believes that Congress should NOT be populated a lifetime career politicians and b) believes that being completely open and honest about his plans/intentions is the best thing for his constituents.

I see him now as a lame duck...2 years to go and he is in no position to
influence change, because he won't be around. It's like having a no-show
job now...gets paid regardless, doesn't have to do anything, can't pressure
colleagues to have a positive impact. Not my kind of representative.
IMHO.

Quoted from joebxr

I see him now as a lame duck...2 years to go and he is in no position to
influence change, because he won't be around. It's like having a no-show
job now...gets paid regardless, doesn't have to do anything, can't pressure
colleagues to have a positive impact. Not my kind of representative.
IMHO.

Personally, I think you have prejudged Mr. Gibson without any REAL knowledge of him and the work that he has done in Congress.  It is well documented that Mr. Gibson is well respected on BOTH sides of the aisle for his work ethic and his ability to work WITH his colleagues.  Your "no show job" comment is completely baseless and contrary to reality.

I think it is refreshing to have a member of Congress who shares my view that our legislative bodies should NOT be populated by career politicians whose greatest claim to fame will be that they flew from their district back to D.C. (at taxpayer expense) just to board Air Force One several minutes later to fly back to their district (at taxpayer expense) just to get a 45 second publicity shot walking off Air Force One.  Mr. Gibson represents what our Founders wanted our Congress to be Citizen Legislators and NOT Fossilized Leeches spending a lifetime building up multiple public pensions while feathering their nests with money from special interest groups.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

Personally, I think you have prejudged Mr. Gibson without any REAL knowledge of him and the work that he has done in Congress.  It is well documented that Mr. Gibson is well respected on BOTH sides of the aisle for his work ethic and his ability to work WITH his colleagues.  Your "no show job" comment is completely baseless and contrary to reality.

I think it is refreshing to have a member of Congress who shares my view that our legislative bodies should NOT be populated by career politicians whose greatest claim to fame will be that they flew from their district back to D.C. (at taxpayer expense) just to board Air Force One several minutes later to fly back to their district (at taxpayer expense) just to get a 45 second publicity shot walking off Air Force One.  Mr. Gibson represents what our Founders wanted our Congress to be Citizen Legislators and NOT Fossilized Leeches spending a lifetime building up multiple public pensions while feathering their nests with money from special interest groups.

You prejudge me that I have not done my homework, and I have.
I stand by my "lame duck" statement and belief. Let's see going
forward how right or wrong I am.

Quoted from joebxr

You prejudge me that I have not done my homework, and I have.
I stand by my "lame duck" statement and belief. Let's see going
forward how right or wrong I am.

I still stand by my agreement with Mr. Gibson on the benefits of and need for term limits for members of Congress and State Legislatures.  I still stand by my belief in the need of "citizen legislators" and not career political leeches being sent to our legislative bodies.  

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I still stand by my agreement with Mr. Gibson on the benefits of and need for term limits for members of Congress and State Legislatures.  I still stand by my belief in the need of "citizen legislators" and not career political leeches being sent to our legislative bodies.  

Not a career politician?  You want him to run for snother political office and climb the political ladder.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I still stand by my agreement with Mr. Gibson on the benefits of and need for term limits for members of Congress and State Legislatures.  I still stand by my belief in the need of "citizen legislators" and not career political leeches being sent to our legislative bodies.  

Not disputing your belief or opinion.
Am stating my opinion that he is now an ineffective "lame duck".
Also must agree with Sissy (sadly), that he may profess term
limits, but by running for a different position, he is simply playing
smoke and mirrors games...3 terms in one political position, then
3 terms in another political position, etc., HE'S A CAREER POLITICIAN!

Quoted from joebxr

Not disputing your belief or opinion.
Am stating my opinion that he is now an ineffective "lame duck".
Also must agree with Sissy (sadly), that he may profess term
limits, but by running for a different position, he is simply playing
smoke and mirrors games...3 terms in one political position, then
3 terms in another political position, etc., HE'S A CAREER POLITICIAN!

He is not a career politician.  He retired from active duty in the U.S. Army about 5 years ago.  He has not given any indication that he plans to serve 3 terms in another office -- just that he is contemplating running for another office.  Given his belief in term limits, he would probably do as he did when he ran for the U.S. House and indicate what his position is on term limits for that office.

I have known Mr. Gibson for over 30 years and he is NOT someone who plays games.  He is a man of his word, a hard worker and a great representative for the district that he serves.  He is quite unlike others that I have known who have served or currently serve in public office.  He certainly was a sharp contrast to his opponent last year -- you know the one who really lives in NYC but bought homes in 3 different Congressional districts (2 in upstate NY and 1 in Ct) and put his finger in the wind to see which one he would run for Congress from.  
Mr. Gibson is also a sharp contrast from our own representative in that Mr. Gibson actually takes the time to really listen to ALL of his constituents and not just the ones who agree with him or give him campaign donations.  Oh -- and Mr. Gibson has proven that he is willing and able to work with Representatives across party lines to address common issues/concerns -- such as he has with his Democratic colleague from the Hudson Valley district just below his own district.  That is quite refreshing considering that our own representative just makes snarky comments about Republicans and focuses his attention on getting publicity shots or pursuing useless projects like the "walking bridge" across the Mohawk River.  ---- That reminds me .. it has been 6 months since I challenged anyone to list an actual accomplishment of our representative (either in his quarter century in the State Assembly or his time in Washington, D.C.).   Anyone?  All I have heard are crickets on that subject.
The speculation right now is that Mr. Gibson may run for either the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Chuck Schumer (2016) or for Governor (201.  I would fully support him if he ran for either of those offices.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

He is not a career politician.  He retired from active duty in the U.S. Army about 5 years ago.  He has not given any indication that he plans to serve 3 terms in another office -- just that he is contemplating running for another office.  Given his belief in term limits, he would probably do as he did when he ran for the U.S. House and indicate what his position is on term limits for that office.

(a) I stated career politician because he has been in politics since leaving the military and
has indicated (as you have also) that he plans to continue to pursue another political position.
That is clear indication he plans on politics as his new "career"!
(b) "...3 terms in another office..." was a generic statement, but you knew that, right?! However,
it goes along with your observation, and that of others, that he will seek another position, and
might also indicate term limits there, etc., etc.  It was presumption of political path!

As for term limits, I do not agree with that. If a person is doing a good job for us, then we should
not jeopardize our representation with term limits. They earn our confidence, then they should continue to serve.
If not, then we the voting public, impose a term limit by voting them out of office. That's how it's
supposed to work.

We already have term limits.

It is flexible and enforced by the voters.

Passing laws to limit terms is passing laws regulating the power of the voters.

Quoted from Libertarian4life

We already have term limits.

It is flexible and enforced by the voters.

Passing laws to limit terms is passing laws regulating the power of the voters.

The only problem is...The voters don't draw the voting districts, the politicians do.  Unless you want to move when your representative is gerrymandered out of your district.

Quoted from joebxr

(a) I stated career politician because he has been in politics since leaving the military and
has indicated (as you have also) that he plans to continue to pursue another political position.
That is clear indication he plans on politics as his new "career"!
(b) "...3 terms in another office..." was a generic statement, but you knew that, right?! However,
it goes along with your observation, and that of others, that he will seek another position, and
might also indicate term limits there, etc., etc.  It was presumption of political path!

As for term limits, I do not agree with that. If a person is doing a good job for us, then we should
not jeopardize our representation with term limits. They earn our confidence, then they should continue to serve.
If not, then we the voting public, impose a term limit by voting them out of office. That's how it's
supposed to work.

The Founders preferred "citizen legislators" and did not envision  30-40 year "career leeches."  

As far as voters imposing term limits -- history doesn't seem to show that.  90+% of legislators get reelected .. and yet Congress and the state legislatures have lower public approval ratings than used car salespeople.   The way that district lines are drawn plays a huge part in that.  Does anybody think that our own representative would have lasted as long as he did in the state legislature or have been elected/reelected to Congress if they hadn't drawn the districts to squeeze in all the D's and get rid of as many R's as they could?

Can This Republican Conquer New York for the GOP?It's a blue state, but Rep. Chris Gibson has worked blue-to-red magic before.
BY JACK FITZPATRICK


January 22, 2015 - New York Republicans have spent a long stretch in the wilderness. They haven't held a statewide office since 2006, and even in 2014, which saw Republicans take the top jobs in Maryland and Massachusetts, Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo's reelection in 2014 was a foregone conclusion.

But despite the setback, the party saw progress in GOP nominee Rob Astorino's losing gubernatorial effort. Astorino cracked 40 percent of the statewide vote, and outside of New York City, he bested Cuomo by 3 percentage points, 49 percent to 46 percent. With that in mind, party insiders have said that if they can just grab 30 percent of the vote in New York City, the state can be theirs. Thirty percent, however, isn't easy. Even in a "wave" election for Republicans, Astorino only got 18 percent.


Enter Chris Gibson, the House Republican from New York who thinks the party can close the gap. "Can the New York GOP win? Absolutely," Gibson told National Journal. "Look at our neighbors in Massachusetts. There's not a single House Republican there, but they elected a Republican governor."

In Gibson, New York Republicans see a politician who connects with voters on the campaign trail and has a strong résumé: The former Army colonel served in Iraq and Kosovo. Perhaps more important, as he vies for support from New York voters, is Gibson's moderate ideology: He is the most liberal Republican in Congress, according to NJ's annual vote rankings.

In a state as blue as New York, however, it's unclear that any Republican—no matter how moderate or talented—can make the difference in 2018. Statewide, registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 2-to-1. Cuomo, a strong candidate who has already beaten Republicans twice in statewide races, has the option to run again.


But Gibson has his own winning history, even in territory that appears unfriendly for Republicans. Voters in his Hudson Valley district favored President Obama over Republican Mitt Romney by 6 points in 2012—even as Gibson beat a Democratic challenger, 53 percent to 47 percent.

And in his 2014 contest with Democrat Sean Eldridge, a millionaire investor whose husband, Chris Hughes, founded Facebook and owns The New Republic, Gibson won by 30 percentage points—despite being outspent by more than 2-to-1.

Now, Gibson is eyeing his next  and leaving himself plenty of room to make a tough, statewide challenge. He announced this month that he's leaving the House in 2016—partly to have two full years to prepare for a possible statewide bid in 2018.

If he does run, either for the governor's mansion or for the Senate seat currently held by Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand, he'll point to a moderate, bipartisan House record. "Legislation on Lyme disease, weather patterns, helping farmers, helping veterans—these are not partisan issues," Gibson said.


And he describes his ideas for a statewide run as similarly agreeable: create jobs, improve the state's education system, and root out corruption.

But those positions aren't Gibson's only appealing qualities, according to other New York Republicans. His moderate-to-liberal positions on social issues make party leaders optimistic about his chances in 2018. "He's pro-choice, which will help him in the city, of course," said Edward Cox, chairman of the state Republican Party. "New York City is the place where we really have to put in a lot of work."

With more time to raise money—Astorino only campaigned for about nine months—a Republican candidate should be able to buy more airtime in the expensive New York City media market. That, plus Gibson's moderation on social issues, is Republicans' plan to surpass 30 percent in the city, Cox said.

None of this means, however, that Gibson would get an automatic spot at the top of a GOP ticket in 2018. Some within the party might balk at his liberal reputation, and Astorino spokesman Bill O'Reilly said his boss is "definitely interested" in running again, hoping to build on his strong 2014 showing.

But O'Reilly did have positive things to say about Gibson as well. "He comes across as principled. He's willing to buck system," O'Reilly said of Gibson. "Rob hasn't pulled the trigger yet, so it's good that he's looking at it. He should also look at Gillibrand's seat, but we like Chris."