Reviews of CT senator race/debate?

[stubeeef]

Watched some of the debate yesterday, thought Lieberman mopped the floor with the challenger - must be my right leanings. Thought I would get your take on it.

[Black&Tan]

I missed the debate, but as a CT resident & voter, I'm very curious as to how both candidates did.

The main issue here is Lieberman's stance on the war. The war was originally a WMD issue, but that has evolved to an intangible "war on terrorism." I agree that we shouldn't leave until the job is done, we owe it to the Iraqi people to fix all that we've destroyed. And empower them to create a functioning government.

What I'm angry about is going there in the first place. I feel Bush misled the American public with the false claims of WMD. Was this due to his desire for revenge, the opportunity to finish what his daddy started, or something else?

Personally, I hold Bush accountable for the war, and the chumminess that Lieberman displays towards the President makes me question the Senator's goals.

[OnceUGoMac]

Lieberman came off too angry and Lamont came off too weak. I'd stick with Lieberman.

[Black&Tan]

Lieberman's done some good things - he helped pursuade the Pentagon to remove the Groton sub base from the ax list. That would have crippled the state. Lamont's a real unknown politically....

[mactastic]

Lieberman came off too angry and Lamont came off too weak. I'd stick with Lieberman.
I'm not surprised. The DLC is very fond of Joementum.

[Black&Tan]

...and here's the transcript from the debate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/07/AR2006070700029.html

[OnceUGoMac]

I'm not surprised. The DLC is very fond of Joementum.

Agreed. However, if he loses to Lamont, I strongly oppose his independent bid.

[Black&Tan]

Watched some of the debate yesterday, thought Lieberman mopped the floor with the challenger - must be my right leanings. Thought I would get your take on it.

After reading the transcripts, I agree with you stubeef. The Senator soundly beat him. Let's see what the voters have to say.

[thedude110]

Lamont's lead now up to 13% (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/03/mg.thu/index.html) -- doesn't look good for 'ol Joe.

What's amazing to me is how he's done it -- even though Lieberman was the freaking VP candidate against Bush, Lamont has managed to portray Lieberman as someone who shares the Bush agenda. Everyone wants to talk about Iraq, but Lamont's ads have been much more concerned with saying that Joe Lieberman is George Bush's candidate.

Lieberman still holds a large lead running as an independent in a three way race, but don't count out Lamont -- he's proven himself so far.

My gravest concern is that the two split the Democratic votes and Connecticut somehow sends a gambling addicted Republican senator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Schlesinger) to Washington ...

[Dont Hurt Me]

Lieberman's done some good things - he helped pursuade the Pentagon to remove the Groton sub base from the ax list. That would have crippled the state. Lamont's a real unknown politically....That was a good thing but kissing George and his behind was stupid and if CT wanted a republican they should have voted one in. Groton sub base memorys....................:cool:

[MacNut]

The lead is supposedly shorter then it was, I don't trust polls at all as they are not accurate but they are predicting a close race.

[zimv20]

The lead is supposedly shorter then it was, I don't trust polls at all as they are not accurate but they are predicting a close race.
do you mean that the poll data doesn't represent the populace or that polls are bad predictors of outcome?

[mactastic]

do you mean that the poll data doesn't represent the populace or that polls are bad predictors of outcome?
Seems that the problem with this particular race is the difficulty of putting together a reliable voter model to predict who will show up to vote.

It's summer, it's a primary, etc etc. No one's sure who will show up at the polls tomorrow.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Lieberman helped get us into Iraq. We now know after 2,500 dead and 400 billion later it wasnt needed. Thats reason enough to vote him out.

[solvs]

I didn't support Joe when he was a Dem, and I don't support him now as a Repub lite. Not that I like the other guy either, but he was good on Colbert. Joe wouldn't even show.

And just in case anyone is wondering, I'm not anti-semitic (waiting for someone to call me that like they did in the Israel/Hamas thread, even though I'm part Jewish).

[thedude110]

I didn't support Joe when he was a Dem

Not that I'm prying into your voting record, but did you support him when he ran with Gore?

I support Lamont (albeit with suspicion), but Joe has managed to hold the support of the CT. left up until this moment.

Incidentally, I've not once voted for Joe -- owing mostly to the fact that I've been out of CT. for ten years.

[zimv20]

Not that I'm prying into your voting record, but did you support him when he ran with Gore?
i voted for the ticket, but i'd always thought lieberman was an unfortunate choice. imo, just about any other VP candidate would have gotten gore the election.

[zimv20]

lieberman's website (http://joe2006.com/) is just a short message right now. looks like they didn't pay their hosting bill, either. (link (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/7/202158/2423))

from earlier:
http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/lieberman_website.jpg

[solvs]

Not that I'm prying into your voting record, but did you support him when he ran with Gore?
I didn't vote in 2000. Didn't see the point. Of course, my problems with Gore seem trivial by comparison now, but hindsight is 20/20. Never really liked Lieb because some of his policies on education (he's pro voucher) and entertainment (such as his support of the Family Entertainment Protection Act). Gore's Wife Tipper is of the same belief when it comes to blaming the entertainment industry, as is Hillary Clinton. Plus he actually beat Lowell Weicker when he first ran because he was more conservative than the Republican Sen, which kinda tells me something. Plus, as everyone seems to be hinting, a lot of people in this country don't like Jews (not saying it's right, it's obviously not). Sad, but it more than likely hurt Gore more than most people will admit.

So, no.

[yg17]

Hope he loses. He's a republican in disguise.

[clayj]

Hope he loses. He's a republican in disguise.If it makes you feel any better, there are some Republicans in the Senate who are actually Democrats in disguise.

[solvs]

If it makes you feel any better, there are some Republicans in the Senate who are actually Democrats in disguise.
Ironically, one of whom lost to him back when he first ran as I noted above. Apparently some CT Republicans found their guy too liberal, so they elected Joe because he was the more conservative of the 2 on some things. Go figure. They've been supporting him ever since, as noted in the other thread about dirty politics. I used to wonder about McCain and Spectre, but am often reminded of why they are Republicans.

Too bad more people couldn't run as moderates and win, but if Lieberman is what's considered moderate, maybe that's a good thing.

[OutThere]

Lamont gets my vote today in the primary.

Though, I'm worried that Lieberman could bail and run as an Independent and still win.

We'll see.

This is my first time at the polls, FWIW. :D

[Dont Hurt Me]

i voted for the ticket, but i'd always thought lieberman was an unfortunate choice. imo, just about any other VP candidate would have gotten gore the election.I would agree, Gore needed a better VP candidate. Lieberman just seemed weak. maybe its his voice.

[jelloshotsrule]

If it makes you feel any better, there are some Republicans in the Senate who are actually Democrats in disguise.

such as?

[zimv20]

i know i'm just one of those naive liberals who thinks foxnews isn't actually fair and balanced, but they sure don't seem to like ned lamont much:

http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/FOXcrawl1.jpg

http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/3/FOXcrawl2.jpg

[thedude110]

Really telling pics. I had no idea the right was so afraid of Lamont (and the emergent left he represents).

[mactastic]

Yeah, if Republicans really did think Lamont would prove disastrous to the Democrats why wouldn't they be supporting him?

[MacNut]

Something about Lamont I don't like, I have been forced to watch these political commercials in CT for months, He just seems like a phony that once in office will be no different then any other rich guy that gets elected. That said if Lamont wins he will have just as much power as Leiberman if he wins as an independent, none.

[zimv20]

on abcnews just now, when they showed lamont and put up a caption, they put an (R) next to his name.

i don't like it when i know more than the journalists i'm watching. or should i say, "jounalists"?

[mactastic]

Out of curiousity, what makes him seem more phony than your average politician?

[zimv20]

link (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2287510)


Lieberman Campaign Says Web Site Hacked

Lieberman Campaign Accuses Challenger's Supporters of Hacking Web Site, E-Mail

HARTFORD, Conn. - Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman, who was locked in a battle with an anti-war challenger in the nation's most closely watched primary race Tuesday, accused his opponent's supporters of hacking his campaign Web site and e-mail system.

Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith said the campaign has contacted the Connecticut attorney general's office and asked for a criminal investigation by state and federal authorities.

Campaigning Tuesday in New Haven, Lieberman said he has no proof that Ned Lamont's supporters are responsible, but is asking state party chairman to intervene.

"I'm concerned that our Web site is knocked out on the day of the primary, you'd assume it wasn't any casual observer," Lieberman said.

Lamont, campaigning early Tuesday afternoon in Bridgeport, said he knew nothing about the accusations. "It's just another scurrilous charge," he said.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's office declined immediate comment. Calls placed to the FBI and the chief state's attorney's office seeking comment were not immediately returned.

Smith said the site began having problems Monday night and crashed for good at 7 a.m.

"Voters cannot go to our Web site. They cannot access information," Smith said. "It is a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise voters."

(more)

very, very low. the lieberman campaign out to be ashamed, as they have no evidence the lamont campaign has anything to do with it. indeed, it looks like sheer incompetence.

there's good evidence that the lieberman site was being hosted on a shared server by a cheapie hosting company, myhostcamp.com. their site is down, too. more information about that from dailykos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/8/153827/3493).

[MacNut]

The problem is lack of moderates in this country, to much liberal conservative politics that are ruining the country. We needs more McCains and Leibermans to run the country.

numbers so far Lamont 61,449 Leiberman 53,159

update Lamont 69,466 Leiberman 64,056

[thedude110]

link (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2287510)


very, very low. the lieberman campaign out to be ashamed, as they have no evidence the lamont campaign has anything to do with it. indeed, it looks like sheer incompetence.

there's good evidence that the lieberman site was being hosted on a shared server by a cheapie hosting company, myhostcamp.com. their site is down, too. more information about that from dailykos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/8/153827/3493).

Based on local reports, the dailykos story has it right -- the problem is the Lieberman campaign tried to do their website on the cheap and it just couldn't handle the load.

Just heard a report on WTIC (http://www.wtic.com/) (Hartford's biggest radio station) saying that, if Lieberman loses, the Republican party of CT. will throw their support behind his independent candidacy rather than the gambling scandal plagued candidate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Schlesinger)who won their nomination. That "support," according to WTIC, is likely to include GOP money.

EDIT: A Lieberman campaign strategist was just interviewed and he is PO'd -- actually used this line:

Ned Lamont used four million dollars of TV ads to systematically distort Joe Lieberman's record. We're used to distortions from Republicans, but Joe never anticipated it from a fellow Democrat.

:rolleyes:

Someone's playing the victim all the way to his write-in candidacy ...

[MacNut]

Joe Lieberman has just announced he will run as an independent.

[zimv20]

Joe Lieberman has just announced he will run as an independent.
he's an ass. i guess we now know how much of a democrat he was, he doesn't mind handing that seat to the GOP.

watch for the GOP to fund his independent run, possibly to a large degree.

[zimv20]

on front page of nytimes and cnn.com: lieberman concedes.

on foxnews.com: "Eleventh-Hour Glitches | Lieberman levels hacking charge at foe"

[mactastic]

Well that was exciting. Interesting that Lieberman is willing to ditch the Democratic party so easily.

[Thomas Veil]

Joe Lieberman has just announced he will run as an independent.Yeah, there's someone who's doing the best thing for his party. :mad:

[zimv20]

Yeah, there's someone who's doing the best thing for his party. :mad:
yes, it is good for the GOP.

[solvs]

Yeah, there's someone who's doing the best thing for his party. :mad:
For the country too. :rolleyes:

[hulugu]

i voted for the ticket, but i'd always thought lieberman was an unfortunate choice. imo, just about any other VP candidate would have gotten gore the election.

I'm in the same boat, I hated Liberman as a VP choice in 2000, but he still smells like roses compared to ol' Beady-eyes and Beelzebub.

[hulugu]

on front page of nytimes and cnn.com: lieberman concedes.

on foxnews.com: "Eleventh-Hour Glitches | Lieberman levels hacking charge at foe"

Yes, and I'm sure if the opposite happened Fox News would be right on hand to discuss Lamont's questions about voting machines. Fox News has presented anyone who thinks the voting machines are a problem as an extremist nut-job.

Well that was exciting. Interesting that Lieberman is willing to ditch the Democratic party so easily.

Why, the man's been a Manchurian candidate for a while now.

[hulugu]

The problem is lack of moderates in this country, to much liberal conservative politics that are ruining the country. We needs more McCains and Leibermans to run the country.

numbers so far Lamont 61,449 Leiberman 53,159

update Lamont 69,466 Leiberman 64,056

McCain is a tool, after being crushed by the Bush campaign in a revolting campaign against him he's been buddying up to the administration and catering to the Christian right, all in an lame-duck attempt to run in '08.

I don't think this is an issue of moderates versus extremists, but a player knowing who has the power at the moment.
Leiberman has been parroting the Republican propaganda about fellow Democrats, including using the phrase 'cut-and-run' in numerous occasions.

Too busy playing 'good doggie' for the Majority, Leiberman like many others in Congress, gave up their authority at an important time, sat on their hands while Rummy played toy soldier with real people's lives and effectively lost the war before it started.

The whole lot should be on the chopping block. Leiberman deserves it.

Lamont appears to be a mediocre replacement, but it's good for Congress to know their jobs aren't safe and the voting public is getting restless.

Edit: Sorry for the multiple posts. I'll shut up now.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Watching fox news I thought they were going to start crying, Hannity was making a ass out of himself again last night. I get pretty sick that anyone who doesnt agree with his Neocon remove all liberty,freedom and common sense party is automatically painted a extreme liberal. Most of these big talkers and so called patriots never even served.

America has figured out Bush & his legions of draft dodgers(Cheney,Delay,Hastert,Frists,Libby,Rove) took us into a needless war while letting the guy who did 911 get away. Republicans that run all 3 branches still cant even secure our borders 5 yrs after 911. We need to vote out every Republican and Democrat who supported this administration of lie and spin. Maybe this is a start. I hope.

[mactastic]

Lieberman is going to be under EXTREME pressure to drop out of this race from many of his former friends. We'll see how he handles that.

My guess is that Joe drops out at some point along the way once he realizes that very few people (on the left anyway) support him anymore. Last night was essentially a no-confidence vote in his leadership.

[Sayhey]

With over 60% of the people of the US coming to the conclusion that the Iraq invasion is a disaster, somehow, it is still being reported, and most notably in this race, that those who oppose the war are an out-of-touch, radical fringe. Lieberman got what he deserved for his full-throated endorsement of the worst foreign policy disaster in this nation's history. It is those who, like Lieberman, refuse to recognize this fact that are out of touch with reality, and the voters of Connecticut are just first to show them that.

[mactastic]

Good lord... Rahm Emmanuel just called (http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/joe_trippi/2006/08/power_to_the_people.html) Joe Lieberman Bush's "love child"!
"This shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means."
Damn, that's gotta sting.

[leekohler]

If the GOP wants to paint everyone who disagrees with them Liberal extremists- let them! They'll find out in November just how p***ed off everyone is at what they've been doing. Lieberman was simply held accountable for ignoring his constituents and got what he deserved. Now- let's give the rest of them what they deserve too.

[MacNut]

The one thing that everyone is forgetting is that this is still about what's best for Connecticut and either way the people of the state lose. Lamont has no power to get anything done for the people and Lieberman if he wins as an independent wont have any power to get anything done either so either way the people of Connecticut lose.

[leekohler]

The one thing that everyone is forgetting is that this is still about what's best for Connecticut and either way the people of the state lose. Lamont has no power to get anything done for the people and Lieberman if he wins as an independent wont have any power to get anything done either so either way the people of Connecticut lose.

Don't be so sure, MacNut. I have a feeling there are going to be a lot of freshmen congresspeople elected in the fall.

And your state didn't lose, you won. People stood up and told Lieberman he doesn't represent them, and he lost his job. The system worked for a change.

[zimv20]

a system where we elect only the connected, powerful and experienced is bound for failure. the CT dems didn't want lieberman, end of story. they have a right to choose their own (small r) representive.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Its suppose to be a Govt by the people or have the corporations erased that?

[zimv20]

abcnews (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2006/08/george_stephano.html)


George Stephanopoulos: Can Karl help Joe?

According to a close Lieberman adviser, the President's political guru, Karl Rove, has reached out to the Lieberman camp with a message straight from the Oval Office: "The boss wants to help. Whatever we can do, we will do."

But in a year where even some Republican candidates are running away from the President on the campaign trail, does this offer have any value to Lieberman? Still smarting from all that coverage of "the kiss" at last year's State of the Union, the Lieberman camp isn't looking for an explicit endorsement. That could create more problems than it solves.

The White House might help Lieberman by putting the kibosh on any move to replace the weak Republican candidate, Alan Schlesinger, with a stronger candidate.

And it might be able to convince Schlesinger to drop out of the race and endorse Lieberman in the final week or two, when it's too late for another candidate to fill the GOP slot. A quiet White House effort to steer some money in Lieberman's direction is another possibility.

This is a tricky dance for Lieberman. He needs to figure out a way to get the benefits of Bush support -- some votes from loyal Republicans -- without turning off the independents and moderate Democrats he needs to win. The safest course may be a polite "thanks but no thanks" to the White House offer.

[mactastic]

The one thing that everyone is forgetting is that this is still about what's best for Connecticut and either way the people of the state lose. Lamont has no power to get anything done for the people and Lieberman if he wins as an independent wont have any power to get anything done either so either way the people of Connecticut lose.
I'm not forgetting. I just think the Democrats of Ct have a different opinion than you.

[mactastic]

abcnews (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2006/08/george_stephano.html)
Yeah, if the GOP actually thought Lamont was the easier candidate to beat they wouldn't support Joe.

[MacNut]

Yeah, if the GOP actually thought Lamont was the easier candidate to beat they wouldn't support Joe.The GOP doesn't have much of a candidate at all, they haven't had one in the past strong enough that has been able to dethrone a Dem.

[mactastic]

The GOP doesn't have much of a candidate at all, they haven't had one in the past strong enough that has been able to dethrone a Dem.
Right, but when was the last time the GOP offered to help the Democrats if it wasn't ultimately in their best interest?

[ham_man]

a system where we elect only the connected, powerful and experienced is bound for failure.
It has worked for 230 years...

[Dont Hurt Me]

Doesnt seem to be working these days.:rolleyes:

[Thomas Veil]

It has worked for 230 years...I think different people would pin different times on when it started breaking down, but for me everything really started going to hell about 1980. That makes it only 204 years that it's worked.

Its suppose to be a Govt by the people or have the corporations erased that?They have. (See above.)

If the GOP wants to paint everyone who disagrees with them Liberal extremists- let them!Amen. I would love to see a smart liberal politician take advantage of that. Poll after poll shows that the American people are really rather liberal, despite what they call themselves. The Dems should hammer on that continuously: "As an average American, you believe the minimum wage should be raised. But the Republicans call you an extremist nut."

You can frame almost any issue that way. Take all the nasty names that the GOP is calling liberals, and turn it on the people themselves. Tell them that when the GOP calls advocates of universal health care, fair wages and an end to the war "nuts", that they are calling the American people "nuts".

[zimv20]

It has worked for 230 years...
not the experienced part, anyway. those championing lieberman's 18 years of experience have apparently forgotten that, 18 years ago, he had no senate experience.

[Ugg]

I'm a big reader of Daily Kos and I can't tell you how sick and tired I am of their and the media's obsession in general about Liebermann. Who outside of CT really gives a flying horse's butt about it? Is it just a matter of Democratic cannibalism or is there something deeper here that I'm not understanding?

[Sayhey]

I'm a big reader of Daily Kos and I can't tell you how sick and tired I am of their and the media's obsession in general about Liebermann. Who outside of CT really gives a flying horse's butt about it? Is it just a matter of Democratic cannibalism or is there something deeper here that I'm not understanding?

It's about the war in Iraq and the direction of the Democratic Party. Lieberman made himself the poster child of Democrats who chose to give unquestioned support to Bush's invasion. He is also a stalwart of the DLC. Combine the two and add Lieberman's positions on such issues as the Terri Schiavo case and affirmative action and it is easy to see reasons why progressives banded together to support Lamont's challenge. I'm very glad he lost.

[Ugg]

It's about the war in Iraq and the direction of the Democratic Party. Lieberman made himself the poster child of Democrats who chose to give unquestioned support to Bush's invasion. He is also a stalwart of the DLC. Combine the two and add Lieberman's positions on such issues as the Terri Schiavo case and affirmative action and it is easy to see reasons why progressives banded together to support Lamont's challenge. I'm very glad he lost.

I fully understand the issues, what I don't understand is the obsession.

[zimv20]

I fully understand the issues, what I don't understand is the obsession.
factor in that they really don't like lieberman, i suppose.

[Sayhey]

I fully understand the issues, what I don't understand is the obsession. Sorry, I thought I was answering your question. The "obsession" is rather a focus on a conservative candidate that could be successfully be challenged. This was tried in San Diego's recent congressional race to replace "Duke" Cunningham and in the Texas challenge of Ciro Rodriguez against Cuellar. As a reader of the Daily Kos, I'm sure you're aware of both of those unsuccessful races. Lieberman is only the most high-profile of these campaigns because he is a Senator and he is well-known because his run for VP and President. I don't see an obsession here, but rather a breakthrough.

[mactastic]

I fully understand the issues, what I don't understand is the obsession.
CT Dems are obviously really fired up about sending a message to Bush, and by extension, his "love child".

It wasn't just Kos who was excited, although this was also a chance to flex his muscles and quiet the criticism that the netroots hadn't been able to win a significant race. By putting his credibility on the line and being right, he has proven that he is a major player in the Democratic game.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Lieberman should have been some kind of check on this President and his policys just as all those other cowards, draft dodgers and bought off politicians that infest Congress. Instead he's getting kissed by the guy who went missing during his national guard time and is supporting his war that has killed 2,600 Americans and injured thousands. Then we find out oops no WMDs, and that they were spinning Collin Powells UN speech and outing our own CIA agents so we could get one guy named Saddam. Meanwhile Bin Laden is laughing his arse off. How the Hell you support that as a Honest American? If they wanted Saddam so bad they should have found him & bombed him not take our Nation to War over spin & lies. Thats why Lieberman lost.

[KingYaba]

I bet Lieberman will win in the fall going as an independent.

[solvs]

I bet Lieberman will win in the fall going as an independent.
Doubtful. People are still complaining about Nader in 2000. I'll bet a lot of those who supported Joe will either vote for Lamont in Nov or just not vote. Even if he does get on the ballot as an Indie.

In other related news (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14228351/) (scroll down):
In Michigan, (Rep. Joe) Schwarz (R), a moderate who supports abortion rights, lost to conservative Tim Walberg, a former state lawmaker.
The cons becoming more conservative and the libs becoming more liberal. Who'd a thunk. Wonder who will win there. If the Dem isn't a total asshat, they might have a shot.
The race drew more than $1 million from outside groups; Schwarz had received support from President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.
Of course, that could have been it too. ;)

[thedude110]

Doubtful. People are still complaining about Nader in 2000. I'll bet a lot of those who supported Joe will either vote for Lamont in Nov or just not vote. Even if he does get on the ballot as an Indie.


I'm not so sure -- CT has 600,000 Dems, 400,000 Rs and (I think) 900,000 unaffiliated. If the GOP throws their support behind Joe (and can sell him as a way to "balance" a voting card with a Republican candidate for Governor who's pretty much a given to be re-elected), I think he could win by a lot. Lamont won the primary by saying Lieberman was George Bush -- that rhetoric won't work with the moderates like it worked with the base (and that base only voted for Lamont by 4 points).

Where Lieberman will suffer is his get out the vote infrastructure. The Democrats and Republicans have given party personnel and structures to get out their vote -- as an independent, Joe is going to have to build that from the ground up by November.

I'm not making up my mind in terms of voting for or against Lieberman yet. We'll see how his candidacy impacts the landscape -- if by running he minimizes Lamont but makes it more likely that that Republican nut Schleissinger gets elected, you better believe I'll vote for Lieberman. Lieberman stood (and will stand) against Bush many times -- another corrupt senator in the neo-cons' pocket is the last thing this state -- or the nation -- needs.

All that said, I'd be a happier human being if I can vote for Lamont -- and if he ends up going to Washington.

[zimv20]

amazing -- RNC chair ken mehlman, on hardball, refuses to endorse the GOP senate candidate in CT. video can be seen on this page (http://www.politicstv.com/blog/?p=643).

[leekohler]

amazing -- RNC chair ken mehlman, on hardball, refuses to endorse the GOP senate candidate in CT. video can be seen on this page (http://www.politicstv.com/blog/?p=643).

Hello! Because the GOP wants Lieberman. This is gonna get really interesting folks. I think Lieberman is going to really screw this up- actually, I'm counting on it. Obviously, the man cares nothing for the party he claims to belong to. He just used it to get elected and hold power. It's very obvious to me that all he cares about is himself.

[Thomas Veil]

From Washington State to Missouri to Pennsylvania, Democratic candidates found themselves on the defensive Wednesday as the Republican Party worked ferociously at every level to try to use the primary defeat of Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut to portray the opposition as the party of weakness and isolation on national security and liberal leanings on domestic policy. Doleful Democrats bemoaned the irony: At a time when Republicans should be back on their heels because of chaos abroad and President Bush's unpopularity, the Democrats' rejection of a sensible, moralistic centrist has handed the GOP a weapon that could have vast ramifications for both the midterm elections of '06 and the big dance of '08.

At breakfast time, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman was in Cleveland, decrying "an unfortunate embrace of isolationism, defeatism, and a blame- America-first attitude by national Democratic leaders at a time when retreating from the world is particularly dangerous." In early afternoon, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow told reporters in Crawford, Tex.: "It's a defining moment for the Democratic Party, whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party they're going to come after you."...

One of the nip-and-tuck Senate races this year is in Missouri, and backers of Sen. Jim Talent are preparing an attack on his opponent, State Auditor Claire McCaskill, that is emblematic of the sort that will be seen all over the country within 24 hours. "Does Claire McCaskill support the wishes of the angry left by endorsing Ned Lamont's candidacy...?"Time link (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1224692,00.html?cnn=yes)

Exactly what I was talking about earlier. The Republicans have their plan ready to roll out. They're going to try to spin this to make the Democrats look like they are way out left. The Dems in turn need to point out repeatedly that they are the ones whose position on the war matches that of average Americans.

If "doleful Democrats" are indeed "bemoaning" the Lieberman defeat, then they are a bunch of wussies. They should be celebrating Lamont's victory and fighting fiercely to tie the failure of the war to the GOP and Bush...and make anybody who agrees with them look like a right-wing extremist.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Hello! Because the GOP wants Lieberman. This is gonna get really interesting folks. I think Lieberman is going to really screw this up- actually, I'm counting on it. Obviously, the man cares nothing for the party he claims to belong to. He just used it to get elected and hold power. It's very obvious to me that all he cares about is himself.Senators seem to all become corrupted by the corporations who own them. I think at the moment the Senate needs to go, everyone of these guys. The United States needs a govt by the people, at the moment this republic is broken and it is a republic folks not a democracy as Bush & gang would spin. Lets send everyone home. I urge all to vote out these incumbants who took us to a needless war.

[mactastic]

It's a defining moment for the Democratic Party, whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party they're going to come after you.
I suppose it's too much to expect that Snow would look to moderate GOP Rep. Joe Schwartz's race and apply the same test...

Schwartz was the GOP Rep who lost to an extreme righty. The establishment GOoPers wanted to punish him for being a moderate on stem cells its seems. Schwartz's opponent was well-funded with extreme right-wing money. So is that a defining moment for the GOP whose national leaders have now made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme right in their party, they're going to come after you?

The right is getting desperate enough to back Lieberman. They are running scared about what may happen in November.

[stubeeef]

Can't prove it, so it really doesn't matter. But; knowing how fickle the public is, I venture that if the London Plot had been foiled a week earlier, Lieberman would have been the winner.

Some would say it wouldn't matter, but I think it would have.

[MacNut]

Can't prove it, so it really doesn't matter. But; knowing how fickle the public is, I venture that if the London Plot had been foiled a week earlier, Lieberman would have been the winner.

Some would say it wouldn't matter, but I think it would have.I was thinking that earlier myself, If this gets bigger I think it could help Lieberman still.

It is amazing how all these people that supported him have thrown him under the bus in a matter of minutes after he lost, I guess you never have friends in politics unless you can give them something in return.

[zimv20]

I was thinking that earlier myself
it's only those who are GOP-friendly who fall for the "weak on defense" crap. we're talking about a democratic primary.

[MacNut]

I've said it before and ill keep saying it, This country needs to forget about the Left wing Right wing politics and find middle ground. That is the only way this country will last. The Liberal Conservative bickering is not helping anyone.

[MacNut]

it's only those who are GOP-friendly who fall for the "weak on defense" crap. we're talking about a democratic primary.Well that primary is over and Joe is gonna try and grab votes from whoever will listen.

[zimv20]

Well that primary is over and Joe is gonna try and grab votes from whoever will listen.
and he's starting already (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/10/lieberman.ap/index.html):

"If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England. It will strengthen them and they will strike again."
but notice he's blurring the line between 9/11 and iraq, and if anything i think the primary showed is that the CT voters are aware of the difference. i also suspect they realize that the iraq misadventure has only increased the threat.

i do not believe this is a winning strategy for lieberman.

[stubeeef]

Iraq now is part of everything, Isreal, Iraq, Iran, the whole thing is becoming related somehow. Some we are to blame, some we are not to blame, but the fact remains the same. These people do not want us to exist, they were emboldened after Reagan pulled out of Beirut, and anything that looks like weakness to THEIR macho view of the world, will be exploited further, IMHO.

[mactastic]

I've said it before and ill keep saying it, This country needs to forget about the Left wing Right wing politics and find middle ground. That is the only way this country will last. The Liberal Conservative bickering is not helping anyone.
Negotiation can only happen when both parties are willing. Otherwise it's just one side capitulating to the other.

The politics of triangulation are dead. Democrats have learned that any sign of a willingness to compromise will be taken as a sign of weakness to be exploited by the GOP. Their options are to continue to lose elections, or to fight back.

If the right really believed Ned Lamont was going to damage the Democratic party they would be offering their help to Lamont, not to Lieberman.

[MacNut]

Thats why Im saying both sides need to find a middle ground, how is anyone being helped when both sides just fight.

[mactastic]

Thats why Im saying both sides need to find a middle ground, how is anyone being helped when both sided just fight.
Look, Rove built the 2004, and to a lesser extent, the 2000, race on a 50% + 1 strategy. Not trying to build the biggest coalition possible, but going for a divisive campaign because his calculations showed (correctly) that he could win by dividing and polarizing the country.

Fool me once, shame on me, etc...

Who would you suggest make the first move towards bipartisanship? The Democrats?

[MacNut]

Who would you suggest make the first move towards bipartisanship? The Democrats?well somebody has too

[mactastic]

well somebody has too
Not gonna happen unless the party in power is willing to do it, right?

Or do you disagree with my assessment that the GOP views compromise in it's opponents as a sign of weakness to be exploited?

[hulugu]

Iraq now is part of everything, Isreal, Iraq, Iran, the whole thing is becoming related somehow. Some we are to blame, some we are not to blame, but the fact remains the same. These people do not want us to exist, they were emboldened after Reagan pulled out of Beirut, and anything that looks like weakness to THEIR macho view of the world, will be exploited further, IMHO.

It's becoming related precisely because the US invaded Iraq. Furthermore, pulling out of Iraq is a dangerous proposition, but so is staying there, at some point Iraq is going to fight its own Civil War, it's just been delayed for nearly 100 years.

It's been said that Al Qaeda took the US pullout of Lebanon after the destruction of the Marine barracks as well as the US pullout of Somalia after the Battle of Mogadishu as a sign of weakness.
But, what we should do is withdraw the large and vulnerable forces in Iraq, and go back to small nimble forces to finish the job in Afghanistan and then complete the same kind of fast and murderous assualts we started against the Taliban.
We need to hunt terrorists and if that means SOCCOM forces in Lebanon hitting Hezbollah, then let's do that. But the stategy of planting a large vulnerable force in the middle on an insurgent population is what makes the US look weak.

We need to strike fast and hard and then leave the instant our objective is achieved, playing political theater in the Middle East is a losing proposition IMHO because the settings for Democratic or even stable Regimes has yet to be achieved.

[zimv20]

from here (http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2006/08/nrsc-takes-lieberman.html):

NRSC Takes Lieberman

It's no coincidence that a purposeful silence has replaced the well-publicized calls from Republicans last month for no-hope GOP Senate candidate Alan Schlesinger to make way for someone more credible.

The state and national party, it seems, have concluded that they can't succeed in Connecticut this year under any circumstance, and would rather see Joe Lieberman win -- which polls show he's likely to do, absent a credible Republican candidate -- than risk handing the election to Democrat Ned Lamont.

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.

"Most Republicans would agree that he'd clearly be a better choice than Lamont," said the source.

--Jason Horowitz

UPDATE: An NRSC spokesman just called to make clear the distinction between actively and openly supporting Lieberman, which they're not doing, and merely opting not to support a Republican in Connecticut.

"The NRSC is not supporting Lieberman," said Brian Nick, a spokesman for the NRSC. "He is a Democrat who votes 90 percent of the time with the Democrats. The race isn't competitive at this point -- our resources will be used elsewhere."

[Thomas Veil]

Well, although I'd much rather see Lamont win, it's nice to know that even in the eyes of the GOP, a Democrat is going to win in the fall.

[thedude110]

First poll (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2006-08-17T124021Z_01_N17245231_RTRUKOC_0_US-CONNECTICUT-LIEBERMAN.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsHome-C3-politicsNews-2) has Lieberman up 53% to 41%, with the Republican candidate sitting at 4%.

Assuming Lamont picks up the 2 outstanding percent (not likely), he's going to have to persuade a lot of Democrats and Independents to absolve themselves of their Joementum.

We'll see what the next few months bring politically, but a Lieberman win looks likely. Of course, look what happened the last time Lamont was underestimated ...