God I Hate Joe Lieberman

[jasonxctf]

anyone else getting tired of this?

 

- You were the VP nominee of the party in 2000 and declare yourself a life long Democrat.

- In 2006, you lose the Democratic primary fair and square by the people in your home state.

- In 2006, you decide that you really are a "sore loserman" and pull out of the Democratic party to become an Independent allowing you to still run for your Senate seat.

- You win the Senate contest by pulling Republican votes away from the Republican nominee.

- In 2007, the Democratic party still convinces you to caucus with you and give you some prominent positions. (they need you at a 51-49 split)

- In 2008, you decide to support your life-long friend John McCain for President.

- In 2008, you decide to start campaigning with McCain for his party's nomination.

- In 2008, after winning his parties nomination, you begin campaigning with McCain against the Democratic nominee, whomever that may be.

- In 2008, you are stripped of your superdelegate vote for the Democratic Party.

- Now there are talks that you may appear at the Republican Convention and may even give the keynote speech, 8 years after standing on the Democratic Convention stage accepting the nomination for VP.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Yea, he's a bell weather. He has no spine.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yea, he's a bell weather. He has no spine.

I don't think that means what you think it means. A bellweather is an indicator of the state of things generally in a certain environment, so, you are saying he's indicative of the Dems right now? I think you mean he's a windsock, or a flip-flopper, or something along those lines.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

I think you mean he's a windsock, or a flip-flopper, or something along those lines.

good catch. yea, that's what I meant. My bad.

 

PS: when the democrats pick up 2+ seats in the senate this fall, they will dump Lieberman. Just my guess.

[jasonxctf]

so here's the question... all indications point to the Dems picking up between 3-6 seats in the Senate this Fall...

 

Republican Held Seats

Warner (VA)

Stevens (AK)

Allard (CO)

Coleman (MN)

Sununu (NH)

Domenici (NM)

Collins (ME)

Smith (OR)

 

Democratic Held Seats

Landrieu (LA)

 

with the other seats being held by the incumbent party. Will the Dems cut lose Lieberman is they have a greater than 51 seat position?

[HuskyCaucasian]

Will the Dems cut lose Lieberman is they have a greater than 51 seat position?

I think so. Heck, Connecticut might cut him loose after all this when he is up for reelection.

Note this (fast forward to 1:30)-

[lostfan]

I don't think that means what you think it means. A bellweather is an indicator of the state of things generally in a certain environment, so, you are saying he's indicative of the Dems right now? I think you mean he's a windsock, or a flip-flopper, or something along those lines.

I didn't know Jay Mariotti was a Senator.

 

Sorry that was too easy, it was like a fastball up in the zone.

[jasonxctf]

oops, and I almost forgot Mr. Lieberman ran for President as a Democrat in 2004.

[Balta1701]

I'm personally a fan of how he says that the question "Is Barack Obama a Marxist" is a valid one that he should have to answer.

[southsideirish71]

anyone else getting tired of this?

 

- You were the VP nominee of the party in 2000 and declare yourself a life long Democrat.

- In 2006, you lose the Democratic primary fair and square by the people in your home state.

- In 2006, you decide that you really are a "sore loserman" and pull out of the Democratic party to become an Independent allowing you to still run for your Senate seat.

- You win the Senate contest by pulling Republican votes away from the Republican nominee.

- In 2007, the Democratic party still convinces you to caucus with you and give you some prominent positions. (they need you at a 51-49 split)

- In 2008, you decide to support your life-long friend John McCain for President.

- In 2008, you decide to start campaigning with McCain for his party's nomination.

- In 2008, after winning his parties nomination, you begin campaigning with McCain against the Democratic nominee, whomever that may be.

- In 2008, you are stripped of your superdelegate vote for the Democratic Party.

- Now there are talks that you may appear at the Republican Convention and may even give the keynote speech, 8 years after standing on the Democratic Convention stage accepting the nomination for VP.

 

I am sure that Mr. Lieberman feels all sorts of warm and fuzzies when the anti-war fringe radical wing of the party decided to trump him and run another candidate because he wasn't anti-war.

 

 

 

Edited April 16, 2008 by southsideirish71

[jasonxctf]

its not uncommon for challengers to show up in the senate primary race.

 

Look at John Kerry...

On January 24, 2007, Kerry announced he would not run for President in 2008, instead choosing to run for another Senate term. He is being challenged in the Democratic primary by attorney Ed O'Reilly.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I'd suggest that the problem here lies more with the parties and their black-or-white perspective, than with Mr. Lieberman. He isn't my fave politician by a long shot, but, the reality is that in the current decade, being a moderate or having views that don't align perfectly with one party or the other tends to get you shot to bits. And that pisses me off.

 

[jasonxctf]

I am sure that Mr. Lieberman feels all sorts of warm and fuzzies when the anti-war fringe radical wing of the party decided to trump him and run another candidate because he wasn't anti-war.

 

 

plus, the people of Connecticut spoke. they wanted Ned Lamont as the Democratic nominee 52-48%. What's wrong with that?

[NorthSideSox72]

plus, the people of Connecticut spoke. they wanted Ned Lamont as the Democratic nominee 52-48%. What's wrong with that?

Nothing. And there is nothing wrong with Lieberman then running as an independent.

 

[Mplssoxfan]

I am sure that Mr. Lieberman feels all sorts of warm and fuzzies when the anti-war fringe radical wing of the party decided to trump him and run another candidate because he wasn't anti-war.

It's not a fringe radical wing of the Democratic Party that's anti-war, it's the vast majority of the party. Lest we forget, the supposed anti-war fringe radical "Marxist", Barack Obama, campaigned for Lieberman in the primary in 2006.

[Mplssoxfan]

Nothing. And there is nothing wrong with Lieberman then running as an independent.

True, although there are some states with laws that prohibit that, which I don't think is right.

[lostfan]

I'd suggest that the problem here lies more with the parties and their black-or-white perspective, than with Mr. Lieberman. He isn't my fave politician by a long shot, but, the reality is that in the current decade, being a moderate or having views that don't align perfectly with one party or the other tends to get you shot to bits. And that pisses me off.

It's one of the 5 or so reasons I'm not registered with a party as opposed to being a Democrat like everyone else around me when I was growing up. And why it probably won't change anytime soon.

[Balta1701]

I'd suggest that the problem here lies more with the parties and their black-or-white perspective, than with Mr. Lieberman. He isn't my fave politician by a long shot, but, the reality is that in the current decade, being a moderate or having views that don't align perfectly with one party or the other tends to get you shot to bits. And that pisses me off.

Here's my problem with that statement...it's the definition of Moderate. I struggle to see how it fits with people like say, McCain or Lieberman.

 

There are plenty of Moderates in the Democratic party, and I'm sure you can find a few within the Republicans although I know their membership less. But Lieberman usually has a pretty normal democratic voting record on a fair number of issues. Environmental issues, abortion, etc., he tends to vote the Democratic party line. But he's bat sh*t crazy, just like McCain, on anything that has to do with war in the Middle east. Never met a war or bomb he didn't like out there.

 

When I think of a moderate, I think of someone like Ben Nelson or Lincoln Chafee, someone who votes with his party a fair amount of the time but also tries to remove some of the most 1-sided parts of bills, maybe one of the ones who says "No, I don't want you cutting raising taxes by $1 trillion, make it $600 billion", or something like that. But I see a person who's on one side on most issues and then totally on the other side on one specific set of issues, I struggle to understand why we should use the same word to describe those 2 types of people.

[jasonxctf]

True, although there are some states with laws that prohibit that, which I don't think is right.

 

so would this scenario be ok... Candidate A runs as a Republican. Loses Republican primary, so then jumps ship to the Green Party. Loses the Green Party Primary, so then runs as a Libertarian. Loses the Libertarian Primary so then runs as an Independent. This certainly didn't happen here... but is it ok for a candidate to bounce around parties until he finds one which he can win in?

[jasonxctf]

plus i'll take it to another level... when your party nominates you for the 2nd highest office in the land, is it ok to be a turncoat and ditch the party when its not conveinent for you anymore?

[southsideirish71]

plus i'll take it to another level... when your party nominates you for the 2nd highest office in the land, is it ok to be a turncoat and ditch the party when its not conveinent for you anymore?

 

The last time I checked, the Senator is chosen by a bipartisan election in the fall. Your guy won the democratic nomination, however he could not win the general. He lost, move on.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

so would this scenario be ok... Candidate A runs as a Republican. Loses Republican primary, so then jumps ship to the Green Party. Loses the Green Party Primary, so then runs as a Libertarian. Loses the Libertarian Primary so then runs as an Independent. This certainly didn't happen here... but is it ok for a candidate to bounce around parties until he finds one which he can win in?

As a general rule, there is a primary, then a general. That's two elections. Your scenario would require 5, so, its kind of moot.

 

[Mplssoxfan]

plus i'll take it to another level... when your party nominates you for the 2nd highest office in the land, is it ok to be a turncoat and ditch the party when its not conveinent for you anymore?

Allow me to preface this by saying I dislike Lieberman for his last two years of shenanigans. I'd say what I really think of him, but it might disobey the reinforced guidelines.

 

There's no question that Lieberman is a turncoat. You can certainly make a case that he's ethically wrong and should have stepped aside for the good of the party. He didn't break any laws, though.

 

I'm certain that in his own mind, Lieberman did what he felt in the best interest of the country, which (ideally or idealistically) should trump what's best for the party.

[EvilMonkey]

plus i'll take it to another level... when your party nominates you for the 2nd highest office in the land, is it ok to be a turncoat and ditch the party when its not conveinent for you anymore?

I believe it was the party that 'ditched' him, when they decided to run a challenger to him in the primary because they didn't like his war views. Nevermind all the rest of the votes, that one area was enough for them to tell him they don't want him anymore. And then when he ended up winning anyway, they came crawling back to have him caucus with them to maintain the majority. He could have told them where to go, but he didn't, and stood with his (ex) party. Hell, why don't we just behead him for being the apostate he is, damn him for changing parties! it's not like the Dems have ever accepted a Republican who decided to switch parties or anything (Jim Jeffords).

[jasonxctf]

As a general rule, there is a primary, then a general. That's two elections. Your scenario would require 5, so, its kind of moot.

 

this would cover multiple years.. take Jim Oberweis for an example. This guy has run for what 4 elections here in Illinois. Won the Primary of one of them. Has more money than god. Should he be able to bounce around between parties to see what gives him the best strategic advantage.