Hate to say it but top dems have themselves to blame for Lieberass

[WI_DEM]

I keep coming back to the fact that Bill Clinton a week before the primary, at a time when Lamont had a ten plus point lead in the polls came to CT and did a rally for Lieberman. It was speculated that if Joementum lost by double digits he would not run as an indy. But Clinton's magic worked and in the final week of the campaign Joe made a comeback in the polls and ended up losing by only four-points. Close enough for him to call it a moral victory.

Yet I waited and waited in the general election for Clinton to come back to CT and do an event for Lamont. He never did. Some top democrats did come and help Lamont but others just gave Lamont token support. If the National Democratic party had enthusiastically gotten behind Lamont and denounced Joe's candidacy might Lamont have done better? I don't know, but they should have been more proactive in supporting the will of the Democratic primary voters.

Now we are stuck with that ass making threats about leaving the democratic caucus (it should be noted he is not a Democrat, he's an Indy who votes with the democratic caucus). He already left the democratic party, maybe the party should just call his bluff.

[Madspirit]

1. Yes!

The Democratic Party should call his bluff.
Lee

[LSparkle]

2. We've all GOT to stop focusing on this -- it'll be a self-fulfilling prophecy

Holy Joe is probably just flexing his muscles (maybe he doesn't like his office or parking space or he's just "on the rag"). He've got to take deep breaths and remember he's been in the Senate (and the Democratic Party) for a LONG TIME -- changing parties is a huge step and not one he might REALLY be willing to take.

[leftchick]

3. some Dems are more committed to the DLC/Corporations

than to americans. They should be voted out.

[k_jerome]

9. lol. nt.

[leftchick]

14. I do not laugh at corporatists

it is sad you find it amusing



From left to right: Harold Ford, Jr. is chairman of the DLC. U.S. Sen. Tom Carper is vice chair of the DLC; U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is chair of the DLC's American Dream Initiative; Al From is founder and CEO of the DLC. (Not pictured: Bruce Reed is DLC president; Pennsylvania State Representative Jennifer Mann is chair of the DLC's State Legislative Advisory Board (SLAB); Columbus (OH) Mayor Michael Coleman is chair of the DLC's Local Elected Officials Network(LEON).)

[k_jerome]

15. lol. nt.

[leftchick]

16. brilliant counterpoint!

as usual

[k_jerome]

17. bwahaha. nt.

[rockymountaindem]

23. You seem easily amused

While the impact of so-called "corporatists" on the Democratic Party is often overstated at this website, that it exists in some degree should not be denied and is certainly no laughing matter.

[Jim Sagle]

38. Hey, it's the best he can do. Al From writes his stuff, and Al doesn't work on weekends.

[Individualist]

13. Exactly!

DLC has too much influence within the party. Any influence they'd have would be too much.

[hootinholler]

35. THey also have too much crossover with the AEI. n/t

[wakeme2008]

4. Both Hillary and Bill where there for Holy Joe in the primary

and BOTH ignored Ned in the general election

IMHO Had Bill and Hillary showed up for Ned, Ned would have won. They didn't and he didn't.

[blm]

5. Let's not forget that Hillary donated her top gun mouthpiece to the Lamont

campaign and oddly enough, he wasn't very quick or effective at all countering Lieberman's attacks on Lamont.

Gee - but he's out there like a flash these days. Wonder why he went mute as communications pointman for Lamont?

[Greyhound]

27. Ah, now you've gone and done it. Exposing the possibility that she

and the rest of the Democratic wing of The Corporate Party might be working to keep the progressive agenda for the people off the radar. I'm sure that this, and countless other "unfortunate" incidents like it, are mere coincidences.

You do have a pair of asbestos long-johns, don't you?:hide:

[blm]

37. heh....does anyone think I still care about a little added heat? ;))))

.

[Nutmegger]

6. OH oh oh but there was the email asking to send Lamont some green

and we can't forget that HRC loaned her "advisor" to Lamont.

Props to Kerry, Kennedy, Wes Clark (who did an ad for Lamont by the way), John Edwards for coming here to this state to show their face and support Ned Lamont. Some did come down and I'll remember them for that.

[Greeby]

33. Don't forget the rest of the CT Democratic Congresscritters

Who did a press conference to show their support for Ned the morning after the primary

[connecticut yankee]

7. Joe was elected by the Repukes

they abandoned their candidate (Schlessinger) who got about 8% of the vote.

Many of us worked very hard for Ned, but one big problem was that the DNC told Ned to hold off campaigning until they could convince Joe not to run as an Independent. This, of course, didn't happen, and New lost a valuable first month of campaigning.

Meanwhile, Bush, Cheney and Limbaugh and Hannity (and others) came out publicly for Joe.

[WI_DEM]

8. of course it wasn't totally GOP votes

Lieberman won the Independent vote and about a quarter of the democratic vote. If Democratic leaders had been more enthusiastic for Lamont and taken Joe to task it is possible that some of those democrats who stayed with Joe would have voted for Lamont and perhaps some Indies too. But the GOP did play it well in CT by not nominating a stronger candidate.

[liberalpragmatist]

25. I think it was kind of an honest mistake

Truth is there's not a ton of love for Joe within the Dem Senate caucus; there are tons of anonymous quotes out there trashing him, etc. The nickname "Holy Joe" didn't come from nowhere.

I think the issue was the leadership figured Lieberman had a very strong chance of win regardless of what they did, especially considering the fact that the Republican was polling single-digits. I think they felt that if they helped Lamont too much, it would just embitter Lieberman and cause him to switch parties.

Of course, he's doing that anyway, so ultimately it may not have accomplished much. I do prefer Joe as a quasi-Democrat to Joe as a Republican, but a heavier push by the DNC and Lamont may have won. Lamont ran a lackluster general election campaign, too, however. Although it's possible party leaders told him to, there was no reason he should have taken that break after the primary. For a brief moment after Joe's defeat, Lamont and Lieberman were tied in the polls; he could have won had he made a good impression on voters at that time.

[JI7]

29. wtf ??????? that makes no sense at all

why the fuck should Lamont stop campaigning in order for them to tell Lieberman not to run ???????

[bunkerbuster1]

31. This can't be stressed enough. I think it might've been unprecedented.

Does anyone else know of a Senate race when a major party actually abandoned its candidate and actively campaigned for an opponent?

Combine this bizarre bit of betrayal to Schlessinger and the power of incumbency, and I am willing to cut my party a little slack. But only a little.

[leftchick]

10. A perfect LTE from MoJo regarding their hillary report

Jack Hitt's story "Harpy, Hero, Heretic: Hillary," on what drives the country's seemingly bottomless appetite for "Hillarating," drew plenty of attention from bloggers.


The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz opined that "either Hitt has had the gumption to commit to glossy paper what millions of Americans have been quietly buzzing about, or he has done a triple-gainer off the high board into fantasyland." Our letter writers, who seem to favor the fantasy‑land interpretation, respond below:

<snip>

Forget what Hillary says and what other people say about her. Look at her voting record. Pro-war? Check. Pro-tax cuts? Check. Pro-torture? Check. Pro-corporations? Check. Anti-choice? Check. Anti-privacy rights? Check. Anti-gay marriage? Check. Anti-immigrants? Check. Anti-working class? Check. Anti-unions? Check. Anti-environment? Check. That’s why true progressives hate her.

:applause:

http://www.motherjones.com/letters/2006/11/backtalk.html

[Clark2008]

20. Wait... when was she ever anti-choice?

Not that it makes a difference in that list - but I'm not aware of any vote such as that.

[cui bono]

22. anit-choice? anti-gay marriage? really?

I don't like her anyway, but those two surprise me. Although I'm not sure why since It's most likely due to her incessant pandering tho the right.

[NoPasaran]

36. Pro-torture? Bullshit!

Hillary Clinton voted AGAINST the Military Commissions Act of 2006. But I guess the "true progressives" at Mother Jones prefer truthiness to truth.

[malaise]

11. Bingo but it was all about

Hillary rather than the party.

[SoCalDem]

12. I hope the CT legislature is working to prevent this from happening again

A simple rule that makes filing for the FALL election (and stating party) happen BEFORE the primary, so that losers in the primary, STAY losers and cannot switch and run in the fall elections.

Lamont never had a chance..he had to waste money and time running against Joe in the primary, and then again in the fall.. He beat the guy in the primary, and should have never had to continue running against him..

If Joe had run in the primary as a independent...(oh wait.. Independents didn't HAVE a primary, now did they?)

Why even HAVE primaries , if the losers can just re-group, change parties, get more money, and keep on going?

[PhilipShore]

18. I agree...

it can only help the Democrats, if he defects to the Repukes, because he already is a double agent.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

19. Right.

It was speculated that if Joementum lost by double digits he would not run as an indy.

Yes, it was speculated... by people who have no idea what the fuck they're talking about. Anybody who has watched Lieberman over the years would know that he'd take any such serious defeat as a challenge. He is one vitriolic mofo, and the only thing he hates more than losing is losing twice.


Now we are stuck with that ass making threats about leaving the democratic caucus

He isn't going anywhere. He's doing it because he knows it irritates you. Welcome to Joe World.

[mitchum]

21. That's because the Clintons and Lieberman are whores in the same stable

[Nikki Stone1]

24. Excellent points all

:kick:

[fooj]

26. They turned theirs backs on the will of the people.

IMO, it was their RESPONSIBILITY to back the Democratic Primary winner. Their behavior was shameful.

Reid, Boxer, Landrieu (look what that did for her :eyes: ), Biden, Schumer, Clinton... SHAME ON ALL OF YOU.

John Kerry showed up and did his part. He walked the walk...

[JI7]

28. Lamont had true support from only a few Democrats

the rest only gave token support. claiming they supported Lamont but all the while making comments about how Lieberman would keep his committee seats and other things if he were re-elected. and of course not investing money in the Lamont campaign.

i think many of these Democrats like Clinton told Lieberman behind the scenes that they wouldn't seriously support Lamont and probably even encouraged Lieberman to run as an independent.

[The Backlash Cometh]

30. He only has a year and a half.

The worse Iraq-Iran gets, the more people will vote for Democratic progressives. We just have to keep informing the public about phony Democrats who will just keep us too far right, when we're ready for diplomatic solutions.

[KharmaTrain]

32. There's Been A Lot Of Horsetrading

Maybe one day we'll find out how the Senate Democrats sold out Lamont in their tactic support of one of their "bretheren". While the Clinton's stayed "neutral" after backing Joementum in the primary, that was as good as support for Liebermann. Had Bill Clinton stumped for Lamont, I'm sure Liebermann would have lost the moderate Democrats and the election. Instead the Clintons sat on their hands...part of a quid pro quo.

I'd read several reports last year that there had been a quiet deal between Harry Reid, several top Senate Democrats and Liebermann. At the time, no one expected the Senate to change hands and the deal was to keep Joe on board for everything but Iraq...that his votes would be there for social issues and that he'd help in blocking the Repugnicans from ramming through making the tax cuts for the rich permanent and destruction of social security and medicare. In the "outside" chance the Democrats were to win control, then Joe would vote for Reid and would retain his "seniority"...including head of the Homeland Security Committee (the dysfunctional agency that Joe helped "create")...Repugnicans weren't willing to offer him either the senority and thus the chairmanships.

It's time to call Liebermann's bullshit. And it's time for Reid to admit there had been a deal with Joe and come clean on all those in the Senate who signed on to this deal. I know it won't happen, but it smelled then, it smells now...we just held our nose to get his vote for Reid and Democratic control of the Senate. Now that it appears McConnell will gridlock the place, let Joe become a total "party of one" and focus our efforts on the House.

The Clintons and their DLC cronies don't understand how the Democratic party is changing. They resent the netroots and I suspect we'll become a target of their wrath as we won't just "fall in line" with the "Hillary is our savior" meme.

[sendero]

34. Merely one more example..

... of why I'm DONE with the Clintons.

[Cha]

39. YEah, and what do they

care?