You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #13: I'm not even a Democrat in name, not being American, [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-20-06 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I'm not even a Democrat in name, not being American,

So I look at the issue slightly differently - I don't feel any party loyalty whatsoever to any group; the two standards I'm judging by are

1) is this good for the cause of left-wing politics in America, irrespective of party.

2) is this acceptable behaviour for a politician - is it "playing fair"?

I think that Lieberman unquestionably did the wrong thing from point of view 1) by even standing against Lamont in the primary - Lamont is the more progressive of the two, although by less than most DUers appear to believe - but that he has done less wrong in that respect than any Republican.

I don't, however, think that he's done anything wrong from POV 2) - he's under no moral obligation of any kind not to run as an independent, given that the voters want him to.

However, given that Lieberman existed and was running, I think that Lamont also did the wrong thing from POV 1) by running against him - by doing so, he's made it likely that the Senator for Connecticut will be Lieberman(I) than Lieberman(D), which is bad. He *obviously* hasn't done anything wrong from POV 2).

I don't think either man has in any way "broken the rules of the game" or acted dishonourably.

I *do* think that those people who hold Democratic offices connected to campaigning in Connecticut but are supporting Lieberman have behaved badly from POV 2). I think that unless and until you split officially from a political party you have an obligation to toe its line to some extent. Lieberman has done so, and that's fine, but people who hold offices relevant to the Connecticut senate under Democratic auspices but are not endorsing the Democratic candidate are not fullfilling the trust the Democratic party placed in them when it selected them, which is wrong under POV 2).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Who is dividing the Party, Joe? kentuck  Aug-20-06 01:43 PM   #0 
  - Puh-leeze, if Lamont really believed in party unity  dolstein   Aug-20-06 02:03 PM   #1 
  - Ba-loney...  kentuck   Aug-20-06 02:08 PM   #2 
  - Lamont has done everything right.  AtomicKitten   Aug-20-06 02:14 PM   #4 
  - Wait a second.  Donald Ian Rankin   Aug-20-06 04:24 PM   #9 
     - Lamont won the Democratic primary, n'est pas?  AtomicKitten   Aug-20-06 04:33 PM   #10 
     - I'm not even a Democrat in name, not being American,  Donald Ian Rankin   Aug-20-06 04:48 PM   #13 
        - I am another non-American, and I have to agree that...  LeftishBrit   Aug-28-06 10:31 AM   #29 
     - au contraire  darboy   Aug-28-06 08:44 AM   #25 
  - wow, second thread I've come upon where you're pushing this crap  Lerkfish   Aug-20-06 02:17 PM   #5 
  - He's back....  Warren Stupidity   Aug-20-06 02:21 PM   #6 
  - according to the Closet Cons  darboy   Aug-28-06 08:48 AM   #26 
  - You're joking right?  acmejack   Aug-20-06 02:50 PM   #8 
  - wow - so any challenger in a party primary is against party unity?  ulysses   Aug-20-06 04:46 PM   #11 
  - So let me get this straight...  ljm2002   Aug-20-06 04:48 PM   #12 
  - Just don't pretend that Lamont has no responsibility for the consequences  dolstein   Aug-20-06 05:19 PM   #16 
     - so, assuming the predictions of doom come true,  ulysses   Aug-20-06 05:23 PM   #17 
     - I think we'll call this the "abusive husband" defense.  ulysses   Aug-20-06 05:30 PM   #18 
     - So you're okay with Lieberman...  ljm2002   Aug-20-06 10:35 PM   #22 
     - That may be the most blindingly arrogant post I've ever read here.  Ken Burch   Aug-28-06 01:15 AM   #23 
     - did Howard Dean in 2004  darboy   Aug-28-06 08:53 AM   #27 
     - According to you, the Dem Party bosses have more right to nominate  MyPetRock   Aug-28-06 11:01 AM   #32 
  - Um, what, then, are primaries for?  Doremus   Aug-20-06 05:51 PM   #19 
  - affirmation of the party's rightward trend, evidently.  ulysses   Aug-20-06 05:55 PM   #20 
  - so primaries are disuniting..  darboy   Aug-28-06 08:40 AM   #24 
  - you are veering  Zodiak Ironfist   Aug-28-06 09:10 AM   #28 
  - He's not veering close, he's there.  MyPetRock   Aug-28-06 10:37 AM   #31 
  - Apparently you think Lieberman is entitled to a Senate seat.  MyPetRock   Aug-28-06 10:33 AM   #30 
  - do you have some sort of random-bullshit-generator to create your  dionysus   Aug-28-06 03:37 PM   #33 
  - There are some...  w13rd0   Aug-20-06 02:11 PM   #3 
  - Jeez, Joe's party is divided?  azurnoir   Aug-20-06 02:50 PM   #7 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Aug-20-06 04:51 PM   #14 
  - Welcome awd..  kentuck   Aug-20-06 04:55 PM   #15 
  - Lamont transcript on CNN.........  bluedog   Aug-20-06 06:56 PM   #21 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC