Lamont Leading Lieberman In Early REturns

plainoldme wrote:

The above is from a site that will make some cringe: Move On. org

Lead deficiency is a horrible thing.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

plainoldme wrote:
Dookie -- I think they totally misunderstood the meaning of words, "national exposure," in my post. Prior to his having been tapped to run for vice president, hardly anyone knew him. Many of us felt he was put on the ticket for geographic reasons. Others felt his resemblance to Wall Street Republicans earned him a place.

And after the Cheney/Lieberman debate most people (except Dookie, apparently) thought the wrong men had been nominated for President.

In fact, I don't believe there was any widespread Democratic movement to oppose Lieberman until recently, when he has remained a staunch supporter of the war in Iraq. Clearly that is the seminal issue that has caused him to lose favor with the peace-at-all-costs element of his party.

Ticomaya, I am constantly amazed at what you either do not get or refuse to understand.

What is it about conservatives who fail to understand timelines and changes of opinion? Try looking up hindsight and then buy a clue. You might finally "get it."

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
plainoldme wrote:
Dookie -- I think they totally misunderstood the meaning of words, "national exposure," in my post. Prior to his having been tapped to run for vice president, hardly anyone knew him. Many of us felt he was put on the ticket for geographic reasons. Others felt his resemblance to Wall Street Republicans earned him a place.

And after the Cheney/Lieberman debate most people (except Dookie, apparently) thought the wrong men had been nominated for President.

In fact, I don't believe there was any widespread Democratic movement to oppose Lieberman until recently, when he has remained a staunch supporter of the war in Iraq. Clearly that is the seminal issue that has caused him to lose favor with the peace-at-all-costs element of his party.

Ticomaya, I am constantly amazed at what you either do not get or refuse to understand.

What is it about conservatives who fail to understand timelines and changes of opinion? Try looking up hindsight and then buy a clue. You might finally "get it."

Meanwhile, I am rarely surprised at what you don't get and refuse to understand, Dookie.

0 Replies

Tico -- Your response to Dookie was of the "so's your old man" variety.

0 Replies

plainoldme wrote:

Tico -- Your response to Dookie was of the "so's your old man" variety.

And of what variety, pray tell, was Dookie's post I was responding to?

I suspect you think he was just giving me helpful constructive criticism. Go ahead and chalk up another good deed for the liberal, and a loutish response from the conservative, in your little book.

0 Replies

keltic, please look at the entire post Lash wrote:

I've GOT to see that voting record.

I remember years of him agreeing with the GOP over Dems on many major issues. <I was crazy about him.>

Thanks for the heads up. I'll investigate.

But, I don't blame the Dems for cutting him loose, even though he's a great guy.

He's for very limited abortion--rare for the Dems.

Pro-death penalty-------rare for the Dems

Increase defense spending and law enforcement--------yadda yadda yadda

I did look at the record and some of the results are noted in my post.

He does side witht he GOP on many of the "defining issues," as I said previously--but yes, the majority of his votes were "liberal."

I noticed the same stealth record with McCain....I think someone mentioned it.

0 Replies

Lash:

I am not sure what you mean by stealth record.

At any rate, as far as "very limited abortion" goes, you would appear to be in error. The National Abortion Rights Action League, (NARAL), has given him a 100% rating.

Source.

Also, Gore was not opposed to the death penalty in 2000 either-it came up during the debates.

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

Lead deficiency is a horrible thing.

Say what?

Don't look now, but I think Sierra has eaten more than a few paint chips to make up for her lead deficiency.

0 Replies

keltic--

This doesn't seem like a Dem stance on abortion:

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman (CT)

Issue Positions(NPAT)

2004 Presidential National Political Awareness Test

Only the ones with x's were chosen by Lieberman. They seem conservative to me.

Abortion Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion.
a) Abortions should always be illegal.

b) Abortions should always be legal.

c) Abortions should be legal only within the first trimester of pregnancy.

X d) Abortions should be legal when the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape.

X e) Abortions should be legal when the life of the woman is endangered.

X f) Abortions should be limited by waiting periods and notification requirements as decided by each state government.

g) Prohibit the dilation and extraction procedure, also known as "partial-birth" abortion.

h) Prohibit public funding of abortions and of organizations that advocate or perform abortions.

X i) Provide funding for family planning programs as a means to decrease the number of abortions.

X j) Other or expanded principles
Just like President Clinton said, I want to keep abortion "safe, legal and rare." The way to do that is not through restrictions that limit a woman's access to abortion. In fact, antiabortion measures such as banning types of procedures without health and life exceptions for the woman put the health - and even lives - of women at risk. As Senator, I voted for an amendment of support for Roe v. Wade because I believe the decision secures an important constitutional right that should not be overturned. I favor permitting the forms of abortion allowed under Roe v. Wade and I support protections for the life and health of the mother.
_______________________

I see his rhetoric sounds liberal, but his waiting period vote and notification acquiesence seem otherwise.

Anyway, I have no point to prove, other than due to some of his speeches and issues, he has always seemed conservative to me. I do see, in part, how I was misled. I still think he is more conservative than your average Dem.

I also think the choices he omitted were more convincing than the ones he chose.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

I also think the choices he [Lieberman] omitted were more convincing than the ones he chose.

True.

About the only cocrete proposals he has supported limiting abortion were not pushing for a reversal of the decision making the RU 486 pill available without a prescription, and the parental notification for underage girls getting abortions. And he favors a judicial override even for that.

Which is something of a limit, true, but miles away from being anything close to most Republicans' positions.

0 Replies

You seem to think he's an average Dem. Is that a fair assumption?

0 Replies

Except for the past couple of years, I would say that he was in the middle range of Dems on most things, yes.

0 Replies

He seems to have that McCain think going on-- You think he's really on the fringes, but the majority of the votes belie it.

0 Replies

Abortion does not occur frequently enough to make it a political issue. Nor, is it an issue that should be politicized. Rather, those who oppose abortion felt the need to criminalize it, instead of behaving as they ought to have and ignored it.

That said, abortion does create ethical problems in the minds of law makers. Joseph P. Kennedy III said that while he supports a woman's right to choose, coming from a Catholic background, it is difficult to say he is favor of abortion. An honest and refreshing statement.

0 Replies

Uh, oh! Sore Loserman may be the next Zell Miller.

Rob Kall: Turncoat Joe "Zell" Lieberman-- The Next Zell Miller?

by Rob Kall

http://www.opednews.com

Zell Miller went out like a psycho nutball at the Republican National Convention. But not many people took him seriously.

Joe Lieberman may be far more damaging to the Democratic party as he becomes the next Zell Miller from hell for the Democratic Party.

By campaigning as an independent, Lieberman could help bring out a strong Republican turnout, which will help the three incumbent Republican congressional candidates who could, otherwise be swept out of office.

The Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger has gambling problems hanging over his head and is currently pulling 13% in the polls.

Remove Joe "Zell" Lieberman from the picture and the Democratic party is looking at a much rosier scenario, wiht a better chance of winning the house, with more funds for other races.

Joe could leave now and be remembered as a good guy who made mistakes on the war and his support of Bush. If he stays in this one, he will be reviled as a traitor to the Democratic cause.

Already, he is attacking the Democratic party as going too far to the left, and he's just getting started.

It's never too late to wake up. Republicans do it all the time and become Democrats or independents. Let's hope Joe does just that-- wakes up and pulls out. It's time to go Joe. If the left had some strong policy promotion organizations, like the right's "think tanks," one of them could offer Joe a job, for a few hundred thousand a year and he'd be able to maintain a visible presence, make a decent living, and exit gracefully. It's too bad, pathetic really, that the Democratic leadership hasn't gotten their act together in that regard.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

He seems to have that McCain think going on-- You think he's really on the fringes, but the majority of the votes belie it.

He's on the fringe now, and here's why:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/joe-lieberman-will-drop-o_b_27006.html

Lawrence O'Donnell wrote:

Joe Lieberman will drop out. He probably knows right now that the day will come in late September when he will announce his withdrawal from the race. No one is going to have to talk him into it. By that time, the Democratic Party power structure will be doing its thing for Ned Lamont and Lieberman will be trailing by double digits.

It won't be a hard decision for Lieberman. He will drop out to avoid career-ending humiliation.

Lieberman came within four points of Lamont by climbing up on the shoulders of the biggest names in the party including Clinton--Bill and Hillary. Lieberman's TV commercial starring Bill Clinton was his best. Now, both Clintons and everyone else in the Party are carrying Lamont on their shoulders. By late September, Bill Clinton will be onstage hugging his new best friend and starring in Lamont commercials. Connecticut's much better liked senator, Chris Dodd, will be campaigning for Lamont this time. The Clinton and Dodd defections will cost Lieberman ten points in Connecticut. If Dick Cheney continues to say nice things about Lieberman, it'll cost him another ten points. And Lieberman campaigning alone, all alone, will look bitter, very bitter. His smile will look faker than ever. Voters aren't drawn to bitter.

Lieberman is going to have one very big news day in late September and he'll milk it for all its worth. That's all his independent candidacy is going to be about--stage-managing his own exit. He didn't want an eighteen year Senate career to disappear under 'Lamont Wins' headlines. He wanted his own news day, his own headline. He knows how and when to get it.

This certainly all makes sense. More successful politicians who bow out of public life tend to get nice, cush corporate jobs and make alot of money on the lecture circuit. If Joe were to continue along this treacherous path that he's implied, his future will look rather bleak in regards to his role as a private citizen.

Joe will bow out, as the Democratic leadership has firmly lined up behind Lamont. And the Republican rhetoric that's been flying as of late is a clear indication as to how scared they are in losing power in Washington. The anti-war movement is now a national movement, and cannot be relegated to the fringes of the liberal left. Add to that Bush's atrocious approval ratings, and the fact that Democrats will make sure that any Republicans running for Congress are going to have to answer to their rubber stamping of Bush's reckless policies, and you have a recipe for disaster for the GOP.

0 Replies

<chuckle>
The Dems haven't had this pinpoint focus, been this energized, this sure of themselves, since the Wellstone Memorial.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

<chuckle>
The Dems haven't had this pinpoint focus, been this energized, this sure of themselves, since the Wellstone Memorial.

Must be the poll numbers...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_el_ge/republicans_ap_poll

0 Replies

Dookiestix wrote:

Must be the poll numbers...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_el_ge/republicans_ap_poll

Oh, these bits are good, the bolded part in particular:

Quote:

Republicans argue that elections will be decided in the 435 districts and the 33 Senate races based on local issues with the power of incumbency looming large. [..]

But fewer than 100 days before the Nov. 7 election, the AP-Ipsos poll suggested the midterms are clearly turning into a national referendum on Bush.

The number of voters who say their congressional vote this fall will be in part to express opposition to the president jumped from 20 percent last month to 29 percent, driven by double-digit increases among males, minorities, moderate and conservative Democrats and Northeasterners. [..]

In the South, Bush's approval ratings dropped from 43 percent last month to 34 percent as the GOP advantage with Southern women disappeared. [..]

0 Replies

Lamont Leading Lieberman In Early REturns

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know