We’re absolutely sure Lieberman will caucus with the Dems?

August 15, 2006

It’s supposed to be a done deal, at least as far as the party is concerned: whether Joe Lieberman or Ned Lamont wins the Connecticut Senate race, the seat stays “blue.” Lieberman has said he’s running as an independent, but he’ll caucus with the Dems if he wins re-election in November.

Maybe the DSCC should ask for that in writing.

Connecticut’s U.S. Senate race continued Monday along its unpredictable way: The White House declined to endorse the nominee of state Republicans – and a new “Vets for Freedom” group with ties to the GOP advertised its backing of incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman, who is waging an independent campaign for re-election after losing last week’s Democratic primary.

The group’s full-page ad Monday in The Courant created an immediate stir: Former Democratic State Chairman George Jepsen, a top adviser to Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont, said the ad showed that “national Republicans, in their effort to help Joe Lieberman, clearly have a well-laid-out strategy to attack Ned Lamont.” […]

“Thank you Senator Lieberman,” the ad began in large type. Then, in smaller print, it continued: “Iraq and Afghanistan are complicated wars. But you have not let politics influence your position. We are grateful for your integrity, leadership and unwavering commitment to America’s troops. We are veterans of these wars, and we salute you.”

Just as bad, Dan Gerstein, a longtime Lieberman aide whom the senator named as his new communications director, engaged in a little red-baiting yesterday, and the Lieberman campaign seems to be anxious to characterize Lamont as a communist (this, after complaining before the primary that Lamont “voted with Republicans 80 percent of the time”).

Karl Rove is being awfully friendly; the WH and the RNC won’t back the Republican candidate; “Vets for Freedom” is coming to Lieberman’s aid; Lieberman is lashing out at the left … and Dems are sure Lieberman will caucus with the Dems come January?

It’s like feeding a dog that bites your hand. All I can say is… WHY?

Call the pound. This one’s rabid.

  • When he doesn’t- can I claim the mantle of being the first to say “I told you so”?

  • The contract wouldn’t be valid–he can change his mind. You can’t agree to agree.

    This has all the makings of a huge, easy target for progressive Dems. Wake me up if they don’t screw this one up, too.

  • Lieberman isn’t in the Zell Miller category yet, but he’s getting there.

    Lieberman went from “de facto” to “official” Republican candidate pretty damn quick. My guess is the Republican will be hounded from the race for gambling problems, making it a two-way race between Lamont and Lieberman. If re-elected, expect to see Joementum caucus with the Republicans. I wouldn’t be surprised if he changed party affliations in a public, spittle-flecked rant. He’s already demonstrated he’s willing to run against the Democratic Party, so why not make it official?

    It’s time to cut him off. Senate Democrats should withdraw all post-election offers from the table immediately, and tell him to withdraw from the race.

    Also, can we get Al Gore to campaign for Ned Lamont?

  • The Big Dog speaks out on Lieberman:

    Lieberman has characterized his loss — and the need for his subsequent independent run — as liberals in the party purging those with the Lieberman-Clinton position of progressiveness in domestic politics and strong national security credentials.

    “Well, if I were Joe and I was running as an independent, that’s what I’d say, too,” Clinton said.

    “But that’s not quite right. That is, there were almost no Democrats who agreed with his position, which was, ‘I want to attack Iraq whether or not they have weapons of mass destruction.'”

    “His position is the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld position, which was, ‘Does it matter if they have weapons? None of this matters. … This is a big, important priority, and 9/11 gives us the way of attacking and deposing Saddam.'”

    Clinton said that a vote for Lamont was not, as Lieberman had implied, a vote against the country’

    He also warns BushCo. not to politicize the London terrorist arrests. I appears that after a long dormancy Bill is once more ready for a fight.

  • Please, please, please … get Al Gore and John Edwards and an onslaught of real Democrats to campaign for Ned Lamont. And give Joe Lieberman the walking papers he so obviously wants. The guy’s a self-serving scumbag. I normally eschew pointless name-calling, but I must admit that sure felt good.

  • I think Lieberman is digging his own grave here with a majority of CT voters. When Lamont beats him in the general election, where he wants to caucus will be moot.

  • The GOP thinks it will quash the accountability movement if Lieberman wins. That’s more of a victory to them than winning the seat at this time and that’s sad.

    I’m sure they hope that if Lieberman continues to lead in the polls it will limit voter turnout and help swing some of the CT house races their way.

    Fortunately, their wrong. As Lieberman continues down the path to the dark side he will be shedding progressives and moderates left and right.

    As long as he keeps spouting nonsensical rants claiming terrorists are a greater threat than the Nazis or Cold War Soviets he’s going to lose the votes of anyone with any sanity, if he hasn’t already.

    November tally: Lamont 58%, Lieberman 35%, Schlessinger 7%

  • The deeper question here is what is Rove up to?

    He appears to be attempting to center the debate about Iraq on two Democrats in CT.

    In other words:

    Any internal strife between Democrats is better than external strife being focused on Bush’s Iraq mess.

    In other words:

    Let Iraq be a Democrat problem for now. And: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. And: Divide and conquer is a proven strategy.

    That this is the overt Rovian analysis seems apparent.
    But what is the covert Rovian analysis?

    For Rove is not only more mendacious than I imagined (up above)… he is much more mendacious than I can imagine.
    So I suspect there is some other diabolical piece of chicanery opperating here…

  • If it walks like a Republikanner schwein—
    And it talks like a Republikanner schwein—
    And it squeaks, reeks, and flipflops like a Republikanner schwein—

    Then it’s a lap-pig of the GOP Reich.

    How many times does this pig have to openly lie about its intentions before those in authority within the Senate kick it into the aisle? If it wants to be a Republican, then by all means—let it be a Republican. They’ve already got a simple majority; anything requiring a 60/40 or a 2/3 still will not go through, even if the pig caucuses with the GOP. The only way to defeat this pig is to kick it into the aisle. “Embracing it” will only further assure it a place on the Senate floor, and it is already a known fact how this particular slab of pork will vote on a great many issues—right along with its “new masters.”

    If the Dems in the Senate are really serious about “taking the high road,” then they’ll begin by scrubbing the $H1+ out of the stall. On the other hand, if Reid and Co. want to play against the GOP the way the GOP would play if “the shoe were on the other foot,” then they need to do the same thing—kick the pig into the aisle, and let it wander on over to its “new masters.”

    In the end—is placating this pig really worth the price to be paid? Will it “really” be a Dem majority if Lieber-sow is “1 of 51?” Is supporting this nasty little swine worth the possibility—the strong possibility–of giving Cheney the tie-breaker option on literally every issue of substance that could come before the Senate?

    I don’t think so….

  • Isn’t it obvious? Lieberman is going to wait and see who controls the Senate before he decides whether he’s a Republican or a Democrat. He’s going to go with whoever holds the majority. Isn’t that what cowardly front-runners always do?

  • And then he’ll choose the Republicans.

    I wish congressional Dems would get it and stop supporting this guy who has betrayed his party by running Independent and messing up the chances of the guy who won the Democratic primary fair and square.

  • The Republitards are in danger of losing one of their most useful tools. Expect them to pull out ALL the stops. I do like the spectacle of the reichwing supporting someone who has publicly proclaimed to be a “new Democrat”, but a Democrat nonetheless, and will not support the lawful winner of their own primary! This is priceless. “Republicans support Democrat for reelection.”

  • I posted this late yesterday on the last Lieberman thread. I think it deserves more play here today:

    This goddamned putz is now actively attacking Democrats and Democratic nominees all over the place, and the sleazeballs in the Senate still want to be in the same room with his stinking, rotting carcass?

    As David Sirota reports:

    Connecticut’s Manchester Journal Inquirer reports that Sen. Joe Lieberman today unleashed a vicious attack on Vermont Independent Congressman Bernie Sanders – a longtime progressive hero and the leading candidate to keep Vermont’s U.S. Senate seat out of GOP hands. According to the newspaper, the Lieberman campaign sent out an official email attacking, among others, Sanders and Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, founder of DailyKos.

    RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman is refusing to endorse the actual GOP nominee in Connecticut, and is instead heaping praise on Lieberman.
    Same thing for the White House, which is also refusing to endorse the actual GOP nominee in Connecticut. Lieberman has been telephoned with a supportive call from Karl Rove, GOP candidates accross the country are rallying to endorse him, and a Swift Boat Vets-ish front-group run by neocon leader William Kristol and Bush Iraq War spokesman Dan Senor is beginning to air ads on behalf of Lieberman. Meanwhile, Lieberman is parroting Vice President Cheney’s talking points overtly implying that Connecticut voters are Al Qaeda sympathizers, and now attacking leading U.S. Senate candidates necessary to win back the Senate for Democrats.

    …consider this new MSNBC story about GOP donors rallying to fund Lieberman’s general election campaign:

    “Quite willing to speak was Bruce Bialosky, a leading Republican donor in California, who said he will raise more than $10,000 for Lieberman….On Tuesday night, once Lamont had defeated Lieberman, Bialosky sent an e-mail to the 2,000 people on his political list ‘expressing my despair over Lieberman’s loss in the primary’ and making it clear he’d raise money for
    Lieberman’s independent bid. ‘I’ve never seen such a tremendous esponse’ from his list, Bialosky said…A Republican campaign fund-raiser based in Washington, who spoke on condition that he not be identified by name, said, ‘There’s a definite sense among a significant number of the Republicans who I deal with that Joe Lieberman is a man of principle and a man we should support.’ This fund-raiser said he’ll contribute money to Lieberman’s campaign and raise money for him.”

    This comes on top of the fact that, according to MSNBC, “a number of corporate PACs, such as the National Beer Wholesalers’ PAC, have already given Lieberman the maximum amount permitted.”

    My favorite in the MSNBC story is the one supportive Democratic fundraiser, Mitchell Berger, who said he’s supporting Lieberman because ““He did a fundraiser for the Florida Democratic Party two years ago and raised a million dollars.” Berger didn’t mention that Lieberman also
    headed down to Florida just weeks before the 2004 election, stood before Jewish audiences, attacked Sen. John Kerry (D) and praised President Bush (R) on Israel issues – landing a big story in the Palm Beach Post just before the vote. Wow, what a loyal Democrat, huh?

    I love what Sirota suggests we bloggers call Holy Joe:

    From now on, I am going to be referring to Joe Lieberman as De Facto GOP Nominee Joe Lieberman and I urge everyone else covering this race – bloggers, reporters, columnists – to do so in the interest not of partisanship, but out of respect for objective accuracy. Over the last few
    days, it’s very clear that is what Lieberman is.

    Oh, and for those interested in just who “Vets for Freedom” is, you might go here and look up “Captain” Larry Bailey, who is also out to “swiftboat” John Murtha as well as support Holy Joe. For Lieberman to accept support from this neo-nazi (a proud member of the “Free Republic” and a brave Southern “heritage” proponent) says everything one needs to know about the “integrity” of Joe Lieberman.

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Larry_Bailey

  • You rabid partisans don’t get it… In a state like Connecticut that has so many independents and moderate Republicans, they don’t care if Joe has been a “loyal democrat.” They just want the guy who will best represent their state in the Senate. The fact that Joe lost in the Democratic primary has in made him more attractive to to the right as they have one interest, that is defeating Lamont.

    Come November, when Joe wins the general election, I can’t wait to see all you liberal Dems run back to him and beg him for your forgiveness!

  • The fact that Joe lost in the Democratic primary has in made him more attractive to to the right as they have one interest, that is defeating Lamont.

    Really? Because one poll shows Lieberman leading Lamont by 5 points, and that’s immediately after the Democratic primary. Five points three months before the election doesn’t seem like an groundswell of “moderate” and “independent” support.

    And I have a feeling when this is all over, very few people will want to associate with Joe.

  • I’m not as sure about anything in life as everybody here is that Joe’s gonna lose.

    I don’t get it. He polls very well among indies and Republicans (see question #15 here, from a poll that’s less than a month old). He lost the Democratic primarty by only 4 points. And now he’s Rove’s favorite Senate candidate. Why are you all sure he’ll lose?

    This is why I was wary all along of the Lamont strategy: Lamont beats Joe in the primary, Joe slinks off to Indieland and wins the general, Joe decides he should caucus with his real friends. What a triumph for the netroots. (As opposed to: Joe, still a jerk, wins reelection and helps us seat Democrats as committee chairs.)

  • Um…Jr….

    Win, lose, or draw—Joe Lie sets foot on my front porch at his own peril.

    Period.

  • The fact that top Republicans are endorsing Joe Lieberman and that Lieberman bad mouths the current Democratic nominees including Lamont, shows he is out of touch and a Republican at heart if not in name yet.

    That LIberman is doing everything to discredit his former colleagues proves he is self-centered and disregards the wishes of his state’s Democratic voters, in a true test of democratic (generally) and Democratic (party’s) principles. The Democratic leadership should officially shun him and Connecticut’s voters should give Lieberman his walking papers in November of this year. May true Democrats win in a landslide this November, for the good of the country and its citizens.

  • Steve M. – regardless of Lieberman’s chances, his campaigning against Democrating candidates and the Democratic party is hurting their chances of winning. If you don’t move to exclude him you are giving him more credibility, and there is a danger in that, too.

    • Comments are closed.