It probably doesn’t get mentioned enough, but [tag]Joe Lieberman[/tag]’s independent Senate campaign is likely to have a serious impact on the Dems’ chances of winning back the House. Connecticut has three incumbent Republicans (Nancy Johnson, Rob Simmons, and Chris Shays), all of whom are considered vulnerable this year against strong Dem challengers (Chris Murphy, Joe Courtney, and Diane Farrell).
If Lieberman is encouraging Republicans and other conservatives to go to the polls to support his candidacy, Dems are understandably worried that those same voters will back GOP House candidates, undercutting key opportunities that could help shift the balance of power on the Hill.
Lieberman has heard the argument and has a response.
For those readers who can’t watch video from your office, Fox News asked Lieberman whether his campaign would hurt Dem candidates’ chances down-ballot. Lieberman said, “They [tag]should have thought of that[/tag] during the [tag]primary[/tag], but here we are.”
It’s an odd thing to say.
As recently as last week, Lieberman reiterated his belief that he’s a “committed Democrat.” But confronted with the idea that he may single-handedly keep Dems from taking back the [tag]House[/tag], he literally laughs and blames Dem voters for the problem. It’s not a particularly subtle message — Lieberman’s telling Connecticut Dems, “You backed the other guy, and this is my payback.”
In response to Lieberman’s [tag]Fox News[/tag] comments, Chris Bowers said:
[T]here seem to be two ways to read this quote. One reading would be that Lieberman thinks that instead of voting their conscience, Democratic primary voters should have instead capitulated to his threats to leave the party. The other reading is that the party establishment, which gave their complete support to Lieberman during the primary, should never have allowed the primary to happen in the first place.
Either way, Lieberman clearly views his run as revenge against Democrats for actually engaging in party democracy. So, either voters should be swayed through threats, or votes should not be allowed to take place. No matter which reading is accurate, Lieberman’s sheer disdain for democracy is overwhelming. As far as he is concerned, democracy is only useful as long as it allows you to remain in power, and now he is just a tough parent punishing bad children who actually had the gall to vote for someone else.
Sounds right to me.