Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Been meaning to post a thread about it, but there's way too much interesting/funny stuff being written for me to narrow it down. So I'll just open a thread anyway.

Joe Lieberman, facing a tough primary challenge in New Lamont, and roundly targetted by progressive grassroots elements of the Democratic base, has decided that he will start gathering signatures to stay on the ballot even if he loses the nomination (petitions are due the day after the nomination is decided, so he was put into a position where he had to make this decision before Democratic voters went to the polls). He's saying he'll be a "petitioning Democrat" should he lose the Democratic nomination.

His side of the story is that he wants to let the voters of Connecticut at large decide if they want him in Washington, which is fair enough. But his problem is that he's trying to have his cake and eat it too; he's not really answering the question of why he believes the Democratic nomination process is inadequate in his case, or why he shouldn't abide by the results. I mean, the answer is "because I might lose", but it's a tough sell at this point in the primary to explain to Democratic voters why they should vote for him for the nomination even though he basically will refuse to accept the result if he loses.

The news today is that Hillary Clinton has said she will support the Democratic nominee, whoever that is...she won't get onboard the JoeTrain if he jumps ship (not to mix metaphors). I suspect that others like Schumer will follow her lead at some point, unless they bury their heads in the sand until the primary is over, which they might (they'll be hounded about it daily though). It puts a lot of Democratic Senators in a really shitty position--besides Lieberman already promised them that he wouldn't run outside of the party if they gave him their endorsement, which they all did.

I further suspect that Lieberman just cost himself the nomination with this move. He was running only 10 or so points ahead--in a lead that was fading fast--and I wouldn't be surprised if this move will cost him 10 points in one swoop. Anyway, it's an interesting story. Like I said, I can't exactly blame Lieberman, but I can't exactly blame the baying Democratic base either, and it certainly doesn't answer charges against Lieberman that he's been a backstabbing double-dealer out only for his own political self-preservation, a charge that was lobbed at him in 2000 (when he refused to give up his Senate seat while running for VP, even though if he won the state's Republican governor would have been the one to replace him, thereby switching the seat to an R in a 50-50 year) as well as all through the Iraq war stuff (he says "Obviously I didn't take the stand for political reasons, because look how much crap I've gotten for it", but that's not all that convincing considering the political climate that existed at the time of his original posturing--it seems to me more like he took a brown-nosing syncophantic stand when it seemed to be a political slamdunk, but had gotten so far out in front on it that he couldn't back off when everybody else had turned).

Anyway, it's a stressful time to be Joe Lieberman right now.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35669

If he splits the Dem vote, any chance of a Republican pickup in CT?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Probably not. I think the Republican nominee (guy named Schlessinger) is a marginal candidate at best--the polls I've seen of a three-way are like 55-20-5 Lieberman-Lamont-Shlessinger. Although I expect that to change drastically should Lamont get the nomination (he'll have institutional support and 100 million plus dollars to spend in a small state, Lieberman run as an indie (might be as unpopular a move as popular), it probably won't help Schlessinger. More than likely, Lieberman as an independent would actually mean the Republican does worse (Joe steals votes from him when paired against another, more liberal Dem).

That said, the governor of CT is a Republican and one of the most popular governors in the nation, and the CT GOP party is a pretty good one, so maybe, but probably not.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs
a charge that was lobbed at him in 2000 (when he refused to give up his Senate seat while running for VP, even though if he won the state's Republican governor would have been the one to replace him, thereby switching the seat to an R in a 50-50 year) as well as all through the Iraq war stuff (he says "Obviously I didn't take the stand for political reasons, because look how much crap I've gotten for it", but that's not all that convincing considering the political climate that existed at the time of his original posturing--it seems to me more like he took a brown-nosing syncophantic stand when it seemed to be a political slamdunk, but had gotten so far out in front on it that he couldn't back off when everybody else had turned).

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smug Git
If he splits the Dem vote, any chance of a Republican pickup in CT?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504

Lieberman certainly is the safest choice in terms of avoiding a Republican pickup in CT. Presumably Paint supports him for that reason? After all, it's all about denying the Republican leadership control of the Senate.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

As mentioned, there's not much chance of it going Republican either way. Lamont beats the Republican challenger by 20 points, Lieberman by 50, and the two of them combined (in a three-way race) put him into the low single digits. The vote could probably be split between four Democrats before there's a risk of the seat switching Republican. To put it in perspective, there's about as much chance of the seat flipping (R) as there is of Orrin Hatch losing his seat this year. Probably less.

I support the nomination process acting as a way for party members to choose who they think is most fit, or unfit, to represent them as a party nominee. I also don't mind Lieberman going directly to the voters, though as mentioned taking that case to the Democratic base is a, shall we say, tough sell at the moment.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

quote:

---

Originally posted by BROKEN_LADDER
what about a sycophantic stand? where does that play into things?

---

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs
Dude, you and I are just going to have to come to an understanding on this spelling thing. The day I start spellchecking or even editing my posts on a regular basis is the day I can no longer justify my flagrant Asylum habit as harmless diversion.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Lamont has a very unofficial blog (not run by the campaign, but by supporters), that's often very funny. Anyway, two updates today were interesting, the first of which was news to me (Lieberman's chief complaint, over and over again, is how he is being pushed out of the party by a millionare and that he has to take out insurance because Lamont might spend him out of a seat).

quote:

---

1. Ned Lamont has challenged Joe Lieberman to a spending cap. Lieberman has refused. Lieberman has raised millions more dollars than Lamont, and has millions more in the bank than he does. Anytime you hear Joe claim poverty, or whine that he is running against some self-funding behemoth of a campaign, please realize that he is talking out of his ass.

2. No one - certainly not Ned Lamont - is trying to "force" Joe Lieberman out of the party. Ned has repeatedly challenged Joe to stay in the party and support the primary winner (that's what members of parties do, Joe). Lamont supporters want Joe to remain a Democrat. We just don't want him in the senate anymore. Please understand the difference.

---

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504

The New Haven Independent tells a slightly different story about the spending cap. They quote the initial LaMont offer as an undefined cap on "raising and spending money", a Lieberman official responding by accepting it on the condition that it include personal contributions by the candidate, and the LaMont official accepting the counteroffer--on the proviso that the limit be set at $7 million, which is the total amount that Lieberman has raised to date.

Which would be, you know, kinda crazy, given that Lieberman presumably intends to campaign between now and the primary.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

News to me also. Cheers.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504

Don't let that stop you from posting about the race, though. It's a fascinating one for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that it may have included the least effective TV ad of this century.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Well, don't stop correcting me either. The only sources I've been getting are far-left revolutionaries who want to send Joe to the guillotine, or far right sources that believe he should be on the McCain independent ticket for 2008.

Yeah, that ad was pretty incredible.

On the other side, the guy that ran the campaigns of Kinky Friedman, Jesse Ventura, Paul Wellstone, and Ralph Nader in 2000, is Lamont's media consultant.

So, two pieces of news tonight on this race.

The first is the debate between Lamont and Lieberman, which you can catch on CSpan. Lieberman looks bad, and not just because I don't like him. Remember that moment in the 2004 debates when Bush started shouting "tell that to Poland!" Much of this debate, from Lieberman, has been like that. He's coming off enormously irritated and affronted that he even has to be there. Lamont, for his part, isn't doing much better....he keeps looking like a deer in the headlights, sort of like Ross Perot's VP did in 92. And Lieberman is technically winning, I'd say, but he's just coming off so....I don't know, hostile and arrogant and slimy. I actually think his performance will be rated worst by his ardent "centrist" supporters, because this is just a bizarro Joe Lieberman.

The other bit is liberal bloggers are calling Democrats far and wide and making them take stands now on whether they'll support Lieberman if he loses the nomination (or whether they'll support the Democratic nominee). Current tally:

Those who would support the Democratic nominee

Hillary Clinton
Howard Dean
Russ Feingold
Al Gore
John Kerry
Bob Menendez
Barack Obama
Tom Vilsack

Those who would support a Lieberman independent bid

Ben Nelson
Mark Pryor
Ken Salazar

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Last edited by Paint CHiPs on 07-07-2006 at 03:20 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paint CHiPs
Yeah, that ad was pretty incredible.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

Here is as good a rundown of it as any.

What the article doesn't quite capture is the bizarro-irrelevency of the entire ad and its message. Like, it's Lieberman lampooning a guy who hasn't been in office for 18 years, who just broke his hip (so the bear is sporting crutches and bandages, ho ho), accusing Ned Lamont of being too Republican, and...I don't know, it's just weird man. Go watch it, even without sound.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

http://www.joe2006.com/images/zoom/...mer_061406a.wmv

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

quote:

---

Originally posted by BROKEN_LADDER
http://www.joe2006.com/images/zoom/...mer_061406a.wmv

---

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 24791

Nothing like a nice hot cup of Joe from Dunkin' Donuts or 7-Eleven, I always say.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

That was fucking bizarro, too.

Sad. Biden's a guy I could have gotten behind. He's been getting on nearly the wrong side of everything lately though, starting with the bankruptcy bill and going pretty much unabated since. I think his presidential run will get about as far as Bayhs. Which is to say, it might not even meet the voters.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 24791

As I have said before, Paint, I used to like Biden. He has gone completely mad now.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged