nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
For all the complaints about the two party system, when one candidate plans to run as an independent he is called every name in the book. Why? Because it may affect a party’s control in a two party system?
Lieberman - WTF?
- Thread starter deep
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
nbcrusader said:
I've voted for third-party candidates. I think the two dominant parties are dinosaurs. But Lieberman was hardly an "alternative" candidate in supporting Bush on Iraq, a war that's getting damned unpopular, even with conservatives. I'm seeing conservatives at peace rallies and meetings locally.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Are supporters of the Iraq war unqualified as candidates?
Earnie Shavers
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
nbcrusader said:
To many - around the world - it is the single most significant mistake the US has made in.... how long?
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
There is quite a difference between eligibility for candidacy and electibility.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Would Lieberman still have lost had news of the thwarted terror attack in the U.K. broke on Monday instead of today?
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
The Nation
David Corn
Thu Aug 10, 10:46 PM ET
The Nation -- Mayhem in Iraq. Global warming on the warpath. National debt to the moon. There's much to moan about. But it's the little things that sometimes can tick one off the most. For instance, in the news today of Ned Lamont's win over Joe Lieberman, there was the remark from Dick Cheney that suggested al Qaeda was buoyed by Lieberman's defeat. The veep said that anti-American terrorists are "betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task. And when they see the Democratic Party reject one of its own, a man they selected to be their vice presidential nominee just a few short years ago, it would seem to say a lot about the state the party is in today."
Two points. First, it was Cheney's boss, George W. Bush, who ran for the presidency in 2000 vowing to change the tone of partisan political discourse in Washington. I know that's a promise that was never kept. But what a nasty shot from Cheney. Neither he nor Bush seem to realize that even though they are GOP partisans they are still president and the vice president of the entire nation and actually have a higher standard to meet than the usual political hacks (including those in their own employ). Yet they show no interest in doing so. Again, nothing new about that.
Second, the disruption of the latest suspected terrorist plot--the one to blow up airliners heading to the United States from London--illustrates that the evildoers are probably not developing their plans based on the outcome of primary elections in the Nutmeg State. Moreover, American policy should not be held hostage to what America's enemies want or don't want. The debate is over what's best for the United States (and the rest of the world). To suggest one path or another would hearten the "terrorists" is to avoid a serious discussion. But what else would you expect from a fellow who still believes he was right to say a year ago that the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes"?
David Corn
Thu Aug 10, 10:46 PM ET
The Nation -- Mayhem in Iraq. Global warming on the warpath. National debt to the moon. There's much to moan about. But it's the little things that sometimes can tick one off the most. For instance, in the news today of Ned Lamont's win over Joe Lieberman, there was the remark from Dick Cheney that suggested al Qaeda was buoyed by Lieberman's defeat. The veep said that anti-American terrorists are "betting on the proposition that ultimately they can break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task. And when they see the Democratic Party reject one of its own, a man they selected to be their vice presidential nominee just a few short years ago, it would seem to say a lot about the state the party is in today."
Two points. First, it was Cheney's boss, George W. Bush, who ran for the presidency in 2000 vowing to change the tone of partisan political discourse in Washington. I know that's a promise that was never kept. But what a nasty shot from Cheney. Neither he nor Bush seem to realize that even though they are GOP partisans they are still president and the vice president of the entire nation and actually have a higher standard to meet than the usual political hacks (including those in their own employ). Yet they show no interest in doing so. Again, nothing new about that.
Second, the disruption of the latest suspected terrorist plot--the one to blow up airliners heading to the United States from London--illustrates that the evildoers are probably not developing their plans based on the outcome of primary elections in the Nutmeg State. Moreover, American policy should not be held hostage to what America's enemies want or don't want. The debate is over what's best for the United States (and the rest of the world). To suggest one path or another would hearten the "terrorists" is to avoid a serious discussion. But what else would you expect from a fellow who still believes he was right to say a year ago that the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes"?
nbcrusader said:
No, because when he loses after participating in the rules for the two party system, he acts like a sore loser.
The people of CT have spoken. They have done their job. They decided that the person representing them was not representing their opinions.
He lost.
If he wanted to be independant, he should have declared that and not made the primary run.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
INDY500 said:
[q]Campaigning in Connecticut, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, who lost Tuesday's Democratic primary and is now running as an independent, said the antiwar views of primary winner Ned Lamont would be "taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/10/AR2006081001625.html
[/q]
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
So THAT'S where Cheney's brain went, into Lieberman's head 
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Dreadsox said:
Does CT have open primaries? Or are Tuesday results evidence of the will of 52% of the registered voting Democrats in CT?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
nbcrusader said:
it is the latter.
so should we do away with primaries?
U2@NYC
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Irvine511 said:
That is the problem that Lieberman had. He needed to better coordinate with Bush the announcement of the plot to bomb the planes.
I guess George W. did not think that helping Lieberman was enough to move the announcement forward...
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
It will be interesting to see polls taken this week. I'm guessing Bush, Republicans and Lieberman all show upsurges in popularity directly linked to raised concerns about terrorism.
Some of you may not like it, but many Americans take the War on Terror seriously, and they will vote this November accordingly.
Some of you may not like it, but many Americans take the War on Terror seriously, and they will vote this November accordingly.
U2@NYC
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
INDY500 said:
Yup, so early August is perfect timing for a terrorist announcement to profit on it dearly come November.
INDY500
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
U2@NYC said:
No, but early August IS "perfect timing" to spoil a terror attack that's scheduled for mid August.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Where is the Global Conspiracy Department based?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
nbcrusader said:
#1 - The first rule of the Global Conspiracy Department is, you do not talk about the Global Conspiracy Department.
#2 - The second rule of the Global Conspiracy Department is, you DO NOT talk about the Global Conspiracy Department.
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Now they're knocking at my door...!!
MaxFisher
War Child
The first post-primary Rasmussen poll shows Lieberman leading Lamont, 46-41.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/11/63924/8204
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/8/11/63924/8204
OP
OP
deep
Blue Crack Addict
and what did the first primary poll show? a few months back?
Lieberman should just slit his wrists
and get it over with
figuratively speaking,
he is committing suicide
Lieberman should just slit his wrists
and get it over with
figuratively speaking,
he is committing suicide
verte76
Blue Crack Addict
deep said:
I never thought I'd see Joe Lieberman acting like this. I used to respect the guy, to the point where I was pissed off at Al Gore for endorsing Dean rather than Lieberman a couple of years back. Now I'm not so sure what I think of the guy...........he's playing politics as usual.
OP
OP
deep
Blue Crack Addict
nbcrusader said:
that's ok
it is just the missionaries (the ones on bikes)
pay attention
eternal salvation is at stake
Maoilbheannacht
Refugee
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2005
- Messages
- 2,400
Dreadsox said:
The People of CT have spoken? I don't think thats accurate. The Democrats of CT have spoken and have defeated Lieberman by a small margin in their little primary. As for the people of CT, let them decide in the general election who is the best candidate regardless of what party their in.
OP
OP
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Maoilbheannacht said:
Would you advocate Congressman Schwarts of Mich run as an independent
because he lost to a evangelist?
If a person wants to run as an independent they should start out that way.
On Tuesday Lieberman was asking the people of Connecticut to elect him as the Democratic nominee.
He will run and lose and go down in history as one arrogant, selfish sack of shit.
(CNN) -- Is top Republican strategist and White House political adviser Karl Rove helping Sen. Joseph Lieberman's re-election bid, on the heels of the latter's Democratic primary loss this week?
"He's a personal friend, and I called him Tuesday afternoon -- 5:00, thereabouts -- and wished him well on his election that night," the GOP political guru said. "It was a personal call."
nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
Schwarts is free to make his own decision.
Other than repetitive name calling for Lieberman and the apparent desire for Democrats to retain the seat, you haven't articulated why Lieberman shouldn't run as an independent.
Other than repetitive name calling for Lieberman and the apparent desire for Democrats to retain the seat, you haven't articulated why Lieberman shouldn't run as an independent.
Similar threads
