Why the Left Is Furious at Lieberman; Iraq is only a part

If I am a Troll, You are a Keltic Wizened, and you really should keep up on the news.

quote

CT-SEN: National GOP Actively Pulling For Lieberman?
By Greg Sargent | bio
Is the National Republican Senatorial Committee actively pulling for Joe Lieberman to win the Connecticut Senate race? A source on the NRSC has just told The Politicker blog in an interview that the party will not give any help to current GOP candidate Alan Schlesinger and now wants Lieberman to win.

From The Politicker:

This morning, a source at the National Republican Senatorial Committee confirmed in a phone interview that the party will not help Schlesinger or any other potential Republican candidate in Connecticut, and it now favors a Lieberman victory in November.

"We did a poll and there is no way any Republican we put out there can win, so we are just going to leave that one alone," said the NRSC source.

Instead, the NRSC is pulling for Lieberman over Ned Lamont, who rode an anti-war message to a victory in the Aug 8 primary.

We're working to get on the record confirmation of this.
*************************************************************

He may not even be able to get 2%

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Now, I have another question.

The Quinnipiac poll shows the Republican nominee as getting only 4 percent of the voters.

My question is: do you SERIOUSLY expect the Republican nominee to get less than 20 percent of the vote? If so, please show me a state where the Republican challenger ever got so low a vote

And if he does get 20 percent, what happens to Lieberman's numbers?

Well, you're from there and I'm not, but from my outside vantage point there is no way on earth Schlesinger is going to get 20%.

He's a political nobody with a scandal hanging round his shoulders - in a district where the Republicans have a unique shot at simultaneously embarassing the Dems, getting an Independent voted in who will side with them on war & peace issues (err, scratch "peace"), and whose win will jeopardise the Dems' long shot in getting a Senate majority.

What on earth is there to win for them by voting Schlesinger?

I dunno. I dont know the state as well as you do, but CT doesnt seem like the kind of place where you'd have many yellow-dog Republicans (or whatever the Republican equivalent of yellow-dog Democrats would be): people who'd vote for a yellow dog rather than a non-Republican.

President Bush has refused to endorse Schlesinger; asked point blank, he refused to be drawn out on whom he supports. The NRSC will not stick out a finger to support Schlesinger.

You ask whether there's been any Republican getting as low as 4%; getting much lower than 20%. But the thing is, there's really little precedent for this race. When's the last time, you can think of, that a race revolved around a Democrat facing an Independent, an Independent liked by the Republicans, with the Republican leadership refusing to take sides and conservative opinion-makers rallying for the Independent in question?

No, I cant think of a race in which the Republican just got 4%, but then I cant think of any recent race like this.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Well, you're from there and I'm not, but from my outside vantage point there is no way on earth Schlesinger is going to get 20%.

He's a political nobody with a scandal hanging round his shoulders

Perhaps. But the normal Republican challenger gets about 35% of the vote in Connecticut. 20% will be significantly below that, taking the scandals-which seem to be overblown-into account.

nimh wrote:

- in a district where the Republicans have a unique shot at simultaneously embarassing the Dems, getting an Independent voted in who will side with them on war & peace issues (err, scratch "peace"), and whose win will jeopardise the Dems' long shot in getting a Senate majority.

They might get a Senator who will side with them on Iraq-but any election of Lieberman will NOT change who is in the majority in the Senate, whichever side that is. Lieberman has said all along, and just reiterated yesterday, that he is running as an "independent Democrat" and will caucus with the Democrats, who I can assure you will be glad to have him back if he wins. That is to say, Lieberman will vote for a Democrat for Senate Majority Leader, will vote for a Democratic majority in every Senate committee, and vote for a Democratic chairman in every Senate committee. Just like he did before, just like all other Democrats in the Senate will.

nimh wrote:

What on earth is there to win for them by voting Schlesinger?

Europeans, with their multi-party systems, are far more used to playing games with their votes than Americans are with the two party system. Europeans might not have so much trouble with the idea of considering one candidate the bad guy for one election, but considering him the good guy the next time because he is better than the alternatives.

The Republicans in Connecticut have voted against Lieberman for 18 years. Now, all of a sudden, the national Republican leadership is sort of hinting that maybe the election of Lieberman is not such a bad thing. Will Republicans all follow this? Only if you think Republicans are automatons willing to follow their leaders in robot-like fashion.

Connecticut Republicans have voted against Lieberman for almost two decades, and a fair percentage of them are NOT going to go to the poll and pull the lever for him regardless of what the national leadership says. Sclessinger might do badly compared to the 35% of his predecessors-but 4%?

Impossible.

0 Replies

I might point out that August and September are the months where third party candidacies flourish, where the poll numbers all show that an upset is likely in the offing.

Unfortunately, the elections are held in November, when most third party dreams have long since been dashed. Yes, there are independents who get elected, but very few.

Moreover, most independents who do make it do so because they offer a fresh alternative. What fresh alternative can Lieberman offer after 18 years? He isn't even running on the platform that he is going to shake up Washington.

Instead, in a year when people are not satisfied with the status quo, Lieberman is saying he is the guy who will get along nicely with the same people who got us into the present predicament. Not exactly a thrilling call to political arms, is it?

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Now, all of a sudden, the national Republican leadership is sort of hinting that maybe the election of Lieberman is not such a bad thing. Will Republicans all follow this? Only if you think Republicans are automatons willing to follow their leaders in robot-like fashion.

But its not just the official Republican leadership that is "sort of hinting that maybe the election of Lieberman is not such a bad thing"; you have everyone from Ann Coulter to Rush Limbaugh - exactly those hardrightist rabblerousers who would appeal to a "yellow dog republican" - actively singing Lieberman's praises, and making out like he's all but a real Republican.

kelticwizard wrote:

Connecticut Republicans have voted against Lieberman for almost two decades, and a fair percentage of them are NOT going to go to the poll and pull the lever for him regardless of what the national leadership says.

Another possibility of what polls showing Schlesinger getting just 4% might be about is that those Republicans will simply stay at home. Its not unheard of. That faced with a situation where one's 'own' candidate is both very unattractive and without a chance in hell, and where the presumed alternative (Lieberman) aint so bad, even those Republicans who cant get themselves to pull the lever for Lieberman themselves will rather drop out of the race altogether than cast a vote that will further diminish Lieberman's chances against an outright liberal Democrat.

Even casting aside sophisticated strategic voting, camps that are demoralised and unsure what to do - as Schlesinger's target voters surely are right now - generally show a far lower turnout than camps who have a single, appealing candidate with good chances.

0 Replies

http://www.uclick.com/feature/06/08/18/wpnan060818.gif

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

you have everyone from Ann Coulter to Rush Limbaugh - exactly those hardrightist rabblerousers who would appeal to a "yellow dog republican" - actively singing Lieberman's praises...."

Outside of Ann Coulter, who is from Connecticut, you did not have Rush Limbaugh and those other commentators going to the voting booth and voting against Lieberman the last 18 years.

Voting is a personal choice, and while there are sources we all have which influence us, those sources are asking quite a lot to tell someone who has regarded Lieberman as "the bad guy" for 18 years to suddenly consider him a good guy.

As for the Republicans who have told the pollsters they will vote for Lieberman, I feel strongly they are people who were forced to watch "the other party's" race on TV and in the papers, and who emotionally ended up taking sides. Come November, though, voters have always shown a marked tendency to return to their party roots and vote as they always did.

0 Replies

Mr.Nimh:

Do you know who Senator Jim Jeffords is?

I am sure that Keltic Wizard has forgotten him. He is the PRINCIPLED Senator from Vermont, who,despite being elected as a Republican in 2000, decided that his "conscience" would not allow him to remain in the Republican Party. So in midterm he defected and became a Democrat.

But it was on PRINCIPLE, mind you!!

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

Mr.Nimh:

Do you know who Senator Jim Jeffords is?

I am sure that Keltic Wizard has forgotten him.

Well, then, you just don't know much, do you? Of course I remember him.

BernardR wrote:

He is the PRINCIPLED Senator from Vermont, who,despite being elected as a Republican in 2000, decided that his "conscience" would not allow him to remain in the Republican Party. So in midterm he defected and became a Democrat.

But it was on PRINCIPLE, mind you!!

Oh, I wouldn't prevent any person from deciding in midtermthat his philosophy fits in better with another party. You might recall Democratic Senator shelby from Alabama switching from the Democratic to Republican parties. Did the Democrats make a big deal about that? Not at all.

But Lieberman is doing something different. He says he is a Democrat, but then he loses the primary and runs against his allegedly own party's choice, using aid and money from the Republicans.

If he wanted to be a Republican, he should just switch to being one. Instead, he seems to be turning the election into an auction-he goes the way that gives him the best deal.

Nothing illegal about it-but the voters should consider it.

0 Replies

Keltic Wizard wrote:

But Lieberman is doing something different. He says he is a Democrat, but then he loses the primary and runs against his allegedly own party's choice, using aid and money from the Republicans.

If he wanted to be a Republican, he should just switch to being one. Instead, he seems to be turning the election into an auction-he goes the way that gives him the best deal.

***********************************************************

The difference between the jerkoff Jeffords and Lieberman is that Lieberman told the voters BEFORE the election which way he was going.

At least he is honest.

Jeffords is an unethical deceptive scumbag!!!

0 Replies

Eric Alterman

Quote:

Here's my prediction: If Lieberman wins the election, he will not switch to the Republicans, as some fear. But he will do the functional equivalent, which is accept Bush's appointment to replace Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, resign his seat and allow the Republican governor of Connecticut to appoint a Republican in his stead. That is the implicit deal between the Lieberman camp and Rove, Cheney, Bush etc and the reason, that alone, in the entire country, this is the only race where this most partisan of political operations, refuses to support the Republican in the race. Bush, Rove and Cheney do not make political decisions on the basis of what they think is good for the country. They care only about their party and themselves. If Lieberman supporters are genuinely supporting him as a Democrat, is it not enough for him to pledge to vote with the party in the Senate. He must pledge that, under no circumstances, will he accept an appointment from Bush or resign his seat, so long as a Republican occupies the state House.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/

0 Replies

From Yahoo! News:

"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., has endorsed Lieberman, saying Schlesinger has no chance of winning."

Plus:

"While his two foes have already collected and spent millions, Schlesinger has raised just $113,581, including a $50,000 loan to his campaign, as of June 30, according to his latest campaign finance report."

Shunned candidate goes to Washington

0 Replies

This is a stupid idea. Best to keep your enemy near by so you can keep an eye on him. ---BBB

Some Dems want Lieberman out of party
By SUSAN HAIGH, Associated Press Writer
Aug 21, 2006
HARTFORD, Conn.

Critics of Senator Joe Lieberman's independent run to keep his job attacked on two fronts Monday, with one group asking an elections official to throw him out of the Democratic Party and a former rival calling on state officials to keep his name off the November ballot.

Staffers for Lieberman, who lost the Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, called both efforts dirty politics. The senator filed as an independent candidate a day after the loss, running under the new Connecticut for Lieberman party.

A group whose members described themselves as peace activists asked Sharon Ferrucci, New Haven's Democratic registrar of voters, to remove Lieberman from the party, arguing that he cannot be a Democrat while running under another party's banner.

The request could lead to a hearing in which Lieberman, the Democrats' vice presidential nominee in 2000, would have to argue that he still adheres to the party's principles.

"The law is pretty clear he is no longer a member of the Democratic Party in good standing," said group leader Henry Lowendorf. "There was an open vote and he was voted out. He joined a different party."

Ferrucci said she would research the request, the first of its kind in her two decades on the job.

Lieberman campaign manager Sherry Brown said the effort was "dirty political tricks at its worst."

"This kind of ridiculous, partisan game-playing is not going to provide anyone in Connecticut with better jobs, better health care, or better schools," she said.

Since losing the primary, Lieberman has referred to himself as an "independent Democrat" and said he plans to remain part of the Democratic caucus in Washington, even though several leading Democrats have called on him to give up his independent run.

Lieberman, popular among Republicans and unaffiliated voters, leads Lamont by 12 points in a recent statewide poll, with Republican Alan Schlesinger trailing far behind.

As of Monday, about 4,600 of the 7,500 voters' signatures Lieberman collected to petition his way onto the November ballot had been verified, and Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz said she expects Lieberman will ultimately have enough.

Lamont distanced himself Monday from the peace activists' request. He told reporters that Lieberman should not be removed from the Democratic rolls, and that Lieberman has the right under state law to form the new party.

"He's got the right to run. It's not what I would have done," Lamont said.

John Orman, a Democrat who gave up a challenge to Lieberman last year, argued in complaints filed with the state Monday that Lieberman should be kept off the Nov. 7 ballot.

Orman, a Fairfield University political science professor, accused Lieberman of creating "a fake political party," adding: "He's doing anything he can to get his name on the ballot."

Campaign spokesman Dan Gerstein said Lieberman has followed the law in his re-election effort.

___

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Eric Alterman
Quote:
Here's my prediction: If Lieberman wins the election, he will not switch to the Republicans, as some fear. But he will do the functional equivalent, which is accept Bush's appointment to replace Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, resign his seat and allow the Republican governor of Connecticut to appoint a Republican in his stead. That is the implicit deal between the Lieberman camp and Rove, Cheney, Bush etc and the reason, that alone, in the entire country, this is the only race where this most partisan of political operations, refuses to support the Republican in the race. Bush, Rove and Cheney do not make political decisions on the basis of what they think is good for the country. They care only about their party and themselves. If Lieberman supporters are genuinely supporting him as a Democrat, is it not enough for him to pledge to vote with the party in the Senate. He must pledge that, under no circumstances, will he accept an appointment from Bush or resign his seat, so long as a Republican occupies the state House.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/

What rubbish. Lieberman isn't ready to retire yet and will not allow himself to be forced out be the extremists in his party.

0 Replies

This one is for BernardR:

http://americanresearchgroup.com/ctsenate/

Quote:

Lieberman and Lamont Tied in Connecticut

Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont are in a statistical tie in the race for United States Senate in Connecticut according to the latest survey from the American Research Group. Among likely voters in November, 44% say they would vote for Lieberman, 42% say they would vote for Lamont, 3% say they would vote for Alan Schlesinger, and 11% are undecided.

The tide is turning, just as I've always said.

0 Replies

And this is for Dookiestix--

CONNECTICUT NEWS

Lamont, Lieberman Gather Union Endorsements
2:03 PM EDT, August 22, 2006
Associated Press NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- Representatives of about 20 union locals rallied Tuesday in support of Sen. Joe Lieberman, even though many prominent Democrats abandoned him after he lost the Democratic primary and launched an independent campaign.

"The choice for our members was clear and easy to make. We asked ourselves who has the better credentials and ability to navigate in Washington to work for the people of Connecticut," said Bob Proto of the UNITE HERE local that represents Yale service and maintenance workers

Lieberman got widespread union support while running for re-election in the Democratic primary. But Lieberman saw much of his party support disappear after he lost the Aug. 8 primary to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont and filed petitions to run an independent campaign.

Most prominent Democrats who had supported Lieberman threw their support to Lamont. But Tuesday's rally by unions, which traditionally support the Democratic Party, shows that Lieberman still has some support from his traditional base.

Lamont is also courting organized labor and is expected to be endorsed Wednesday by the United Auto Workers.

Taking a dig at Lamont, a Greenwich businessman, Proto said, "Our union does not feel comfortable with a multimillionaire with very little credentials representing the interests of working men and women in Connecticut."

Lieberman said he appreciated the support.

"Today is a day full of hope for me because of the endorsements you've given me," he said.

The rally included hundreds of union workers including food workers, Teamsters, carpenters, laborers, firefighters and communications workers. They gathered in front of a construction site on the Yale University campus.

end of quote

SENATOR LIEBERMAN GETTING LABOR BEHIND HIM????

WHO WILL BACK LAMONT? left wing kooks???

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Some of us remember clearly LBJ's tv ad showing the little girl walking in a field of daisies, next picture a mushroom cloud, insinuation was Goldwater was a dangerous war monger. The rest is history.

Oh, how terrible.

You ARE aware that Goldwater advocated using nuclear weapons in VietNam, Okie? I think you are old enough.

Pray tell, considering that Goldwater advocated the use of nuclear weapons in VietNam, why is the mushroom cloud commercial unfair?

0 Replies

Quote:

"The choice for our members [Lieberman] was clear and easy to make. We asked ourselves who has the better credentials and ability to navigate in Washington to work for the people of Connecticut," said Bob Proto of the UNITE HERE local that represents Yale service and maintenance workers

Quote:

Lamont is also courting organized labor and is expected to be endorsed Wednesday by the United Auto Workers.

Oh, this is big news.

The ladies who serve the food in the Yale cafeteria and the fellows who change the ligh bulbs in the dorm have endorsed their local favorite Joe Lieberman.

Lamont has to content himself with the endorsement of the United Auto Workers-a far more politically potent group.

This is just the latest example of how the support Joe Lieberman used to be able to count on is now going to Lamont, and Lieberman has to scramble to get righties to support him-in a state where even the Republican representatives vote liberal about half the time.

Gotta hand it to Lieberman-he's making a big splash. But by the time everything gets sorted out in November, it sure looks like he's going to realize that it is difficult to get reelected on a platform of "more of the same" in a year when people are dissatisfied with the status quo.

0 Replies

Lieberman's endorsements include the Teamsters!!!

0 Replies

kelticwizard wrote:

Oh, this is big news.

The ladies who serve the food in the Yale cafeteria and the fellows who change the ligh bulbs in the dorm have endorsed their local favorite Joe Lieberman.

Lamont has to content himself with the endorsement of the United Auto Workers-a far more politically potent group.

Uhm. I appreciate your fervour, but you're overlooking things in your enthusiasm here. The article may have quoted the rep of the Yale service workers specifically, but says quite clearly that they are just one of about twenty union locals that rallied to Lieberman.

That is big news indeed, I'm afraid: "The rally included hundreds of union workers including food workers, Teamsters, carpenters, laborers, firefighters and communications workers."

On the other hand, the Auto Workers are the only union local mentioned as having gone Lamont.

0 Replies

Why the Left Is Furious at Lieberman; Iraq is only a part

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know