Shame on Joe Lieberman
Crossposted at Yellowdog Blog
When DFA candidate Christine Cegelis lost the Democratic Primary in IL-6 to Tammy Duckworth, I was one of the loudest voices shaming Christine Cegelis to clearly and unequivically endorse Duckworth. To her credit, Cegelis did.
That's why I'm going to add my two cents about what's going on in Connecticut now, because I don't think we can tell progressives that they are welcome in the Democratic Party as long as they are civil enough to lose, and because I think that if Lieberman follows through on his pledge to run in Connecticut, it will divert progressive resources from Illinois. And if Lieberman should happen to win, it could permanently drive out the new progressives who have been entering the party all across the nation. Heck, if I was them, I'd start my own party too.
So, let me say it, loud and clear: Shame on Joe Lieberman.
Joe, you lost the primary, fair and square. You had a chance to make your case, your opponent made his, and the voters decided it was time for a change. You're on the wrong side of history, and it's too late to change the outcome of the election. But it's not too late to shape how you'll be remembered in the history books. Show some respect for the process, show some respect for the party you still claim to be a part of, and take your loss like a man.
21 comments:
YDD, I'm sure Joe will change his mind after your cunning insight...someone's quite full of themself.
RUN JOE RUN!!!!!!!!
Duckworth ran a class campaign against Cegelis.
Had Duckworth supporters been posting stuff like this around the blogs, Cegelis may have been less party minded and run as an independent herself.
"Good men, Daniel Webster and Faust would attest, sell their souls to the Devil. Is selling your soul to a god any worse? Leiberman cannot escape the religious bond he represents. Hell, his wife's name is Haggadah or Muffeletta or Diaspora or something you eat at Passover" (by "gerrylong," posted on the Huffington Post, July 8, 2006).
via Lanny Davis: Liberal McCarthyism.
Or the blackface post.
Kind of hard to unite when that's thrown at you... and a lot was thrown.
I'm proud I voted for him for VP. I'll send him a check now.
Exactly how is Lieberman not "respecting the process" by choosing to run as an independent? If Connecticut's electoral laws are anything like Illinois', only registered Democrats vote in the Democratic primary. If Lieberman thinks that he can truly represent the people of his state, shouldn't he be allowed to test that belief through the general election?
YDD just likes to hear himself talk, which explains this post.
And I thought Bill Barr was the leader of worthless posts...we now have a race.
anon 8:39
You'll hear lots more just like YDD's. He's not alone.
Who cares, this isn't an Illinois issue and if the voters in Joe's home state want to support him, and the law allows for it, then so be it.
DNC meets in Chicago this month.
They should bring Lamont here too...have him make some appearances.
YDD wrote the whole post without even mentioning his Ned Lamont's name.
And note Jesse Jackson was standing behind Lamont during his victory speech.
So someone from Chicago thinks Lamont's important.
greg - I don't think people should just be Democrats when it suits them. If Lieberman had won the primary, and Lamont had decided to do an end-run around the process or withheld his support, Lieberman would've been outraged, and rightly so.
Instead, Lieberman is blaming his loss on black helicopter theories, ignoring the fact that turnout doubled in this primary and 14,000 voters joined the Democratic party.
I know what the polls say now, but here's my prediction: if Lieberman runs, he loses.
twice the 20% norm on turnout, does not a winner make
I'm betting Lamont's peeked.
The higher the turnout the smaller the margin between the two became...
Per the Courant
Lamont rolled up lopsided margins in the Farmington Valley, Litchfield County, the lower Connecticut River Valley and scattered suburbs around the state. He won Hartford and Lieberman's hometown of New Haven, which first elected Lieberman to the state Senate in 1970.
Lieberman dominated in the New Haven suburbs, the struggling rural towns of eastern Connecticut and old mill towns of the Naugatuck Valley, home of conservative Reagan Democrats and the place he chose to begin his campaign bus tour 10 days ago. He also took Bridgeport.
Lamont is pontentially creating a new bunch of Reagan Democrats among exactly the same kind of folks progressives think they should be representing.
It's class politics all right it's just the Rich and not so Rich aren't lining up the way the left thinks they should.
It's not a winning formulae for Democrats.
Was there not a similar bit of whinning when 'Run, Forrest, Run'got whupped in the Primary, from the Progressive quarters of my Party?
Happy to continue this on your site if you want, YDD, but your response makes it seem like it's more important for a candidate to be a party member than it is to actually advocate positions that are representative of that candidate's constituency. Makes me wonder if the main effect of Lamont's victory in CT was more to determine the direction of the national Democratic party rather than to actually govern.
I rarely agree with you, but on this one; I agree 100%! Shame on Joe; he lost, he needs to move on. Threatening to run a spoiler campaign, what an arrogant ass. They just can’t let go. I guess, after all, being part of that Boy’s Club makes one quite powerful.
Don't Make No Waves...Don't Back No Losers
A Quinnipiac University poll released in July showed that 51 percent of likely voters would support Lieberman in a three-way race, versus 27 percent for Lamont and 9 percent for Schlesinger, a lawyer who was formerly a legislator and mayor.
Lamont made waves with 140,000 votes in the Primary. The general will probably be about 1.5 million.
I'm guessing the 27% above is generous and drops as Lieberman lets lose on him.
Lamont made waves, and looks like a loser... so why shouldn't Lieberman be Rakovian?
greg - I'm not saying it's more important to be a party member...no one made Joe Lieberman run for re-election as a Democrat. He chose to be a part of the Democratic Party. Being a part of the party comes with certain benefits -- like ex-Presidents dropping by town to campaign for you -- but it also comes with certain responsibilities, like supporting the Party's eventual nominee.
Instead, Joe Lieberman has decided to take his bat and go home. And he has the nerve to say that he's doing it to ave the Democratic Party, which, in his little persecution-complex corner of the world is under attack from progressives that he calls "extremists."
Earth-to-Joe: Recognizing that the war in Iraq is an abyssmal failure is not an extreme position. It's mainstream, even in Connecticut.
Bill Baar - Considering that Lamont has been focusing his campaign and his messages on Democratic primary voters, I'm not surprised polls have him trailing Lieberman in the general. I'll bet the polls had him below the margin of error when he first got into the primary.
ZC (haven't figured out how to work this system yet): There's another reason why Joe should drop out now. There are three House races in Connecticut where Dems might be able to pick up seats.
If Lamont runs alone, Dems win. If Joe runs, it's only gonna encourage Republicans to turn out to support him vs. Lamont. That increased Republican turnout could be the margin of victory for the House Republicans Chris Shays, Rob Simmons and Nancy Johnson - all Northeastern types that Democrats need to beat if they are going to establish a durable House majority.
Regardless of fair play principles, where I also agree with YDD, Joe running is actively _hurting_ Democrats' chances of taking back the House. I have been a huge admirer of Joe in the past, but he is on the verge of losing all my respect. Say it ain't so Joe.
I am a 77 year old senior. I can remember when this country was not being run by coporate crooks from the White House to Enron.Where crooks like Claude Allen went to jail not set free due to Katrina and work stress.There is so much innate talent in our country only to be smashed by the idiots in power.Liberman has been a promulgator of these idiotic and dangerous policies. He is an ancient spoiled childish self-centered brat. I think his mendacious claim of his site hacking points to his true lack of any character. It is now quite obvious that there was no hacking, only a badly managed $15 site with an unreliably server without bandwidth to accomidate the surge. I read that one of his workers was playing poler all night? His lies show one what a complete farce this guy is,
7:33 brought up the most salient point. Lieberman's decision places his own self interests over those of the Party which he claimed to be proud to represent. It is antithetical to the intended nature of party politics to allow personal agendas to drown out party principles. Lieberman should live by the choices he made.
You might want to elaboroate on those Principles,,,
,,,I don't think many Democratic Leaders went on the record saying the slurs on Lieberman, his wife, or faith had crossed the line.
The Party desereted Lieberman. He owes it nothing.
Davis's point, in case anyone misses my drift,
Moreover, the support he [Lamont] gets from these haters should not be attributed to Mr. Lamont--nor should he be blamed for their extremism, bigotry and intolerance. But he ought to denounce them. He hasn't as yet.
Reminds me of Balgojevich and Sister Muhammed.
Clearly, I am naive about the importance of the two main parties in our electoral system, but shouldn't someone who desires a seat in the US Senate be worried more about accurately representing his or her state than falling into lock-step agreement with the Democratic Party (in this case)?
This question isn't meant to be rhetorical: at what point does the desire to, as some have argued, aid one's party take precedence over one's belief that theirs is the more effective/desireable direction for the country to take? If Lieberman's receipt of the benefits of the Democrats' organization in the past is the reason for why he should gracefully retire from politics following his Tuesday loss, aren't you arguing against primary elections? Why not let the parties' state or national committees select their respective candidates and let them have at it?
Post a Comment