Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Thought experiment: Would McCain have won in 2008 if he had chosen Lieberman as VP?

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 » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:18 PM
Original message
Thought experiment: Would McCain have won in 2008 if he had chosen Lieberman as VP?
I think yes.

He was ahead in the polls in August/Sept, before Palin showed herself to be a moron. A nomination of Lieberman would galvanize the influential Jewish bloc (not that there's anything wrong with that, but let's not kid ourselves on the power of ethnic identity). It would also appeal to the muddy middle that McCain wants bi-partisanship.

Your thoughts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jzola Donating Member (52 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. No!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Liberal Donating Member (120 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. No, he looked like a grumpy old man and clueless. VP didn't matter much. But....
I wonder if Romney would have won if running as president with the financial crisis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. no
Too old and out of it. His debacle during the financial crisis would have sealed his fate, even if he hadn't had Palin. Remember the rise in late summer was due to Palin. LIEberman would have infuriated the base of the republican party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. That's a good point. The LIE man would have alienated his base. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
19. True, but where could they go?
Edited on Wed Apr-06-11 12:37 PM by karynnj
They would have still voted against the in their view, half Kenyan, likely Moslem, black: - no matter who was on their ticket - though they might have really disliked LIeberman.

*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. who cares? let's look forward, not backward
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Edit--to move forward, one has to look backward. nt
Edited on Wed Apr-06-11 12:25 PM by mistertrickster
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. But, that isn't history.
You might as well ask what would have happened in SE Asia if Kennedy wasn't assassinated.

It's speculation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Agent William Donating Member (628 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
9. Nobody likes Lieberman.
Not the right, not the left, not the middle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. The voters of Connecticut?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. Not even the aliens on the planet that he came from
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
10. Pro-choice, pro-gay Lieberman? No.
It would have enraged the rightists, no doubt about it. They were already wary enough of McCain himself. It would have had adverse impact on GOP candidates elsewhere, meaning their rout could have been worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
36. you forgot pro-war and still a resounding NO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. Yeah right
Look at the margins (both popular vote and electoral vote). Lieberman would have helped McCain get maybe a few extra points in CT, but they would have lost the state anyways. I doubt he would have helped much in FL either. Plus Lieberman's pro choice record would have turned off social conservatives.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
13. I can't believe that you would say such a thing on a progressive site.
I'm turning you in to the mods for saying "Joe LIEberman."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
14. I think it would have helped with independents - but not that much with Jews
I don't think that he would have won the majority of Jews - even with Lieberman. tI am Jewish and remember the great excitement in the Jewish community when he was chosen in 2000. However, if I remember correctly, he did not carry the majority of Jews in CT in 2006. In addition, Jews are 2 % of the population. As VP for a conservative ticket, that was pro-war, I really do not think he would have done well. McCain would have done somewhat better - but more because Palin literally scared many people I knew.

I do think he would have done better with Independents because it would have appeared bipartisan. I know that Lieberman was respected by many of the genuinely independent people I knew because he stood against his party. Many of them also had liked McCain when he was a maverick. Picking Lieberman would have been as real maverick.

The question is whether Lieberman could have helped McCain better when the crash hit. McCain acted so strangely, it is no surprise that his numbers fell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
34. Actually, exit polls showed that Lieberman got 65% of the Jewish vote in 2006
Which is not a particularly good showing compared to past races (but is a majority)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #34
42. Sorry - I went by memory and should have checked
That is a good showing either against another Jew in the primary or in a 3 way general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
15. McCain lost with "The fundamentals of the economy are sound" after the collapse
He sealed the deal by "Suspending my Campaign".

He looked like an out of touch erratic hothead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrTriumph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
16. Heavens no, the R base would have deserted the ticket. Hmm. Not a bad idea.
Edited on Wed Apr-06-11 12:36 PM by MrTriumph
party discipline...a good thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
17. NO. Most of the Jewish population in the U.S. are Democrats, and after what LIEberman had done in
regard to selling out the Democratic party to support mccain, they would NOT vote for him. In fact the iimplication that the Jewish population would only vote for a person just because he was Jewish implies that the U.S. Jewish population doesn't think about the issues, is wrong

The U.S. Jewish population is as diversified as any other demographic group, and stereo types are not accurate

There are about 13 to 15 million Jews world wide, and only 6.5 million in the U.S. Definitely not a majority, and if anything the 2000 election demonstrated that LIEberman actually hurt Gore instead of helping him.

The Jewish population voted for Gore, NOT because he had LIEberman on the ticket, but because Gore was a Democrat who stood for Democratic principles, and protecting social security, the environment, etc.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChoppinBroccoli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
20. You're Ignoring The Reason Why McCain Was Forced To Take Palin To Begin With
Conservatives didn't think McCain was "conservative enough," and the Party higher-ups were all over him to take a "hard-line" righty in order to solidify his base, which was wavering. If he had taken a Democrat (and a socially liberal Democrat at that) as his running mate, the conservatives would have abandoned him in droves. Remember the reports from back then stating that the Party bosses were pressurimg him to take a running mate who was Anti-Choice? I can't remember who it was he wanted at the time, but I remember that the person he REALLY wanted to be his running mate was a Pro-Choice Republican, and as soon as this person's name surfaced, the "you better nots" started rolling in from the right-wing echo chamber.

The McCain candidacy was a dead-bang loser from the word go, no matter who he picked as a running mate. He SHOULD have taken Romney (even though the two can't stand each other personally), but even Romney wouldn't have helped him much. After so many gaffes and flubs in the press, and then getting lambasted in all 3 debates, McCain never had a chance.

And I find this an interesting exercise to look back on this, because as I've looked at the political landscape for 2012, you know who I see as being the MOST "electable" of pretty much all the big-name Republicans right now? John McCain. And he'd get beat even worse in 2012. That's why I'm not even a little bit worried about losing the White House in 2012. The Republicans have NOTHING. All the adults have left the room.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. mccain choose palin because he thought Hillary would win the Democratic nomination. The problem
with his reasoning was that Hillary has a brain, palin is a complete idiot

dangerous, but an idiot nevertheless


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChoppinBroccoli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. The Palin Pick Came Within Days Of The Democratic Convention
By then, everyone knew Obama was the nominee (except for a few delusional PUMAs). I think McCain may have had hopes of converting a bunch of Hillary voters by basically pandering to them (Look! My running mate has lady parts too!!!). Nevermind that the two couldn't have been more different.

No, it had more to do with trying to pacify the hard-line righties within the Party than anything else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #20
45. +100 for last two sentences nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A-Schwarzenegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
21. Or Sarah could have had Joe's voice.
It would have given her that gravitas thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
23. no
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
24. I think this is really what sank McCain


It was his Dukakis of the election. It just made him look old and grumpy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChoppinBroccoli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. This Was One Of Many Factors That Cost Him At Least A Respectable Defeat
It was the debates (all 3 of them). It was the "I don't know how many houses I own" thing. It was the "fundamentals of the economy are strong" thing. It was the "that one" comment. It was lots and lots of stuff. Then to have the idiot Palin blowing it for him at every turn was just the icing on the cake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
25. Closer, maybe
However, a lot of the Republicans would've probably revolted at the idea and stayed home on Election Day and McCain would've still lost. For all of his faults, Lieberman was/is more progressive than even the 2008 Republican Party base. Politically, it would've been disastrous for Lieberman too had he lost and had to crawl back to the Senate and basically become a real "party of one" too. I don't think that McCain could've won in 2008 no matter what but had he picked a slightly more *competent* person for VP, the election could've been closer since Palin ended up being a deciding factor AGAINST McCain for a lot of people, particularly disenchanted Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
28. No.
McCain didn't stand a chance. Not even a little. His campaign was a snoozer from the beginning. (Remember the green screen?) The only thing that made his campaign remotely interesting was the bubblehead that he chose for a running mate. Lieberman is not a vote getter (ask Al).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #28
46. Well, I think Lieberman did help Gore in the critical state of Florida, even
though a lot voters ended up voting for Buchanan because of the confusing "butterfly ballot."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. I would disagree with your assessment.
When Lieberman was named, most voters said "who?" He wasn't an asset for Al Gore (who could have used someone to help counteract the "wooden" meme.) And McCain's biggest problem was that he is old, and there's not a damn thing a running mate can do to change that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. Makes sense . . . you might be right. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JPZenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
29. No, but Al Gore would have won 2000 if he had picked Graham as VP
We all know that Al Gore really won the 2000 election. However, he easily could have won the 2000 election without question if he had picked Graham as his VP instead of Lieberman.

At the time, Graham was very very popular in Florida. He would have attracted enough votes and turnout in Florida to overcome the irregularities. Graham also had the credentials to be VP, which Lieberman did not.

Lieberman added absolutely nothing to the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChoppinBroccoli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I Always Thought His Choice Of Lieberman Was A Fatal Mistake...........
..........but according to a very knowledgable right-wing friend, it was actually the best choice he could have made. I can't remember why he thinks that, but he said that in his opinion, the selection of Lieberman was the strongest pick Gore could have made. I always thought Gore should have taken either Gephardt or John Kerry (as was rumored to be his second choice). Graham would have been a good choice too. I'm not a huge fan of Gephardt, but I've always thought Kerry should have taken Gephardt as HIS running mate too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Gore needed someone not from the NE.
When I heard Lieberman was the veep pick, I thought it was over right then for Gore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
30. I think Palin actually gave McCain a boost - so no
He was looking pretty same old same old until she popped into the campaign
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. She probably did at first
And then people started paying attention to what she was saying. After that, she didn't help at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. Every Rep I know loved her then
It was only in our world that she was considered a liability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDemKev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
37. WHO CARES???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
38. No, because then the right wing base wouldn't have turned out for him.
The fact of the matter is that McCain was the sacrificial lamb for the 'Pugs in '08. They knew as well as we did that after Bush, Jesus Christ could have run on the 'Pug ticket and wouldn't have run. McCain was left on the horns of a dilemma. He could either choose another moderate conservative like himself, and thus suppress the right wing whacko vote, which he needed. Or he could take the route he did take, naming a right wing whacko as his running mate, thus insuring that the right wing whacko vote would turn out, but shutting the pocketbooks of his big money backers and thus, as we see, losing.

Nobody could have won on the 'Pug ticket, not coming in after Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
39. No, he would have lost by an even bigger margin...
if anything, Palin made the race closer than it would have otherwise have been.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #39
44. He did get a bump in the polls after Palin at least initially. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
40. Anybody who thinks McCain lost only due to Palin wasn't paying attention
Edited on Wed Apr-06-11 01:29 PM by WI_DEM
McCain sunk his own campaign by running a lousy campaign--and the stunt he pulled during the financial crisis and "suspending his campaign"--that is where he really began to fall when people got a look at him up close. Also, like it or not, Palin excited the right wing base--look at her crowds compared to McCain's. If McCain had selected a nominal democrat there would have been a floor fight at the convention and many on the right would have sat out the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 01:41 PM
Response to Original message
41. No. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
43. Very doubtful.
The baggers wouldn't have liked it and wouldn't have shown up in the numbers that did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidthegnome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
47. I highly doubt it
I can't say for a certainty, as it didn't actually happen. Still, McCain isn't particularly well loved among the further right and fundamentalist Christians, a good part of his campaign was trying to convince them he was something he wasn't. Lieberman? I guess he'd carry some support from either side, but the majority in both parties (to my knowledge) think of him as a colossal douche bag or a useful tool, depending on the situation.

No, I don't think they would have won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-06-11 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
48. Jewish voters vote Democratic, they didn't even support Lieberman during the Primary
it's like republicans thinking alan keyes would win black voters or michael steele would help them with black voters.

McCain would have lost even more since he wouldn't have gotten the wingnut racists and other bigots who voted for him only because of palin.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 21st 2014, 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
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