Face it: Lieberman is not coming back to the Dem party

[CTLawGuy]

In order to go anywhere, he will have to parrot GOP talking points (attacking Lamont from the right)and run as basically a Republican. He will use Republican money in large part.

And, as vindictive as he apparently is, do you think he would go back to the party he is doubtless convinced betrayed him, if he were to win?

A vote for Lieberman is basically a vote against Dem control of the seat at this point.

[wtmusic]

1. It it possible more Republicans will vote for Lieberman than Democrats

and his candidacy could actually help Lamont?

[Eric J in MN]

2. The Republicans haven't put up a competitive candidate in CT.

NT

[Warren Stupidity]

3. He won't get Republican money.

Other than that I think you are right - he has to run to the right to carve out the republican leaning independent voters for himself. But I think he starts out in deep financial trouble. Lamont will have the full support of the Democratic Party organization while Lieberman will have the full support of the Joe Lieberman Party. Lamont should be able to knock him out. Plus basically Lieberman is a shitty campaigner. He has had a free ride for the last twelve years as there was only token opposition for hsi senate seat. Joe was a joke in the 2004 primaries. He ran one of the worst campaigns in recent memory against Lamont. Why anyone thinks he is up to the rather formidable challenge in front of him now is a mystery.

[dolstein]

4. Face it -- you don't want him in the party

That's what this is all about. DU and the left-wing blogosphere has been trying to drive Lieberman out of the party for a long time. Even though he's still a registered Democrat and has pledged to caucus with the Democrats if re-elected. But the blogosphere refuses to take "yes" for an answer. They want to strip him of his committee membership. I suspect they'd want him excluded from the caucus even if his vote would decide which party controlled the Senate. And after they succeed in forcing him out of the Democratic caucus, they'll see "See, we told you all along he was really a Republican."

[FrenchieCat]

5. Hell, even by voting against him, Lieberman cannot be "forced" out.....

so how do you think he can be forced out of the Democratic Caucus?

I'm picturing Lieberman as an Heston Moses type politician...."You'll have to pry me away when I'm dead and cold"!

[CTLawGuy]

6. he's destroying the party!

how would you feel if every leftist wacko primary loser with delusions of electability ran as an indy?

Our party would never win again. We can't take 2 or 3 left-of-center candidates for every 1 right of center candidate.

The very primary system and the very survival of our party is at stake.

[dolstein]

15. Personally, I'd love it it every leftist wacko ran as an indy

Perhaps then the Democratic Party would realize that there's a broad swath of the electorate out there in the middle that's ripe for the picking. Instead, Kos has convinced people like Ned Lamont that the reason the Democrats aren't the majority party is because they aren't liberal enough.

[CTLawGuy]

24. either

you are lying (I'm sure you had bad feelings about Nader's 2000 run) or

you're a Republican, becuase those are the only people who would benefit from multiple Dem candidates in a GE.

[skipos]

7. Please read this and comment

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1155

[ButterflyBlood]

9. Is that a Zobgy Interactive online poll?

I take them myself, but I know very well the self selected survey sample makes them worth about a grain of salt. They're only slightly less prone to freeping style manipulation than most online polls.

[skipos]

10. Ok, then cut the results in half.

You still must admit if anyone is out of the mainstream, it is Lieberman.

Most Americans think Bush is a crappy president. Most Americans think the war is a disaster. In CT an even larger majority feels this way. Lieberman is out of touch with most Democrats, and he got voted out by a record turnout.

[ButterflyBlood]

11. Oh, I'm not denying Lieberman is out of touch

And there's plenty of other polls that show that. But that still doesn't change that Zogby Interactive polls are trash.

[izzie]

12. I think it is up to Conn to run who they want.

Working in the gov. has been this mans life so I am thinking he just does not understand not being wanted by the people who put him into office for so many years. It is an ego thing and now he will try to find someone who will feed that. I do not know why he does not get it.

[ReadTomPaine]

8. Joe's running against the Democrat, Dolstein.

He cannot, therefore, represent the Democratic party in this election. The Blogosphere didn't elect Lamont. Lieberman's former supporters did along with other Democrats who felt Ned would be a better pick than Joe. They weren't radical leftists when they voted for Joe in the past, and they aren't now that they voted for Ned Lamont.

The dynamics of the race are simple. If Joe Lieberman wants to win, he's going to have to appeal to the right. The left and Democratic party have already spoken.

Here's a piece of advice. Whenever you find yourself backing a candidate who has the approval of the Bush Administration, you're probably backing the wrong person.

[dweller]

13. damn, DING!

clear and succinct.

dp

[dolstein]

14. They're both Democrats

Ned Lamont's a Maxine Waters/Al Sharpton Democrat. Joe Lieberman's an independent-minded New Democrat. Both have said they'll caucus with the Democrats if elected.

Lamont may be the Democratic nominee, but under Connecticut election law, that and 50 cents will get him a cup of coffee. Lamont doesn't "own" the Democratic vote any more than Lieberman owned the Democratic vote after receiving the official endorsement of the Connecticut Democratic Party in the spring.

Lieberman received the support of 48% of the Democratic primary voters. According to the exit polls, 75% of Lieberman's Democratic supporters are sticking with him. Does this mean these voters aren't Democrats any more?

You're just pissed off that the 7.5% of the Connecticut voters that supported Ned Lamont in the primary don't get to decide for the other 92.5%. That's a really interesting view of democracy.

[fujiyama]

17. Joe Lieberman is a republican talking points spewing "Democrat"

The kind of Democrat that goes on TV and attacks his own party and tells us to be "bipartisan" when the other side is destroying this country.

Keep accusing everyone here of being a leftist whacko.

You know what your problem is Dolstein - you have no real idea what the fight against terrorism really is - just like the Goddamn republicans and Joe Lieberman. To you and them Saddam and Al Qaeda are the same thing.

Why don't you just go all the way and give us all the typical RW talking points.

Fuck your bullshit.

[HuskerDU]

19. Granted I only saw him on Tweedy, but Lamont certainly

did not come off as anything but moderate to me.

[ReadTomPaine]

22. Hillary's check will buy a lot of coffee. That's just the first of many.

Where will Lieberman's money come from? Not from the Democratic party. I'd have voted for Joe in a heartbeat against the GOP were he the nominee. I already did in 2000. But he's not. Every major Democrat from the Clintons to Barbara Boxer is backing Lamont. Have they all been hypnotized by Kos too?

I find it interesting you associate Ned Lamont with fellow Democrats in the first part of your statement and then choose to refer to Joe Lieberman using the meme "independent-minded New Democrat" in the second. Given the context, a more proper comparison would be with Joe Lieberman's most recent and high profile associations. And those would be with Karl Rove and George W Bush. This is why he's not the nominee. Not because Kos sits on his chest all night and steals his breath like a ghost.

This isn't to say Joe won't win this race if he plays his cards right. It's a cynical game he's playing, but it's a plausible strategy. If he does win, and he keeps his word, I'll be delighted because either way he's going to watch his step more often and we still get the seat. If he loses, however, I'll be even happier because he's proven himself to be unreliable in his public support of the party time and time again. Remember the golden rule. Nothing good comes from supporting the Bush administration.

And no Dolstein, I'm not the one who's pissed off here it seems. For me it's win/win. The point is made either way and the party has already begun to make changes in wake of this primary. I'm happy to let the voters decide and abide by their choice. By now, everybody in Connecticut knows where these two candidates stand. Nobody is fooling them in this race. Not me, not Kos, not Joe Lieberman, not Ned Lamont and certainly not you.

[dionysus]

29. har har, what a joke you are

go peddle your garbage over at FR...

[Zorra]

18. Political order upended as Democrats slam, Republicans praise Lieberman

WASHINGTON (AFP) Republicans had words of praise for Democrat Joe Lieberman, whose longtime support of the US administration on the Iraq war was seen as causing his US Senate primary election defeat.
snip---
Lieberman -- who lost Tuesday's election in part because of his perceived role as an ally of the George W. Bush administration on Iraq -- vowed to continue his fight for reelection, and found many prominent Republican backers, including New York City Michael Bloomberg.
snip---
In a speech Wednesday Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman hailed Lieberman as a "different kind of politician, and a different kind of Democrat."
snip---
"I think it's time for somebody to break through and say, 'Hey, let's cut out the partisan nonsense'," he said in a US television interview.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060810/ts_alt_afp/usiraqv... ;_ylt=AurNVFp7G6ErsEYpMwsxg.WyFz4D;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-

Joe Lieberman was defeated in the primary because the majority of Democrats recognize the republican party, republican policy, and the republican agenda as an imminent threat and a clear and present danger to the safety, security, and continued sovereignty of the United States, while Senator Lieberman at times advocated collaboration with these horrible fascists.

The republican party, and their fascist agenda, is a greater danger to our country than every terrorist group on the planet combined.

The republicans always work contrary to the interests of the vast majority of the people of the US.

The majority of Democrats feel that they can trust Ned Lamont to completely reject, and always vote against, the fascist agenda of the republican party.

We simply do not trust Joe Lieberman to vote against the republicans all the time, every time.

At this time in our history, "bipartisanship" means advocating the extreme RW radical policies of the republican party.

Ned Lamont, and the people that support him, are not "left wing wackos", like all the radical RW propagandists are trying to paint them. We are average Americans concerned about the rapid decline of our nation under extreme RW radical republican governance.

Ned Lamont has done nothing but espouse sound, sane, prudent policies that would be good for the vast majority of people in this country.

We Democrats simply want honest, prudent legislators that clearly recognize the very real threat that the republican party poses to our country, and we want a Senator that will always vote against wacko republican policies and interests.

We like having Mr. Lieberman in our party - we just don't trust his judgement enough to want him as a Senator.

[eridani]

27. If I lived in Connecticut and he had won the primary--

--I would have voted for him. Too bad the Nader-spoiler-type loser won't live by the same quid pro quo rules.

[invictus]

16. I'm sure he is talking to Frist as we speak n/t

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CTLawGuy]

25. "loony left"?

nice RW talking points, did you learn those from Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity?

[eridani]

26. If you are running against a Democrat in a general election--

--you aren't a Democrat, period.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

21. good riddance to bad rubbish n/t

[opihimoimoi]

23. Now that he is a declared INDEPENDENT...we don't want him, Period

Bu BYE.....

[primative1]

28. Why was he a democrat to begin with?

This is the part I can never figure out.
There are two basic ideologies. Its not hard to tell them apart.
Meet a stranger in some parking lot and talk to them for a minute or two and you can easily tell if they are democrats or republicans.
But with politicians its not as easy to tell? Umm ...,why?
Why was Joe Lieberman a democrat?
He obviously buys into the GOP philosophy hook line and sinker, so why?
Was it because he thought it sounded cooler to be from the party of FDR than from the party of Nixon?
Was that his only reason?