CT Deaniacs start campaign to "Dump Joe"

[2952-0-0]

Well? He's certainly one of the more conservative Democrats, but you can't really call him a DINO like Zell Miller. What could happen here? Could Lieberman be defeated in the primary? Would a divisive primary campaign hurt Democrats in the general election?

http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/archives/001793.php

http://www.democracyforct.com

http://www.dumpjoe.com/

[No more McShame]

I like Lieberman.  And, though conservative on national defense issues, is a true Democrat.  I don't see much chance of him losing either in a primary or general election.  I hope it never happens, I could live in a Lieberman presidency.  Not to say I wouldn't criticize him from time to time

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I give Lieberman the following grades in each area

Foreign policy: F
Social issues: C+
Environment, economic issues: A-
Spokesman for the Democratic party: F

[Alcon]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

[Sam Spade]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

They probably won't listen.  Still, it's certainly worth trying for.

[Alcon]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

They probably won't listen.  Still, it's certainly worth trying for.

It always amazes me what people will do "in the name of the party." They are hurting the party yet call themselves its core members. They apparently do not realize what they are doing.

[Sam Spade]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

They probably won't listen.  Still, it's certainly worth trying for.

It always amazes me what people will do "in the name of the party." They are hurting the party yet call themselves its core members. They apparently do not realize what they are doing.

Well, one would think the major Senatorial disasters of 2002 and 2004 would cause people to change their minds and get back to what was successful before (running Senate campaigns on local issues and not offending the party's more moderate members).

The main problem that I'm not convinced most core members realize yet is that Senate races are starting to look more and more like Presidential races (i.e. nationally run) because they continue to let the Republicans dictate the agenda (on a national level).

In the Senate, that is a killer for the Democrats, because a good 26-28 states will not go for Democrats right now who are connected to these "core" left-wing members on the national level.  Won't happen.  You're leading yourself towards permanent minority status by ignoring this.

And the slate of seats that are up this year (with the exception of Santorum) have more vulnerable D seats than R seats once again.  (2008 will be the other way, for the first time since 2002)

You've got to play smart and by alienating your more moderate members, that's not playing smart in the long haul.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

Lieberman didn't get that memo.

[A18]

A 3/5 majority isn't a supermajority; it's an operational majority.

[Gabu]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

Nuh uh, we need to be more liberal!  Any non-liberals are not welcome!  We don't need your vote!  As long as we're as liberal as they come, we'll win election after election!

Blah.

Frickin' Democrats.

[dazzleman]

I don't think a primary fight against Lieberman will get anywhere, nor will it hurt him in the general election.

Even I intend to vote for him unless the Republicans put up somebody really good, which they won't because they won't get anybody good who'll agree to be a sacrificial lamb against him.

Connecticut is not all that liberal.  It's not another Massachusetts.  Lieberman fits fine, especially when you consider that he balances off a more liberal senior Senator Dodd (for whom I would never vote).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

They probably won't listen.  Still, it's certainly worth trying for.

It always amazes me what people will do "in the name of the party." They are hurting the party yet call themselves its core members. They apparently do not realize what they are doing.

Ala Labour in the '80's

[dazzleman]

Memo to my party:

There is a time for inner-party fighting. When the opposition party is threatening to reach a supermajority is probably not that time.

They probably won't listen.  Still, it's certainly worth trying for.

It always amazes me what people will do "in the name of the party." They are hurting the party yet call themselves its core members. They apparently do not realize what they are doing.

These type of people live in an echo chamber, and many believe that they are the majority, and that they can win.

Of course, many said the same thing about Ronald Reagan and his 1976 challenge of incumbent President Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination.  Reagan was called a representative of the "minority wing of the minority party."  Ford, while uninspiring, was "realistic" enough to win while Reagan was too conservative, according to the conventional wisdom at the time.

And yet Ford lost, and four years later, Reagan took over the party and the country.  The difference between Reagan and the current moveon.org types is that he had positive ideas, while they do not.  His campaign was not based solely on hate, though like any good politician, he knew how to pit his potential supporters against his political enemies and motivate them to vote for him.  There is a difference between doing that (Roosevelt did it masterfully) and running on a platform solely of negativity, which is what the left wing of the Democratic party represents.

It's absurd for these people to be going after Lieberman.

[Joe Republic]

Lieberman may not fit in too well with the Democratic party at large, but as Dazzleman has already said, he fits in fine with CT politics.  Plus, Lieberman would never turn on his own party like Zell Miller did.

This kind of logic coming from the far-left is the same logic behind the 'Nader 2000' campaign.  And look how that turned out.

[DanielX]

I give Lieberman the following grades in each area

Foreign policy: F
Social issues: C+
Environment, economic issues: A-
Spokesman for the Democratic party: F

My grades of Lieberman:
Foreign Policy: B+
Social issues: C
Environment: D-
Economic Issues: D
Spokesman for the Democratic Party: A or F, depending on your view of him.

[12th Doctor]

I like Lieberman, but I'm hoping that the Dems do dump him.  It will be proof for all of the nation about how exreme they really are.


Landslide In '08

[opebo]

Leiberman seems like a social conservative to me.  I'd like to see him replaced by another Dodd.

[TomC]

I disagree- Lieberman does wear his religion on his sleeve and gripes about Hollywood values, but is for gay rights, good on women issues, prochoice. He's most conservative on defense issues. Also, he is pro-vouchers on education.

I don't mind if Lieberman is replaced- better than a Repub, but I don't really like him. My problem with this is the "Deaniacs"- if Dean's forces, even without his explicit approval- are seen as targeting a sitting Democratic senator- he is going to have some real problems with the folks in DC. And I wouldn't blame them one bit.

[TomC]

Lieberman is not pro-gay rights.

Posted on Tue, Apr. 01, 2003

Lieberman seeks more gay rights

Senator shifts emphasis, setting a social agenda more liberal in nature

RONALD BROWNSTEIN

Los Angeles Times


WASHINGTON - Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., generally considered the most conservative contender for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, endorsed a series of liberal social goals Monday, including affirmative action and an expansion of civil rights protections for homosexuals.

 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I like Lieberman, but I'm hoping that the Dems do dump him.  It will be proof for all of the nation about how exreme they really are.


Landslide In '08

The irony of a Toomey supporter saying this.

Anyway I hate Lieberman but he's not worth dumping and this'll fail so it's really a moot issue.