Lieberman - WTF?

[INDY500]

I already miss Cynthia McKinney.

 

[Dreadsox]

With due respect, I'm not.

Lamont garnered 33.465871438% of the votes of the CT democratic delegates. That's a better statistic than any anecdotes. So considering that 2/3 of the delegates still initially supported Lieberman, how can you argue that he was pushed out by them? Sorry, the math doesn't add up.

Hey you are right...What do I know....I just report what my relatives tell me who live in the state.

Clearly...The party supported Lieberman.

You are right...if Lieberman had 2/3rds of the vote he would be the nominee.

With all due respect....

[Q]By the time the returns were in Tuesday night, showing Senator Lieberman losing to antiwar businessman Ned Lamont 52 percent to 48 percent, the sight of the 2000 vice presidential candidate losing his party's nomination for a fourth Senate term did not come as a surprise.[/Q]

I guess Lieberman did not have 2/3rds of the votes.

 

[deep]

Lieberman: It would be 'irresponsible' not to continue campaign
Associated Press

August 9, 2006

HARTFORD, Conn. -- Down but not out, Sen. Joe Lieberman filed to run for re-election in November as an independent, saying Wednesday it would be "irresponsible and inconsistent with my principles if I were to just walk off the field."

This guy is just a worthless, arrogant piece of crap!

 

[anitram]

I guess Lieberman did not have 2/3rds of the votes.

Good grief.

I was talking about the CT democratic delegates, clearly stated in my post, and they had a vote several months ago to determine whether or not Lamont could even run in the primary. He had to get a certain percentage of votes to qualify. He got 1/3 of the votes in that instance.

The primary is not a matter for delegates voting but all who are registered with the Democratic party, no?

 

[Dreadsox]

Good grief.

I was talking about the CT democratic delegates, clearly stated in my post, and they had a vote several months ago to determine whether or not Lamont could even run in the primary. He had to get a certain percentage of votes to qualify. He got 1/3 of the votes in that instance.

The primary is not a matter for delegates voting but all who are registered with the Democratic party, no?

I guess it was not all that clear.

You are referring to the caucusses (SPELLING), a system which is designed to keep control over the party. The caucus delagated from from the towns throughout Connecticut. The delagates are chosen at the town level and sent to the convention. Usually the town committees are pretty much in tow and sinker with the party leadership.

You are reading WAAAYYYY too much into the caucus. The leadership could have kept him off the ballot period. Delagates cut deals at the convention. As a former member of the Town Republican Party, and delegate to the convention that nominated Romney, when it was clear candidates that we supported had the votes, deals were made to take votes to get other candidates onto the ballot.

If the party leadership supported Leiberman 100% on the state level, this guy would not have got his name on the ballot.

 

[Dreadsox]

The primary is not a matter for delegates voting but all who are registered with the Democratic party, no?

You are correct. Although in some states, like MA independants can declare republican or democrat to vote in a primary. It skews the results. The assumption is that the voter in a primary is 100% a member of the party. In MA, many independants registered republican to vote for McCain. In CT, many democrats switched parties in the primary to vote for McCain.

My relatives have been bombarded with telephone calls from National figures to help Lieberman. My relatives also feel that up to the election the pressure has come from the National leadership and not the state leadership.

 

[Dreadsox]

This guy is just a worthless, arrogant piece of crap!

I just watched him on CNN. My relatives from CT happened to be here today picking up my kids for a vacation. They are so pissed because they feel it assures a Republican candidate will win.

 

[U2democrat]

I hope he will eventually be talked out of it. Without the support of the party and other major players he won't get the money he needs to maintain his candidacy.

 

[verte76]

I just watched him on CNN. My relatives from CT happened to be here today picking up my kids for a vacation. They are so pissed because they feel it assures a Republican candidate will win.

That's what the pundits are saying, they're saying it's going to hurt the Democrats.

 

[deep]

I just watched him on CNN. My relatives from CT happened to be here today picking up my kids for a vacation. They are so pissed because they feel it assures a Republican candidate will win.

I don't know if it assures GOP victory or not.

But why have primaries if the loser just goes independent?

Every sore loser with a following could take this attitude.

What would have happened in 2000

if GOP McCain went Independent in 2000 Pres election and then said he wanted the option to caucus with the GOP in the Senate.

Most if not all of Lieberman's support and sympathy is coming from GOPers and Fox news, and the like.

Joe should take the high road.

What if this LaMont guy got only 49 % to 51% for Lieberman.

Would he have said 49% against an incumbent is a mandate, I'm going independent so the people have a choice, pro Iraq or con Iraq war?

 

[anitram]

I just watched him on CNN. My relatives from CT happened to be here today picking up my kids for a vacation. They are so pissed because they feel it assures a Republican candidate will win.

If by that they mean Lieberman himself, sure.

The Republican Schlessinger is a total non-entity and has no chance of winning at all, even if Lieberman and Lamont split the vote. He's not in the game.

 

[Bluer White]

Joe should take the high road.

Why quit if you have a great chance to win in the general election? Why is that the low road?

 

[Irvine511]

Why quit if you have a great chance to win in the general election? Why is that the low road?

he's putting himself before the good of the party, and, some might argue, the State of Connecticut.

 

[Bluer White]

he's putting himself before the good of the party, and, some might argue, the State of Connecticut.

Doesn't a senator represent many more citizens than simply half the vote of his own party?

 

[Irvine511]

Doesn't a senator represent many more citizens than simply half the vote of his own party?

the question has already been posed: why have a primary if the loser just renounces his party and goes Independent if he loses?

or are you suggesting that incumbants be given special treatment because they have won elections in the past?

 

[Bluer White]

or are you suggesting that incumbants be given special treatment because they have won elections in the past?

Actually, I could be persuaded to support term limits. So your answer would be "no" to whatever special treatment you may be referring to.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

This guy is just a worthless, arrogant piece of crap!

I think thats just because you fear he is going to beat Lemont in the general election. Surely, your not opposed to any American who chooses to run for office regardless of the circumstances?

 

[deep]

If he wanted to run as an independent he should have pulled out of the primary.




Do you think their are others that have lost primaries?

that could have had a good run as an independent?

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

If he wanted to run as an independent he should have pulled out of the primary.




Do you think their are others that have lost primaries?

that could have had a good run as an independent?

Sure, there is nothing wrong with doing that. Its not against the law.

 

[deep]

Why the Republicans Are Loving the Lieberman Loss

Karl Rove, White House senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, telephoned Lieberman but an aide said the call was personal in nature and did not include any offer of assistance with his independent bid against Tuesday night's victor, Ned Lamont of Greenwich.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1224692,00.html?cnn=yes

Do you think Rove called McKinney? or even Schwartz?

or is it just slimeball to slimeball phone calling?

 

[deep]

Sure, there is nothing wrong with doing that. Its not against the law.

in some states it is

 

[Dreadsox]

If by that they mean Lieberman himself, sure.

The Republican Schlessinger is a total non-entity and has no chance of winning at all, even if Lieberman and Lamont split the vote. He's not in the game.

Now that I have done my own homework, I agree with this statement.

He is a freaking moron. The Republican Party never thought the Dem. Party would be in such dissary, so they were not putting up a real candidate. They have allegedly asked this numbnuts to step out of the race and he won't.


HEHE!!!!! Ain't politics grand.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Voting Lieberman out was helping the terrorists!

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/10/cheney-ct/

As the Mideast sits on the brink of regional war, Vice President Dick Cheney spent his time yesterday holding a teleconference to discuss the outcome of the Democratic Senate primary in Connecticut.

Cheney said that to “purge a man like Joe Lieberman” was “of concern, especially over the issue of Joe’s support with respect to national efforts in the global war on terror.” He explained:

"The thing that’s partly disturbing about it is the fact that, the standpoint of our adversaries, if you will, in this conflict, and the al Qaeda types, they clearly 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."

Cheney’s argument assumes that the war in Iraq is helping the United States defeat terrorists. He’s wrong. His own State Department found last April that Iraq had become a safe haven for terrorists and attracted a “foreign fighter pipeline” linked to terrorist plots, cells and attacks throughout the world. An overwhelming bipartisan majority (84%) of national security experts believe we are losing the war on terror, and 87 percent think Iraq has had a negative impact.

Cheney should spend less time analyzing the Democratic primary in Connecticut and more time acknowledging the administration’s critical policy failures and trying to fix them.

 

[Irvine511]

^ dispicable.

vote for Republicans or you're going to die.

 

[anitram]

Why is it okay for Republicans to constantly imply, openly or vaguely that liberals or voting for liberals is somehow synonymous with further terror?

Cheney is a pig.

And why isn't he talking about the Republican incumbent Schwarz who was also booted on Tuesday in favour of a complete wingnut? So leftist "extremists" are at fault in Connecticut but rightwing lunatics pushing one of their own is completely reasonable?

 

[Irvine511]

[q]Hang on, Dems. Here come the Pol Pots of your party. And if you were for national security, you are now emphatically not. Or else.

Remember the mountain of skulls in Cambodia? It's the Democrats new reality now that the anti-war rabble has tasted blood by taking Lieberman down.

That's My Word.

Don't forget my radio show. Check it out here!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207666,00.html

[/q]





how this passes for analysis is beyond me.

 

[verte76]

Cheney and Co. have totally screwed up Iraq but they won't admit it. That place has turned into a haven for Wahhabist nutcases. They claim that they're fighting people like this but they've botched it.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

'I am a loyal Democrat,' Lieberman said, 'But I have a loyalty higher than that to my party. That is to my state and my country. I`m essentially taking out an insurance policy.' the 64-year-old senator added.

I fear for what the Democratic Party has become since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. I predicted that he would lose the primary, because the left wing of the democratic party is more likely to dominate the polls.

But golly, if you follow the party line 95% of the time, and you think independently the other 5% of the time, you're considered Bush's bed pet. Let's compare that to America's relationship with Israel. Israel disagrees with the US about 10% of the time, but that has no grounds for flawing their relations.

I think Leiberman has a good shot as an independent. Many people in Connecticut will find him to be a safer alternative than his less experienced and less precautious opponent. I'm sure most see Leiberman as the decent man that he is. He's done much more good than harm for America overall.

 

[deep]

I fear for what the Democratic Party

yeah right

you are a hard core conservative

and Irvine is fearing for the Republican party

the truth is
both of you are hoping the party, you don't support, is not successful

1. Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political strategist, called the Lieberman campaign Tuesday night. The White House said the call was purely "personal."

2. Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, publicly declined to endorse his own party's Senate candidate when pressed on MSNBC on Wednesday.

3. Vice President Dick Cheney, usually media-averse, participated in a conference call with reporters to talk about the Connecticut race — and express regret about Lieberman's defeat.

4. Cheney said he had "a good deal of respect" for Lieberman, his counterpart on the Democratic presidential ticket six years ago whose political career has been imperiled by his strong support for the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq.

5. Cheney said he considered it "a perhaps unfortunate and significant development" for Democrats that they would "in effect, purge a man like Joe Lieberman."

Whether such remarks would help or hurt the senator as he fights for his political life was unclear. But Lieberman left little doubt that he was committed to the battle.

5 more reasons why Lieberman sucks

why is it that only Republicans are lamenting his defeat?

 

[deep]

At long last, Mr. Lieberman, have you no shame?

Lieberman Seizes on Terror Arrests to Attack Rival

By PATRICK HEALY and JENNIFER MEDINA

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman seized on the terror arrests in Britain today to attack his Democratic rival, Ned Lamont, saying that Mr. Lamont’s goals for ending the war in Iraq would constitute a “victory” for extremists, including those accused of plotting to blow up airliners traveling between Britain and the United States.

“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,” Mr. Lieberman said at a campaign event at lunchtime in Waterbury, Conn. “It will strengthen them and they will strike again.”

Mr. Lamont, who rode an antiwar message to beat Mr. Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary on Tuesday, has called for a firm deadline to remove front-line American troops from Iraq, and he endorsed a Democratic-sponsored amendment in the Senate to set that deadline for next July. Mr. Lieberman opposed setting a deadline.

In a telephone interview from his vacation home in Maine, Mr. Lamont said he was disappointed with the personal tone Mr. Lieberman’s remarks, and questioned the connection between the Iraq war and the new terrorist plot. He also continued his strategy of trying to link Mr. Lieberman’s views with those of the Bush administration, whose approach the senator has tended to support in the fight against terrorism.

“Wow,” Mr. Lamont said, after asking a reporter to read Mr. Lieberman’s remark about him. “That comment sounds an awful lot like Vice President Cheney’s comment on Wednesday. Both of them believe our invasion of Iraq has a lot to do with 9/11. That’s a false premise.”

Dick Cheney, in an interview with reporters on Wednesday, lamented Mr. Lieberman’s loss in the primary and said that Al Qaeda and other terrorists were counting on Americans to adopt a weaker military posture, and that the victory of Mr. Lamont over Mr. Lieberman indicated that “the dominant view of the Democratic Party” favored that weaker approach.

Mr. Lieberman also revealed today that, several hours after Mr. Cheney made those remarks about the Connecticut race, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff called the senator to tell him about the foiled terror plot.