Comments on: Thanks, For Everything

By: dab from CT

dab from CT — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 03:48:06 +0000

Herb you are a total asshole!!!!!

By: dmichael

dmichael — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 23:37:36 +0000

My thanks to Christy, Jane and the rest of the FDL group who worked hard and pushed the Iraq War to the forefront of issues in this election. Ned’s loss is unfortunate but not a reflection on the work of this group. My thanks also to Ned and his campaign staff and the most engaging and imagniative political ads I have ever seen. I hope we see more of them in future campaigns.

By: duginnj

duginnj — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:19:46 +0000

I believe that Ned Lamont is the critical factor, however buried, in the dismissal of Rumsfield. I could not vote for Lamont, I cannot thank him enough for his committment.

By: Junior

Junior — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:01:22 +0000

I don’t believe Lieberman won instead of Ned Lamont. But anyway we won the house and the senate. I’m still concerned about someone saying that this is just temporary because the conservatives are mad at Pres. Bush. What I want to suggest is for democrats to be moderate instead of far left so that our reign will not be temporary and we can possibly win the Presidential election come 2008. I’m a republican who voted Ned Lamont and other democratic candidates to protest of what is happening with the republicans. Mostly our family and relatives are republicans or conservatives and you know there are many conservatives who are angry and voted the democratic candidates. Cristy please convince the democrats to be not too far left or too liberal but not too conservative, just moderate so that all of us moderate republicans can fit in with the democratic ideals and instead of going back to vote republicans next time when the party makes a turn to reform. Thank you.

By: dachoste

dachoste — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:51:34 +0000

the most galling thing to watch last night was the smug mug lieberman had claiming victory- “beholden to no party”, etc. the fact that he’s a swing vote makes him MORE powerful than he was before the election. i hope the voters in CT who voted for him can stomach him making deals with the republicans- but then again he was doing it before and they still gave him a pass…ahhhh, but that’s the only bitter pill… we lose santorum and burns and allen, but retain lieberdick… unpalatable but not bad in the overall picture… thanks ned, you were a great candidate, next time you’ll be a great campaigner, but thanks still.

By: Dilbert

Dilbert — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:29:37 +0000

Hello,

Do we turn a blind eye to Joe’s “street money” now that the Dems control the Senate counting him?

By: Keith Ingber

Keith Ingber — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:42:24 +0000

heroes don’t always win. more often than not, they only mnake it possible for the rest of us to win.

By: CuriosityCat

CuriosityCat — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:35:35 +0000

Time to start working on Lamont’s next election bid.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:34:20 +0000

Ned’s candidacy had the disadvantages of its advantages:

Ned was singularly courageous and focused in his stand against the war. Because it mattered to him, he was willing to talk about it when the rest of the Dems were afraid to. This changed the country.

But Ned stayed focused on the anti-war idea too long. Not that it should have been abandoned, but people needed a reason to vote for Ned, and not simply against Lieberman and the war.

In not seeing quickly enough that the contest needed to be about more than the war and Lieberman, Ned lost his campaign.

I understand all about the Nixonian slush fund, the umpty-ump millions of Cheney-raised Republican millions from out of state, the complete sellout of Ned by the Dem establishment (who are happy to ride Ned’s coattails, but have no interest whatsoever in having their complicity in the war and the destruction of the country brought to light), but the same tenacity about an ideal that made Ned such a success in his primary victory doomed him in the general election.

And yet in some ways Ned’s loss is important, because it exposes the basic corruption and complicity on both sides.

If Ned had won I can feel I would have been much more willing to believe that things really are better, and in truth, they’re not.

Thank you Ned Lamont. In both victory and defeat, you made and will continue to make America a better place.

By: Cujo359

Cujo359 — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:29:31 +0000

Late to the party, as usual.

Thanks, Ned and his supporters. You guys pulled the Democratic Party’s power structure out of its lunacy. You made them realize that not talking about Iraq meant not taking a stand on one of the things that Americans felt was most important. You gave us a choice that wasn’t just between Republican and Republicaner.

We’re sorry that you didn’t win, and even sorrier that Lieberman won instead, but you ran your race, and that’s what counts.