there's been a ton and a half of speculation about what Lieberman will do if he wins the Senate seat ... it's very possible the Senate "scorecard" will end up with 50 Dems, 49 republicans, and Lieberman ... if he votes with the Dems, we control the Senate; if he doesn't, the republicans will control the Senate because Cheney will cast the deciding vote ... should Democrats be worried about Lieberman? the best answer is: maybe ...
one thing worth pondering, if only for a little mental exercise, is the possibility of a new centrist party being formed ... I watched the CT debate yesterday ... Lieberman is happy as a clam bashing Democrats AND bashing republicans as well ... "l'etat c'est moi" ... Joe may just form his own country ... he's just loving freeing himself from all the wrongs that have ever happened and blaming both parties ... "look at me" he says ... "i am the non-partisan voice of reason unlike these other jerks on either side of me." ... what a guy ...
if the vote tally goes as described above, Lieberman could carry considerable clout ... any time he wants, he could jump across the aisle ... and probably back again if he feels like it ... but perhaps this "one man centrist party" is not quite as alone as he might appear ... and perhaps there will never be a third party in the center at all ... the article below raises some interesting points about a different script for the centrists; perhaps instead of a third party, they'll become "aisle hoppers" ...
maybe the most cogent model is one that envisions several aisle hoppers coming towards the Democratic side ... skeptical? well, there are certainly no guarantees ... but consider this ... ideologically, centrists seek a blend of left and right ... they presumably would like to see a less partisan environment especially in the Senate ... if the centrist republicans remain as republicans and the Senate remains in republican control, the result is one party government and that leads to more right-wing extremism ... the balance centrists seek is just not possible with one party control ... so if "tipping the balance" can be effected by republican aisle hoppers, i think it remains a very real possibility ... viewed through that lens, Lieberman may not be quite as relevant as he has seemed ...
and, finally, take note that the seemingly irrelevant republican in the CT Senate race totally dominated yesterday's debate ... neither Lieberman nor Lamont held their own ... Schlesinger has ZERO chance of winning but if he can keep up what he delivered yesterday, he might just hold on to a bunch of his base ... if that happens, Lieberman could be in trouble ... Lieberman needs those republicans to win ...
source:
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/10/17/look_out_for_party_switchers.htmlLook Out for Party SwitchersThe morning after the 1994 election, while Democrats were licking their wounds, they got kicked again when Sen. Richard Shelby announced that he was switching his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican. Shortly after Shelby's switch, Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell jumped to the GOP side too. In addition, several more House Democrats who were reelected in 1994 from mostly southern states, switched to the GOP making the 1994 election a good old fashioned ass kicking of the Democratic party.
There is a realistic possibility that if the Democrats pick up at least five Senate seats on Election Night, several current Republican Senators could switch to the Democratic side of the aisle. Remember, Shelby switched because he felt Democrats were incapable of moving away from liberalism and Campbell switched because he felt Democrats were beholden to cronyism and did not respect other views among colleagues on issues important to Campbell. In 2006, cronyism is alive and well in the GOP ranks: Arlen Specter is shunned by the GOP leadership and White House for his views on domestic surveillance while Olympia Snowe, John Warner and Chuck Hagel are shunned for their views on Iraq.