Politics1: Lieberman will speak at GOP Convention

[Brittain33]

this is truly baffling for me. hard to believe that this guy was the Dem VP candidate just 8 years ago.

It was hard to believe then, too, although I didn't appreciate it at the time. Democrats were in such a hole in the late 1990s, Lieberman had been around so long, and middle-aged Jews had remained such a solid part of the Democratic coalition that I didn't understand why so many Democrats I knew didn't like him.

[Iosif is a COTHO]

I never quite got this reasoning. First the Democrats, especially those indignant Democrats on here, call for his head for years. Then they throw him out for some no-name nobody in an important election, showing no respect for him whatsoever. Then he wins anyway as an Independent. And now you expect him to be LOYAL? I mean, seriously, lol. Lieberman owes the Democrats nothing, as far as I'm concerned. He should follow his conscience in supporting McCain.

Erm, except that they made his political career, Connecticut Democrats voted for him as their candidate three times, and the Party awarded him the Vice-Presidential slot on their national ticket. And he won again in 2006 by promising enough Democrats that he was still loyal to them. But no, he doesn't owe them anything.

[Erc]

To all those who are certain he won't win in 2012...

What makes you think people will remember or care in 2012, either way?

And if his position on Iraq is the main thing separating him from the majority of Connecticut voters...what makes you certain that Iraq will be an issue in four years?

If the election were held now, he'd lose.  But it isn't now, it's four years from now, and I don't see why Lieberman can't resurrect his popularity in the next four years.

[7,052,770]

I, bitterly, regret endorsing Lieberman over Lamont

Dave

Yep.  Good thing I can't vote in CT, or voting that way would be one of my biggest regrets in life.

[Gustaf]

I never quite got this reasoning. First the Democrats, especially those indignant Democrats on here, call for his head for years. Then they throw him out for some no-name nobody in an important election, showing no respect for him whatsoever. Then he wins anyway as an Independent. And now you expect him to be LOYAL? I mean, seriously, lol. Lieberman owes the Democrats nothing, as far as I'm concerned. He should follow his conscience in supporting McCain.

Firstly, the problem here is that you're eliding "the Democrats" just as Lieberman does. Random posters here aren't representative of the party as a whole, any more than Republicans on the Internet represent their party.

Secondly, Lieberman started bashing the Democratic Party a few years before the 2006 primary. It really began in 2004, when he was snubbed in the presidential primaries and starting acting vengeful toward the party, slamming it when he could get a chance and praising the Republicans. He'd been priggish for years before, but it was only then that he really seemed to cut his ties with the Democrats and believe his own propaganda about being an independent thinker instead of someone just looking to get revenge on the party that didn't appreciate his leadership.

Third, he ran for reelection as an Independent Democrat, specifically trying to capitalize on residual loyalty from the Democrats who gave him 48% of the vote in the primary along with the Republicans and independents he courted. He ran as being in favor of ending the war, in favor of a Democratic nominee for President, in favor of caucusing with the Democrats. Note that nearly all of the senators in power (one would think would be included with "the Democrats" in your usage) supported him in the primary and pretty much held back even after he lost and ran as an independent. He owes as much to the Democrats and they owe to him, because he clearly felt he needed Democratic support to win.

Finally, can I ask you in what way you identify with the Democrats, as you do so in your avatar? You are welcome to like Lieberman and disagree on lots of issues, but you seem to have a negative view of the Democrats that goes beyond tactical disputes into the realm of the partisan. I'd like to you know how you feel.

I will admit to not having followed Lieberman's career in enough detail to judge some of your points. I don't really recall there being an out-pouring of support for Lieberman from big-shot Democrats, but I guess I could be wrong there. But generally, under a system such as the American one, I don't consider party loyalty to be all that important. He didn't exactly ran as an Independent Democrat, imo. He ran as himself (Connecticut for Lieberman) without support from that many Democrats or from the Democratic party. They tossed him out and he showed them he could win anyway.

As for my identification with the Democrats, I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Why do you think I have such a negative view of Democrats?

[HardRCafé]

The Democrats should give Lieberman's speaking spot to Ned Lamont

Remind me what office he holds again?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Democrats should give Lieberman's speaking spot to Ned Lamont

Remind me what office he holds again?

Co-chair of Obama's Connecticut campaign.

[Keystone Phil]

The Democrats should give Lieberman's speaking spot to Ned Lamont

Remind me what office he holds again?

Co-chair of Obama's Connecticut campaign.

Yeah, that's really not an office.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

The Democrats should give Lieberman's speaking spot to Ned Lamont

Remind me what office he holds again?

Co-chair of Obama's Connecticut campaign.

Yeah, that's really not an office.

But Phil - he probably holds the briefcase that has their literature to distribute in it!  He might even be in charge of bringing donuts to campaign meetings!!!

[HardRCafé]

Sec. of State, Condoleezza Rice
Sec. of Labor, Elaine Chao
Sec. of Donuts, Ned Lamont

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

[Хahar 🤔]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Not bothered by him endorsing the other party's candidate? Not bothered by him speaking at the other party's convention?

My opinion of Joe Lieberman:

'04

'08

\

\

\

\

V

We can kick him out of the Democratic Caucus in the 111th Congress. And we sure as hell better.

[Torie]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Not bothered by him endorsing the other party's candidate? Not bothered by him speaking at the other party's convention?

My opinion of Joe Lieberman:

'04

'08

\

\

\

\

V

We can kick him out of the Democratic Caucus in the 111th Congress. And we sure as hell better.

Get the tumbrels out, into which to pack him off to the guillotine. (I am reading about the French revolution at the moment.)

[Хahar 🤔]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Not bothered by him endorsing the other party's candidate? Not bothered by him speaking at the other party's convention?

My opinion of Joe Lieberman:

'04

'08

\

\

\

\

V

We can kick him out of the Democratic Caucus in the 111th Congress. And we sure as hell better.

Get the tumbrels out, into which to pack him off to the guillotine. (I am reading about the French revolution at the moment.)

Have the President dismiss him and appoint Ned Lamont under Article 48. (And I'm reading about the Weimar Republic.)

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Not bothered by him endorsing the other party's candidate? Not bothered by him speaking at the other party's convention?

No, it does not bother me.  He is free to endorse any candidate, and without him, we would not have a majority this year.

[Хahar 🤔]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Not bothered by him endorsing the other party's candidate? Not bothered by him speaking at the other party's convention?

No, it does not bother me.  He is free to endorse any candidate, and without him, we would not have a majority this year.

Grudgingly accepting it and not having it bother you are two totally different things.

He better get kicked out of the caucus next year.

[specific_name]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Really? What about his socially conservative positions on censorship? I wonder how much longer he'll caucus with the Dems.

[Person Man]

I'm not to bothered by this.  Except for the War, Lieberman is a fairly liberal Democrat, and we should welcome him into the Party.  We should let him keep the Chairmanship, and try to get him back as a Democrat in 2012.

Really? What about his socially conservative positions on censorship? I wonder how much longer he'll caucus with the Dems.

He's pretty much indistinguishable from major dems on 90% of the issues. I think we should keep him. Then again, after the election, we should really start asking what he wants. I think he could defect after the 2008 election, if it's not close or the Republicans retake the senate and his views on the issues will "Evolve".

[HardRCafé]

My opinion of Joe Lieberman:

'04

'08

\

\

\

\

V

You seriously had a strong opinion about him when you were nine?

[Хahar 🤔]

My opinion of Joe Lieberman:

'04

'08

\

\

\

\

V

You seriously had a strong opinion about him when you were nine?

My only memories of him were from 2000.

[HardRCafé]

You seriously had a strong opinion about him when you were five?

[Хahar 🤔]

You seriously had a strong opinion about him when you were five?

I was just another five-year-old hack, fanatically supporting whatever name happened to be below Gore's.

[HardRCafé]

Were you just mirroring your parents, then?