Login Here
(Photo from the WH website, at the signing of the Intel Reform Act, 12/17/04.)
Joe Lieberman in today's Hartford Courant:
"Sen. Reid left no doubt in my mind that I would retain my seniority and committee assignments within the Senate Democratic Caucus should I be re-elected," Lieberman said Thursday, "and that has been confirmed to me by several other members of the Democratic caucus."
Oh, really? But you won't name names? Ummm hmmm. Pardon me while I step through the smoke.
From Sen. Reid's office, in the same article:
"As is customary, the caucus will consider such things as committee assignments only after the elections in November. There's nothing automatic about anything," said Manley.
And I have it directly from another member of Reid's staff that this quote is exactly Sen. Reid's position on the matter -- that the caucus makes the decision together, it is not something that is issued by fiat. And this will be voted on by incoming Democrats -- not the outgoing caucus -- so whatever chits Lieberman thinks he's piled up (and by Bob Geiger's count, that would be six definites at the most at this point, in the "feed Joe's hungry ego" Connecticut for Lieberman party apparatus), they may not be operative come November.
It is time to hit the phones, gang. I'd sure like to know what every Democratic Senator's position is on Lieberman and his committee positions, wouldn't you? Especially given his back-stabbing Cheney-esque maneuvers in Connecticut over the past week, and his attempts to portray the position taken by more than 80% of the Connecticut electorate -- and more than 60% of all Americans and a decided majority of the Demcoratic party -- that the Iraq occupation has been managed badly and that we need a new direction as "aiding the terrorists." (Getting the Mehlman faxes daily, are we?)
Because this is what I've been hearing more and more lately from folks in DC:
Privately, some members and their advisers are increasingly concerned that Lieberman is becoming political poison for any Democrat who backs him - someone who is too closely identified with President Bush's support for the Iraq war and is getting too much Republican support for his re-election. (emphasis mine)
You know why they think supporting Joe Lieberman is political poison? Because he is, and because you guys have been doing a lot of hard work on this issue, so kudos to all of you as well. Wouldn't you like to know if your Senators plan on rewarding Turncoat Joe?
You can call toll free at 1-888-355-3588 to the Capitol switchboard. You can also find contact information for your Senators here. This isn't just a question to be asked of sitting Democratic Senators, though -- it's also something we should find out from Democratic Senate candidates. Most politicians are home for the August recess and doing events all over their respective states -- this is a fantastic time to drop by a local office or a candidate event and talk with your Senator in person about how important it is to stand up for democracy and the Democratic party.
This is the time to stand up and let your Democratic Senators know exactly how you feel about de facto Republican candidate Turncoat Joe Lieberman and his GOP playbook tactics in Connecticut. And if you get an answer from your Senators on this, please report back here -- we'll keep an eye on this one. Please let your voice be heard!
Share This 
Spotlight
Christy!
Bob Geiger!
I do hope Lamont gets more visible. Lie-berman is sure putting on a full court press, and Lamont needs to come out swinging. The earlier Joe gets on the ropes, the better.
Get Ned in front of the cameras - make Joe do the same, and you’ll see Ned’s numbers rise fast.
“When you enter the ocean you enter the food chain, and not necessarily at the top.” - Cousteau
If Joe were to win the election (not reelection because the last time he ran as a Democrat and this time he’s running for a differnet party), and as some fear the Prez were to offer him Rummy’s job and he took it, as I understand it, the Gov of CT would appoint a new Senator.
Is this true or would there be a byelection?
I can understand if the term is about done, to just appoint someone, but it seems hardly fair if the person has 4 or six years in front of him to get in without earning it from the people.
Dems need to be developing real contingency plans for the possibility that Lieberman goes back to the senate owing his election largely to goopers. It’s an ugly scenario- but Reid had better be prepared for it.
how do these fuckers develop such a sense of entitlement? both LIEberman and lil’ bushie have this affliction. it’s not pretty, especially in adults.
Let the DSCC and it’s chairman, Chuck Schumer and Mark Pryor (D?-ARK) know that Pryor either needs to support the Democratic candidate in CT or resign from his position as vice-chair of the DSCC, whose mission it is supposed to be to elect Democrats to the Senate.
Having a person in a leadership position in the DSCC not support the Dem candidate is outrageous.
i thanked byrd & am glad to thank any other ned-supporter anybody wants me to thank — to me, fdl does best when it deals with each candidate, one at a time — that’s why this particular effort’s exciting
i have more fun dealing with somebody like byrd who’s done something good than dealing with a party committee or trying to get my views across to tin-eared pompous fools like hillary & chuck
why hasn’t josh marshall volunteered to serve in iraq? it nauseates me when folks like him & tom friedman are so quick to demand that american youngsters ought to be killed or maimed for their cherished cause
Actually this is the big one. To keep RGJoe from bleeding Dem resources from Brown, Tester, etc. - gotta hit’em hard and now!
US Senators must believe they will pay a price for playing coy with party loyalty. I can’t believe I was so foolish to think the Dem leadership would have jumped on this without prompting - I thought they’d have purged him by now…
Christy - Peanut is as imagined!
Morris Sheppard @ 6
Schumer’s position is the same as Pryor’s!
For Ned Lamont’s schedule today, click here.
Excellent, Christy. This is just what we needed. I’ve been working the phones too and I really think it’s time to pin some more people down.
Bionic’s comment is very much on my mind. With Joe you just do not know what you are going to get, and that may include a Gov. appointed Senator.
While I think it is time to run against Joe for what he is, as opposed to what he is not (a Democrat) I would like to see a LOT more noise from the incoming caucus about stripping Joe’s seniority.
A lot of the electorate sounds apolitical to me - that’s why it has taken so long for Iraq to be seen as a failure instead of a litmus test for citizenship. For Joe to lose a _practical_ advantage would help Lamont a lot.
Josh Marshall supports the Iraq war? Sure about that?
BTW I heartily endorse those who say that Ned needs to get on Holy Joe’s case and NOW! The way I see it Ned has two jobs - one, introduce himself positively to the rest of CT, and two, expose Joe for the lying, faithless, double dealing, two faced piece of crap he is. His piece in the WSJ does no. one admirably, but he must get on no. two, and fast.
Sorry to say, this is going to get nasty, folks, and Joe started it.
I wandered over to Andrew Sullivan’s place to see if he had any more on the thinness of the London Terra Plot, and found this.
Another conservative doesn’t just disagree with BushCo, but pulls every morsel of credibility out from under them.
Not much of a Sullivan fan, here, but maybe his conservative readers are taking this in.
Surcam @
133
Look, you can believe whatever you want. Don’t try to explain your “opinion” as truth.
Byrd has said his past with the Klan was shameful. For Byrd, as a “son of the South”, to say that out loud, in public is an act of contrition. There tons of modern day Republicans like Trent Lott who think that the old Klan ways were good for America.
People make mistakes, live awful lives and they change and they grow. For a self-described “liberal” to be unwilling to grant a human being the right to absolution after asking for it, repeatedly and with conviction makes me curious as to just how liberal you really are.
-GSD
Go right ahead and use Sean Hannity as your moral guide. Lay into John Kerry for his Vietnam War criticism while you are at it. Trump up the charges that Bill Clinton was a Russian double agent because he visited the USSR in the 60’s as the Hannity’s have suggested. It is your right to be obstinate, unforgiving and uncompassionate, but don’t claim the mantle of “liberalism”.
PS. I never said “don’t talk about it”, I said don’t use Sean Hannity’s framing. I talk about shit day in and day out here and often others don’t agree, so don’t go screaming censorship.
new press release from Ned’s team:
NEWS RELEASE
President Bush Nominates Lieberman for Senate
For Immediate Release
For more information: Liz Dupont-Diehl, Communications Director, 860 989 7893
STATEWIDE - As George Bush & Dick Cheney rush to embrace Democratic primary loser Joseph Lieberman, the campaign of Ned Lamont pointed out the numberous links between the incumbent Senator and Bush’s failed policies.
“He’s the de facto candidate of George Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney,” said spokeswoman Liz Dupont-Diehl. “Which is not surprising when you consider how much they sound alike when they defend Bush’s incompetence in Iraq, failed efforts to fight terror, or questioning the patriotism of those who disagree with them over the war in Iraq.”
Lieberman has voted for every single off-budget appropriation for the war — refusing to hold Bush or Rumsfeld accountable for sending our brave troops to war without armor, spending billions of taxpayer funds on no-bid contracts for their friends, or failing to have to have a plan to bring our troops home to the heroes welcome they deserve. He just parrots Bush’s talking points that paint dissent as unpatriotic and defeatist.
He has also supported Bush & Cheney in their efforts to privatize Social Security, appoint judges who threaten a woman’s right to choose, and give billions in subsidies to oil and gas companies while families pay record prices at the pumps.
“It’s no surprise that the National Republican Senate Committee has endorsed Lieberman, and that Dick Cheney has called to support him,” Dupont-Diehl said. “Karl Rove called Joe right after the election and they worked off the same play-book last week with their ridiculous claims that Connecticut voters aided terrorists by voting Joe out of office. After 18 years in the Senate, Joe Lieberman will do anything to hang on to power. This campaign is bringing to light how closely he has supported the Bush administration in its failed war on terror, and how they are mortgaging our children’s future.”
Voters turned out in record numbers a week ago to say no to the failed Republican policies of the last six years and yes to someone who will stand up to George Bush and take this country in a new direction. Unfortunately, for the last six years, Joe Lieberman has simply rubberstamped bad Bush decisions about this country’s future, turned a blind eye to incompetence and no bid contracts, and fought to stay the course in Iraq while our nation becomes less and less safe. His actions over the last week only confirm that he’ll continue his support of these dangerously wrong policies.
###
rwcole at 13 is right, I think — I don’t recall Josh supporting the Iraq War either.
meta @ 9
IIRC Schumer has come out in support of Ned, although weakly. He has not endorsed Joe as Pryor has and claims the DSCC is in support of Ned, as well. Still, not quite enough.
rwcole #13
he wanted us to go into iraq
Thucydides Jr. @ 2
Um, you mean like campaigning with John Edwards yesterday?
Bionic @ 3
This is a VERY important question. My understanding is that the (REpug) governor, would appoint a replacement. This might explain a certain aspect of the RNC strategy, no?
btw- go over to MFI’s site for a lovely pic of the cover of the UK Independent …
http://gorillasguides.blogspot.com/
apparently the Ind. interviewed Labour leadership and they agree that Bush *is* crap.
more evidence of backstabbing, or word twisting. bet Reid isn’t happy……..
Pach at 11 — Can you tell that I have had it with Lieberman’s hypocrisy? Calling Al Sharpton privately to beg for his support and, when Joe doesn’t get it, publicly smearing Sharpton like he was so much dirt under Joe’s shoe. Conason is spot on today. And that’s just one example of many, many others where Joe is a public face that hides a completely different one out of the public’s eye.
And I, for one, have had it. Rove is using him as a pawn to bait and switch the entire Democratic party apparatus, and split the Democratic voters nationwide — on racial, on economic and on political lines. And I have had it with people in DC who only want to see the “poor Joe” wallow in his ego and self-pity routine as real. Wake the fuck up, people — do you want to win or what?!?
Is the Kiss Float still driving around Connecticut, anyone know?
Seems like it would be a good way to remind Connecticles about what’s at stake in the race hehe.
Hagel:
http://www.journalstar.com/art.....864536.txt
via thinkprogress
sorry if previously posted, i have some catching up to do.
Reid and fellow Senate Democrats need tread very carefully around the Lieberman seniority issue.
The likelihood of the Democrats taking the Senate by a single seat majority is increasingly likely, as is (sigh) Lieberman defeating Lamont in the general.
Would you put at risk Democratic control of the Senate for the blogosphere pet candidate? Do you honestly believe all the senior Democrats up for committee leadership positions will do so? Now that’s just naive.
Lamont is going to have to run without meaningful support from the Senate Democratic Caucus. He’s just not going to get it.
[Narrowly escaping an EPU … ] You-all bawling about Ned’s — what? four-day? — break from the campaign just amaze me.
If there’s anything that Ned and Tom Swan have shown us this summer, it’s that they know what they’re doing.
Candidates who don’t pace themselves but run flat-out for eight or ten months are bound to hit the walls (plural intentional). Like any good manager, Ned knew when to step back, recharge, and bring fresh eyes, mind, and body to his task.
Isn’t a campaign mighty like writing and proofreading something? You can work so furiously on your text, get so close to it, that your mind’s eye begins to see what it intends to be there instead of what is. If you don’t step back and let the thing “cool,” then come at later with fresh eyes, you’re bound to make and miss ever more typos.
Worn-out candidates are error-prone. Ned and Tom, knowing they’d need a short break somewhere, scheduled it for the best possible time. If Ned needs and takes another couple of days off somewhere between now and November, I say power to ‘im. He’s doing an excellent job of this and knows how best to keep on keepin’ on. He’ll step back and hit Preview as needed — whether we have sense enough to or not.
/fuss
one way josh can right the wrong is by saying our going into iraq was a mistake, but he won’t — it’s a strong undertow that’s hidden by superficial agonizing
I get Ned’s schedule each day and he’s been doing media appearances and a small selection of events each day. Yesterday, he campaigned with John Edwards, this weekend he’s out in two parts of the state campaigning. This week he also got the SEIU endorsement and just now the campaign issued their new press release -see above. Ned was on the BBC world service yesterday morning, got good footage on Hardball last night, etc … not exactly invisible.
Comment at no. 7. Think you should check the archives at TPM first before you make this assertion. My memory, and I do not really feel like researching this but will do so if you are going to make unsubstantiated comments, is that Josh Marshall flirted with the idea of an Iraq war but ultimately came down against it. Not necessarily the strongest position against the war but certainly not the position you represented him to have taken.
lotus @
29
Lovely lotus - spot on - as always!
Roger at 30 — if you have an issue with Josh, take it up with him — but enough with the Josh bashing today.
RTS #32
about 90% of americans wanted us to go into iraq — he was part of it, which is why he won’t say it was wrong
Christy Hardin Smith @
25
AMEN!
Every Democrat supporting Joe ought to be reminded that Lieberman’s support in the November election comes primarily from GOP voters (the latest CT polls prove this to be true). Joe’s GOTV campaign is going to hurt the Democratic party, not help it. No wonder career Democrats continue to lose elections, jeesh!
Thucydides Jr. says:
August 18th, 2006 at 9:49 am *
I do hope Lamont gets more visible. Lie-berman is sure putting on a full court press, and Lamont needs to come out swinging. The earlier Joe gets on the ropes, the better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thucydides, everyone supporting Lamont says being critical of his post-primary strategy is wrong and ill considered. To hear them talk Ned as doing EXACTLY what he should be doing, be patient and the noise you’ll hear is Lieberman’s bones being gound beneath the wheels of the Lamont machine. Their protests of criticism seem so quick and touchy I wonder if those quizzing them have hit a nerve? Personally I think Lamont is carrying a knife to a gunfight.
cloud7 @ 37
Decrying Lieberman as a Republican? That dog don’t hunt. A Republican could not be elected Senator in 21st century Connecticut. And yet he’s ahead (and his lead widening) in polls of the electorate. He’s leading significantly among Connecticut Independent voters too.
and your little dog, too — at 15. Wow. Thanks for link to Sullivan. It doesn’t get any clearer than that. How ironic, but it’s possible the “conservatives” will bring this Administration down.
What’s interesting to watch is how slow some Dems are in seeing this is happening, even though the trainwreak is happening right in front of them, and not realizing how toxic Bush — and Joe L — have become. [Great post Christy!!] You don’t want to be standing next to someone who’s not only driving over a cliff but is probably being pushed by his prior enablers.
The message to Harry Reid, et al: get as much distance between Dems and the Bush/Bush enablers as you can.
Come November, Lieberman’s hat will read “I WISH I HAD A JOB TO SHOVE”
Anne Holliday @ 33: Lovely lotus - spot on - as always!
She’s right. As one who has done years of professional writing and editing and proofreading, there is absolutely no substitute for critical distance. (blog posting doesn’t count!)
roger loger at 35:
i’m not sure where you’re getting that 90 percent number, but I think it was more like 60/40 when the IWR was passed in Oct. 2002.
Pilsner party at 39 — are you sure about your math on the “lead widening” assertion? Because that does not add up among every poll that I’ve seen for a statewide-three-way race in CT. Care to share your source on that?
Harkin’s office didn’t know what his position is. I left email and asked for a response. Harkin is in Iowa, but I don’t think he’s coming anywhere near where I am. Someone might take the opportunity to ask him a question at an event.
pilsner at 39:
21st century CT voted for J. Kerry in 2004. That majority can’t be happy with Lieberman’s love affair with GWB. After all, they are two years angrier than they were in ‘04.
“left no doubt in my mind” != “told me”
Christy — totally agree that JL’s hypocrisy slip is not just showing, it’s dragging the floor.
We can probably compile of list of lies/distortions/misdirection/evasions and create a nice Late-nite out of it, or have a covered-dish supper and everyone can bring something to the table. But a main page complilation could be Spotlighted.
It seems inconceivable that Holy Joe will caucus with the Dems; when all is said and done, almost all of his money, support and votes will have come from the GOP. It can’t be for nothin’, CaneToadKarl wouldn’t allow this much support for a “Democrat” unless there was really something in it for King George. Let’s face it Joe Lieberman is really just a protoRepublican.
both Surcam and Pilsner Party are newcomers here today — isn’t it odd such determined anti-racists weren’t here when we were discussing in depth the George Felix Allen MACACA story ? Democrats seem to be the target of these two newbies …
As I’ve mentioned before, the moment Lieberman is certified to be on the ballot as the CFL candidate he ceases being a Democrat. He may think he is, and he may plan on caucusing with them. But he will not be a Democrat.
Other candidates have switched parties, and have been cleanly removed from their former party. Why is it so hard for our politicians to understand that Lieberman has left the party? Just because he’s switching to a made-up party and whining about still being with the Democrats doesn’t make it so. The voters have chosen their candidate.
I don’t hear Jeffords from Vermont whining about and expecting the perks from his former GOP colleagues after he left them to go independent. It disgusts me that the incumbency racket in the Democratic Party is more concerned with cuddling with their buddy Lieberman than doing what’s right for the party and Connecticut voters.
i agree with Lotus @ 29
there is such a thing as too much exposure. Lieberman has to do it. he doesn’t have any other option. can you imagine how connecticut voters felt after the primary? the last thing they wanted to hear was more about politics, at least for a week or so. Lamont ran a grass roots, press the flesh campaign before the primary and it appears that he’s doing the same thing now. and it’s obviously something that Lieberwuss recoils from doing. so, what’s not to like (for Ned and us)?
The sense I get is that Lieberman is not beloved among his peers, and they have no illusions over whose interests he guards. But he’s holding them hostage, since and individual senator can use the rules to seriously fuck over any other senator’s agenda. The members actually have more “I can fuck with you” power this way than the Leader does. So he’s holding them hostage, at least until November.
I agree with lotus@29 also.
Ned’s a smart man. I would venture to say Joe was given the rope that he will hang himslef on.
lina @ 43
I wondered about that too, Lina………..
Christy Hardin Smith @ 44
Rasmussen, August 12: “Lieberman earns support from 46% of Connecticut voters while Lamont is the choice of 41%.
Quinnipiac poll, August 17: “Lieberman ahead in the race, 53% to 41%”.
Wake the fuck up, people — do you want to win or what?!?
Sometimes, Christy, I’m willing to think that they really d o n ‘ t .
Might smack into too much accountability or somethin’ thetaway, doncha know. Might have to be grownups instead of weenies.
There be monsters [um, us] there . . .
bcinaz @ 49
how about crypto-republican……..
Although off topic, the story associated with this Raw Story headline might merit further exploration when the full story is posted: Cheney receiving suspect Iran briefings; Developing…
Maybe you can ask your wavering Senator how they expect to convince average Americans that Dems will stand up for them, if Senate Dems demonstrate that they won’t even stand up for their own voters.
Karl will eventually make sure this question gets asked publicly, so let’s make sure they think about this while it can still be a private deliberation.
I agree with MillinaryMan and Lotus too.
Pach - I disagree, for the simple fact that any Senator can simply block the actions of the Senator blocking him/her - resulting in a stalemate. Also, if you think about it, why wouldn’t Senators use the tactic now, particularly those in the minority party?
As to why support Lierman? Perhaps they too have forgotten that they serve the people who elected rather than themselves, just like Lierman.
I really want to hear Surcam and Pilsner explain away the 2006 macaca slur from the GOP Senator …
lotus at 29 — thanks for your response to the handwringers. Ned did NOT lose ground in the days after. He gained with party unity meetings and behind the scenes discussions with national dems; with quick follow ups on national shows that were outright homeruns; with quick response to the Cheney/Lieberman mistakes in linking Ned to terror support — which backfired and gave Ned more national appearances to respond, get name recognition and show how good he is. Cheney stopped talking about Ned and the national dems saw this. The national dems may be hedging their bets, as rw suggests, but the point is, they’re not betting against Ned, and that’s a huge change from before the primary. [We will win over rw eventually.]
And besides, Ned can’t twist national Dem arms publically and it would be a mistake to try/do so. He’s winning them over, and as they see more of him, he’ll be fine. Ned’s image and position are going to lift all Dem boats, and it’s the Dem Pres wannabes who see that.
Pilsner at 56 — you can’t compare two different polls, with two compeltely different polling samples as apples and apples. Especially because the latest Q-poll sampled not just registered voters but also likely voters, and Rasmussan did not. The Q-poll trending, thus far, has been for the gap to close between Lieberman and Lamont in the three-way race Chris Bowers did a great comparison piece on this yesterday, FYI. You might want to take a peek at it.
I’m not saying that it isn’t going to be a tough battle for Ned Lamont - because it clearly is, as we’ve been saying all along — but the evidence is not there as yet that the Lieberman lead is widening, especially given that his negative numbers have been rising steadily in every successive poll.
The thing is though, Harry Reid’s spokesman was obviously given a chance by the Courant reporter to deny and contradict Lieberman’s excerpted statement about the support Harry Reid supposedly assured him of yesterday. But Reid’s spokesman didn’t take the opportunity to do so. Instead, he played coy.
So is it really Lieberman who’s blowing smoke here, or is it Harry Reid?
We really need to start naming names, as Bob Geiger has done so well, and holding individuals, rather than unnamed party factions, to account. Harry Reid has the power as Minority Leader to make a real difference here. So far, he seems to be using it mostly to back up Joe, at the expense of Ned, despite his public PR to the contrary.
Pachacutec is absolutely right about the tactics Chuck Schumer used against Paul Hackett’s donors to get him out of that Ohio campaign. Schumer and Reid damn well know how to play this game, but they are not playing for our side right now, as far as I can tell.
Stephen Parrish–don’t know if it’s related to the Raw Story story, but MZM (of Duke Cunningham fame) contracted to provide intelligence briefings to the White House both on Iraq (pre-war), and also on Iran.
puppethead says:
August 18th, 2006 at 10:29 am
Well said, and I’m going to use this post on DiFi and Boxer, in hopes that one more time around the ‘Joe-is-not-your-ally’-bush may make a difference.
*ilson46201 @ 62
I’m not happy to see a former Reaganite — who advocated the “thousand ship navy” no less — as the “Democrat” to oppose Allen.
I believe in a “big tent”, OK. But must we so big that we embrace military meglomaniacal types like Webb and (see adjacent threads) KKK Grand Kleagles?
What, Webb is “reformed” too?
How about some untainted blood?
Pilsner at 68 — so you are unwilling to accept anything but purity from Byrd or Webb, but Lieberman’s Alito cloture vote and his embrace of Bush’s Iraq occupation policies are a-okay with you on pragmatic grounds? Pardon me while I don’t buy your logic.
I sent an e-mail to the DSCC website and aske them why they continue to list LIEberman as a democrat and an independant when is is the de facto repbulican candidate. info@dscc.org send them some love
*ilson46201 @ 50
Cleanup at the end of the Kudos thread might be in order :)
Pachacutec @
53
Just wondering: What agenda do the Senate Dems have between now & November (besides reelection) that Lieberman could interfere with? Seem to me that showing a little courage, bouncing RGJoe from his committee assignments, withholding $$$, honoring the party, etc would do more for Dems.
Pilsner has now attacked George Felix Allens Democratic opponent while sidestepping denouncing the GOP Senator’s macaca slur … smells like a troll to me !
Just off the phone with Matt in Sen. Bill Nelson’s Orlando office who got testy with me and said “it is none of Senator’s Nelson’s business what happens in Conneticut” and again and again I got from Matt and Ty in the DC office “It’s a personal decision and the Sentor is not getting involved. He is focusing on his own reelection campaing.”
You know, the one where he is running againt Katherine Harris. “Nuff said.
Call Matt if you are a Florida Democrat and ask him why won’t Sentor Nelson stand with Ned Lamont the winner of the Democratic Primary. 407-872-7161. Ty up in DC can be reached at 202-224-5274. They both sound like they have alot of time on their hands and would love to talk with you.
My Senator is turning into a laughing stock with his die-hard middle of the road position.
Oh Florida, when will you stop being the laughing stock of this Great Nation??????
Message to the Democratic voters of the Nutmeg State: even though you sent this hack to Washington (JoMo) three times, all is forgiven as long as you don’t do it again.
Raw Story has this this morning:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2....._0818.html
Not to worry, it’s wall to wall ReThuglicans and they could use some radio-active water for when they want some variety in the selection of beverages. Kool-Aid all day everyday gets kinda boring.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 64
I think you’re the one with the methodology problem. You’re looking at the Quinnepec polls before and after the primary and saying they show a “trend down”.
Nothing could be further than the truth. They show a surge of support for Lamont among Democrats from a significant event, the primary itself. Lamont was 51 - 47 among Democrats before the primary, now he’s 63 – 35. You call that a trend when, in fact, it’s a one-time event.
Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D. said yesterday:
“Sen. Lieberman’s support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing. It more than offsets what he has lost among Democrats. As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans, while holding onto a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran Senator will be hard to beat”.
Excuse me, but is anyone here seriously suggesting Lieberman’s standing among Republicans is trending *down*?
pow wow (@65):
yes, they do know how to play the game and right now it’s a game called “cover your ass and watch which way the wind blows”. it’s not a pretty game but one at which senators, especially, are masters.
like the man said, “politics is like making sausage. you don’t want to see how it’s done.”
these guys are not idealists. and Russ Feingold makes them look, shall we say, reprehensible ?
another Bong special for Senator Pryor (D[INO]- AR):
[snip]
…I understand there were some folks who inquired about your support for Joe Lieberman. One of your responses, I believe, (paraphrasing) “Don’t ask me to be consistent…” or something to that effect was startling to me even if it was made in jest. Now I understand that Senator Lieberman has been a good friend and “mentor” to you during your first term in the Senate, but you should be aware that it is the opinion of many of your constituents, myself included, that supporting a candidate that is being endorsed by the likes of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove is not a recipe for a warm fuzzy reception for you come election time, 2008. By all that I can see, Arkansas is not as red as it used to be… becoming bluer every day.
Additionally, I don’t see how you can, with a clear conscience, continue your support for Senator Lieberman and at the same time, retain your position at the DSCC. Seems like a major conflict of interest there. The sole purpose of the DSCC is to get Democrats elected to the Senate, NOT Independents, Republicans or other parties (read: CT for Lieberman). Speculation that Senator Lieberman might even be considered for the Secretary of Defense, is even more alarming. If he were to win the general election in November and then be appointed as Secretary of Defense, his seat in the Senate would most assuredly be filled by a Republican. Remember: Joe left the party, the party didn’t leave him…
[snip]
… and then a few pleasantries…
Pilsner…. Hmmmmmmmmm - I like beer.
:-)
PS I tipped both Ty and Matt off the Bob Geiger’s website because they didn’t seem to know about it.
I tried to explain the power of the internet but I believe it all fell on deaf ears. Whatever.
Pilsner — no, his GOP support is rock steady — but his Independent support is not. Care to continue?
Redd- A polling of likely voters should be more accurate than a polling of registered voters- it is a smaller universe- containing those registered voters who actually voted recently and who intend to vote in the upcoming election. (At least that’s the normal meaning of “likely voters).
*ilson46201 @ 73
I think it’s wrong to point at something like the macaca slur and suggest it has anything to do with, or somehow justifies, Democrats recruiting one of the mad architects of the Reagan build-up that brought the world to the edge of war, if not annihilation.
Suggesting there’s any connection or relation between the two points … now that’s trolling!
rw at 81 — I know — but the latest Q-poll was the first time that likely voters have been brought into the polling mix that I know of — anyone know of another poll that has done them earlier in CT?
Christy Hardin Smith @ 80
Wait, let me get some popcorn
I think the pressure needs to build temendously towards Reid. I have been very appreciative of him at certain times (Shutting down the Senate, “actions have consequences”), but right now, this smells of back-stabbing. And we’re the ones being stabbed.
WE are the ones fighting this goddamn fight, and he is not supporting us.
I am sick and tired of being back-stabbed by the very people I’m fighting for.
We are educated active members of society at large, and we’re treated like pariah from BOTH parties.
I’m not happy with Schumer or Rahm either, but let’s take on Reid NOW. Joe CANNOT be responsible for leading committees come January, no matter what.
Jesus, talk about demoralizing the troops. I’m fed up with him.
newtonusr —
The tension is about not losing the support of those who assume/think that supporting Israel, no matter what it does and even if its actions seem counter-productive, is in the best interests of Israel and/or the United States. That accounts for why almost everyone, from both parties, kept hiding behind “Israel’s right to defend itself” while being silent on their concerns about whether the Lebanon invasion was a sensible (never mind moral) way to do that. That probably accounts for a lot of the dancing going on. We should not expect an emerging Democratic leader from Connecticut to solve this by himself.
bcinaz @
49
It’s perfectly conceivable. In fact Joe is probably more valuable to Rove as a Democrat. He provides that critical veneer of “bi-partisan” support for every failed Republican policy. Bush can go on television and say that “nobody” predicted the lack of WMDs in Iraq or that criticizing his war policies is “supporting terrorism” and lo and behold, next Sunday there’s Lieberman spouting the same talking points all over the news shows while all the pundits nod in sage agreement.
Why do you think Bush kissed him? He’s the Judas-goat who leads all the other goats to the slaughter pen. They never kill the Judas goat, he’s too valuable.
It’s perfectly possible Lieberman would switch parties because he’s more comfortable as a Republican, but there’s certainly no deal to do so.
The Republicans simply get a guy who will back them whenever they really need it (like on Alito and every trade deal) plus political cover everytime they screw up. Unless his switch in party changed the majority from Democrat to Republican, there’s simply no way Joe could be more valuable to the Republicans as a Republican.
On a lighter note,
Ping gets it right,
“I didn’t room with Babe. I roomed with his
suitcase.” Ping Bodie
My eyes are glued to the Sox/Yankees game.
Let’s take four outta five and head for first…
Who the hell was Ping Bodie?
Jack
Evil Parallel Universe @ 61
They undoubtedley forget they serve the people. The tactic does not typically get used because it’s one of those things like mutually assured destruction: opening the door means everyone fires up their nukes.
I don’t know what people have in their agenda wish list for riders and add-ons to legislation before NOvember, but they have them. Mind you, I don’t think any of their reasons for stupisity are good reasons (see my post yesterday), but these are their reasons, form what I can gather behind the scenes.
OT: Let’s all send Slick Willy some burfday lurve!
http://www.clintonfoundation.org/60bday
:-)
Christy Hardin Smith @ 80
Well, sure if you invite me to continue I will.
Again, Quinnipac:
Lieberman leads 58 – 36 – 3 percent among likely independent voters.
Put that together with the massive registration drive funded by Lamont before the primary - that pulled into the Democratic Party a wave of (former) registered Independents receptive to his message - and you realize that 36 number is pretty close to a natural ceiling for Lamont.
Lamont’s rocketing upward among Democrats and Independents is very likely itself a temporary boost related to the primary, so expect to see his numbers declining significantly in the next few weeks.
pow wow @ 65