If you want the party’s support, don’t leave the party

June 15, 2006

When it comes the [tag]Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee[/tag] ([tag]DSCC[/tag]), I don’t necessarily mind when it endorses candidates, even before a [tag]primary[/tag]. If party officials have a candidate they think has the best shot at winning, voters can take into consideration which Dem is the “[tag]establishment[/tag]” candidate. Of course, there’s an inherent understanding behind this: the DSCC can express a preference, but whomever Dem voters pick as the nominee deserves the party’s full support.

It’s what makes this completely unacceptable.

[DSCC Chairman Chuck] [tag]Schumer[/tag] said that the DSCC “fully supports” Sen. Joe [tag]Lieberman[/tag] in his primary bid, and he refused to rule out continuing that support if Lieberman were to run as an independent.

There were degrees of independence, Schumer said. “You can run as an independent, you can run as an independent Democrat who pledges to vote for Harry Reid as Majority Leader.”

Schumer said he had neither sought nor received assurances from Lieberman that an independent bid would not ensue if [tag]Ned Lamont[/tag] tightened the noose.

Wrong. If Schumer and the DSCC want to endorse Lieberman in the primary, I think that’s fine. Lieberman is the incumbent. But Schumer suggested yesterday that Lieberman could get rejected by actual Democratic voters, abandon the party altogether, and the establishment would still support him.

As Digby put it, “You don’t get to leave the party to avoid losing in a Democratic primary and then expect Democratic Party financial support to run against the Democratic candidate. That’s just nuts. And it’s so disrespectful to the Democratic voters of Connecticut I can’t honestly believe he has thought this through.”

Some have noted that the DSCC supports [tag]Bernie Sanders[/tag]’ Senate campaign in Vermont, even though Sanders is running as an independent. That’s true, but it’s not a fair comparison — Sanders doesn’t have a Democratic opponent. For that matter, Sanders has never been a Dem, so it’s not like he abandoned the party after Democratic voters backed someone else.

Schumer’s remarks came at a press conference, so it’s possible that he was just speaking off the cuff. Maybe he didn’t mean to convey that message, or perhaps, upon further reflection, he realized that it doesn’t make any sense for the DSCC to reject a Dem nominee who wins a Dem primary thanks to the support of Dem voters.

I can only hope Schumer “clarifies” his comments today.

Joe has to go and Schumer should be making sure ther is a clear path to the door and that it does not hit him in the rear on the way out. This smells like a reaction to Rovian tactics of calling Dems disorganized. Schumer seems to be saying that we are so organized that we will support any Democrat. Dems should not be in lock step. The benefit of the Democratic party is that we believe reasonable people can disagree. The world is not balck and white.

I realize this also allows for support of the worst Democrat ever but not before the primary and not if he feels the need to disregard the party primary process. The big tent needs to be put up but we should not offer to give Joe a free ride to the tent so he can undermine the fundamental ideals of the party.

If Joe goes Independent and the voters of Connecticut want him in the Senate, fine. I will just stop buying nutmeg and insurance in protest. The DSCC should not, however, fund his efforts.

  • Chuck as really gotten messed up here. If Lamont beats Lieberman (please, please, please) than Lamont deserves the party’s support and Lieberman should seriously think about running for some office in his state if he wants to continue in politics.

  • Lieberman ought to lose and then he ought to be dumped. Lieberman acts like a Republican, he should be a Republican. He should not get the endorsement of the Democratic Party. It can’t be any clearer than that.

    Schumer has left me cold lately, too. Not like Lieberman – he usually is on the “right side” of the issues. But he’s beginning to follow the well-worn path of so many others in “the leadership” who put their own cozy welfare over that of the Party and the Nation. We need Democrats who are Democrats … first, last and always. Americans agree with us overwhelmingly on the issues. What they really hate are politicians (i.e., weasels).

  • You can probably hand the 2008 election to the Republicans if Leiberman runs in independent campaign. It will be Ross Perot redux. Recalling the fight to keep Nader on the sidelines, I believe an independent Leiberman campaign will spark a civil war…

  • Along with certain senators’ votes on cloture for the bankruptcy bill, the Alito nomination, and a number of other items, this is just another reason to not send any money at all to the DSCC. Send your money to the DNC or the DHCC or to a particular candidate. Send the DSCC mail vouchers back with no money and a note that you will send $$ once the Dem senators get their act together.

  • The Dems will only turn heads when they show by their actions that they are actually a party capable of taking a firm stand and tossing out ol “support our president” Lieberman.

    This means tossing out business as usual politics and being guided by principles.

    Until then, they are just another verson of the current clowns and crooks in power.

    I’m not holding my breath.

  • Wouldn’t it be ironic if Democrats won back the Senate but then lost it when Liebermann went Independent. Kind of a Trent Lott/Jim Jeffords moment. Let’s actually get some power before we throw it away.

    Folks what I’m saying is we should spend more time and energy defeating Republicans than we do insuring that Democrats remain ideologically pure.

    I know many people will say that Lieberman votes with Republicans so who cares. And I say, sure he is a conservative. But compromising and building coalitions is what politics is all about. New England is a political battle ground. I personally think that Democrats will eventually take the vast majority of hte seats here in the same way that Republicans have taken the South. Let’s understand that any politician elected here will probably be moderate and go after the vulnerable Republicans instead of attacking one who has cast his lot with us.

  • Sanders has been endorsed by the Vermont Democratic Party, which makes him a Democrat for the purposes of his Senate race. I don’t think we’d have to worry about him caucusing with the Republicans, unlike Lieberman.

  • “I know many people will say that Lieberman votes with Republicans so who cares. ” NeilS

    I care. Ine th end it matters what laws are passed and which direction the country goes in. If Lindsey Graham or Rick Santorum decided to change parties and replace the – R with a – D but intended to vote the exact same way they do now would you support them?

    This seems to be about puting the party above the policy. The last thing I want is Leiberman becoming the most powerful Senator in the country because he is always in the undecided column.

    I guess the silver lining in Gore’s loss was not ending up with this clown in the VP seat. Oh, the crisis we would have after two terms of Gore when Leiberman was the presumptive nominee for President. We should have known whe he ran for re-election in the Senate while running for VEEP that Joe was all about Joe and nobody else.

  • What’s the point of having a primary if the Democratic party leaders won’t support the winner of the primary. I agree with Digby – it IS a huge slap in the face of the voters.

  • If Lieberman loses in the primary, is there really that great a threat of him then beating Lamont in the general as an Independant?

    It seems to me like if Lieberman doesn’t get the primary votes, then he doesn’t get the votes no matter what he does. You either like him and his politics, or you don’t. I’m not sure his political party affiliation is going to have a lot of bearing on the voting.

    All of that aside, it’s still an awful position for Schumer to take and I hope it comes back to bite him in the ass.

  • Don’t forget Leiberman is Jewish. It may very well be that he supported the war because he puts Israel ahead of other issues of the day. There may be enough voters in the land that will vote strictly on this issue, so that will siphon votes away from the Dem nominee…

  • I know many people will say that Lieberman votes with Republicans so who cares. And I say, sure he is a conservative.

    Tolerating excessive Republicanism from Lieberman only allows for the “no consensus” arguments the media propegates. Especially since he perpetuates this view himself by his many Fox News appearances and his overt displays of affection for Bush.

    If you want a strong Democratic party that people will not be afraid to vote for, be prepared to kick the DINOs to the curb.

  • Will, although I currently live in MI, I follow CT politics closely as I lived there for 10 years before moving here. I read recently that polling is clear that Lieberman would win as an independent because Republicans and Independents (and many Democrats not particularly politically active) push his numbers up. Remember, CT has closed primaries, unlike MI and some other states. There’s no likelihood a Republican would win there at this time so the primary is the real contest. He could conceivably lose the primary but win the general.

    Anyway, since Schumer would be unlikely to respond to a call from me, I called my Senators to tell them about Schumer’s words. I pointed out that this was an insult to CT Democrats and that there is no excuse available that there is no Democrat running (a la Sanders). I also pointed out that as a contributor to the DSCC, I didn’t want my money going to support a former Democrat competing against a loyal Democrat in the event Lamont wins. I also told them that this wasn’t Lieberman bashing–I voted for him when living in CT (although I admit to you guys to being embarrassed about that and have donated to Lamont to make up for past sins).

    I think the call helped. At least the people on the line seemed as disturbed by Schumer’s words as I was.

  • There really isn’t a consensus on what to do about the Iraq War in the Democratic Party. In fact there isn’t a consensus on the war in the Republican party either.

    I still think we are counting our chicks before they hatch. Bad polls for the president and his party are not the same as Democrats winning elections. Once we have control of the agenda, along with committee chairmanships, then we can talk about how to share the power among fellow Democrats. Until then its just so much sound and fury.

    And please don’t start with this DINO talk. I come from a very conservative part of the country (home to Marilyn Musgrave) and I have seen the Republicans tear each other apart with talk about RINOs. Personally I’ve never found a politician with whom I agreed completely. Don’t expect I ever will.

  • What I want from the Government:
    I want illegal immigration stopped. Illegals deported.
    Gangs totally eliminated, Debt paid off. Terrorists stopped.
    Environment improved before it is too late. A whole new bunch of people in the government. Most of those in there now need to go.
    I want jobs improved for citizens and the middle class treated with respect. Need I go on.

    • Comments are closed.