OMFG: Lieberman is now mulling over running as a REPUBLICAN if loses

The man has no shame! Apparently the GOP candidate got in some hot water and may withdraw from the race and reporters asked Lieberman's press secretary if Holy Joe would consider running as a Republican if he lost the primary and the response is that they are "mulling it over"!!

So he can't decide if he will be the republican, democratic or "Joe for CT" party candidate!

www.dailykos.com

In fact, on bill passage and nominations he votes 40% with the Democratic caucus.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Zodiak%20Ironfist/4

Your average Republican would do about the same, I'll bet...

70% of the Republican caucus is 100% BushCo policies (see my post down-thread for a graphical representation of the 109th Congress). Of the dissenters, Chafee is the most deviant with a 30-something percent score. Leiberman is about the same as Chafee, and better than 100% of the Republicans. That talking point is actually true, but the "90% Democrat" one is misleading according to my analysis (I've been doing this quarterly for a year, now).

I am not a Leiberman fan, trust me, but I do like basing my opinions on the truth.

"... my little project to score Democratic Senators (and to a lesser degree, Republicans) according to issues that matter to me and, ostensibly, a number of other DUers"

I suspect that if you removed his support votes for predetermined issues like confirmations you would find that reasonably solid Democrat. Senators are rarely see the world in black and white. Giving a support vote for an issue that he cannot control might give him more leverage when fighting for something that he might control.

I don't want to be a Lieberman apologist. I would be happy to see him replaced by a more blue blooded Democrat.

Investing scarce political resources on this is questionable. I have seen more threads about Lieberman here than any other campaign. Loosing his seat in an effort to asset the power of the progressive grass roots is a bad idea.

If he runs as an independent we will loose the seat. If he runs as a Republican we might loose it. Checkmate.

It's the primary season--of course there are a lot of primary threads. If Zell Miller or Ben Nelson were running in contested primaries, there'd be threads about them, too. Investing scarce political resources? I'm with you--it would be much more sensible if Joe's corporate pals would pull their support from his sinking ship of a campaign and throw some money Ned's way. I'm surprised they haven't done it already, since Joe is looking more and more like a man with neither a party nor a constituency. If Joe runs as an indy, the three-way race would be up for grabs--you pretend to know that the winner will be the Republican, but I haven't seen any polling that shows a Republican lock in a three-way race. CT is a heavily Democratic state, after all; if Joe runs as a Republican, Ned wins. If Joe loses the primary and does the rational thing and drops out, Ned wins. So, in two out of three possible scenarios, Ned wins for sure--in the third, he has a fighting chance. That seems like a pretty good bet to me.

I score ALL appointments and bill passages in which there is not 95% agreement in the senate. Sometimes even if there is none but the progressives feel strongly about it (like Boxer standing up for Ohio voting rights). All of the issues I score are posted there, so you can decide for yourself rather than "suspect" which issues I choose and do not choose to score.

I suspected that DUers care about two things: bill passage (whether or not an issue actually becomes law...Bankruptcy Bill, Patriot Act, CAFTA) and insane political nominations (Alito, Negroponte, Gonzales, Condi, Janice Rogers Brown).

These issues are not arbitrary because all issues that meet the criteria are included. All of them from the 109th Congress...two years of votes,and the most recent.

And Leiberman scores 40% on that scale.



You should ask yourself, why does Leiberman have a 50% voting disparity when one compares his votes on bill passages and nominations with his total voting record? A reasonable person would conclude that Joe just does not come through for Democrats when the vote really counts. At least not in the 109th Congress.

Here is a list of the issues I scored so everyone can see them.

Condi confirmation (against; liar)
Gonzales confirmation (against; torturer)
Class action lawsuit reform (against; loss of right to court trial)
Bankruptcy bill (against; bad for middle class and poor)
Negroponte confirmation (against; death squads)
Cheney energy bill (against; oil comany profits)
CAFTA (against; bad for workers)
CAFTA (2nd vote; against; bad for workers)
Ohio vote certification (against; stolen election)
Firearm manufacturer immunity (against; big business protection)
Confirmation of radical judges (against; compromise filibuster away)
Tax Relief act of 2005 (against; tax cuts for rich)
Deficit reconciliation act (against; spending cuts for poor)
Alito cloture (against; by DUer's request at the time..normally I do not score cloture)
Alito nomination (against; asshole Bushbot)
Tax cut protection (against; favors the rich...do these people ever stop?)
Extend Patriot Act (against; anti-civil liberties)
Raise limit on public debt (against; bad for our future)
Flag burning Amendment (against; not necessary and against 1st Amendment)
US-Oman FTA (against; ANOTHER "free trade" agreement?)
Roberts Confirmation (against; those blue eyes aren't fooling anyone)

first you said he votes 90% with the Dems, then you say "I suspect that if you removed his support votes for predetermined issues like confirmations you would find that reasonably solid Democrat."

which one is it? 90% or "reasonably solid?"

Personally I don't care what he runs as. As long as he loses. He is worthless and needs to set an example for other dems who might vote with the party on many issues but are completely wrong in their support for the war and Bush.

AFL-CIO 82%
NARAL 95%*
Human Rights Campaign 90%
League of Conservation Voters 88%
Planned Parenthood endorsement

*NARAL needs a big as asterisk because of his Roberts and Alito votes. (I very strongly disagree with him on this but I think I explained his motivation in my previous post.)

-----------

He is far from my favorite Senator. I don't want to be a Lieberman apologist.

Is it really worth loosing this seat? Is this the best use of scarce political resources?

An asterisk does not excuse allowing roberts and Alito on the court. Nor does it excuse the three right-wing freak judges that were put on the bench through Leiberman's crappy compromise. And the Patriot Act? What the hell is NARL scoring to give Leiberman a 95% rating?

These scores mean nothing witout the methodology. Otherwise, they are faith-based numbers from groups who would not benefit from scoring a Democratic senator with a low number. ADA and ProgressivePunch do the same thing, making the Senate look more polarized than it actually is (when it counts).

When one goes through the data, one sees how very few bills actually get passed in the Senate from year to year. So where are the 38 other NARL-based votes (assuming that NARL counted those two votes against Leiberman)?

Lieberman's is in the right wing of the Democratic tent but he is usually in the tent. He will vote with Repugs on predetermined issues. He usually does this to leverage his influence on issues that he might actually influence.

Bush knew he was giving him the kiss of death. It was calculated to turn the base against Lieberman and it succeeded.

I would prefer a more blue blooded Democrat but he is not a DINO.

In fact, your argument hinges on it, so define it for us, please. Which issues were predetermined in the 109th Congress?

And I will list the issues in which Leiberman voted against the Democrats.

This way, we can see if we are talking apples and oranges.

Boxer should feel great about campaigning for a Republican.

SICK.

this lil' revelation should alleviate it.
Good riddance!

1. He voted for Condi
2. He voted for Gonzales
3. He voted to take class action lawsuit rights away
4. He voted for Negroponte
5. He voted for the Cheney Energy Bill
6. He voted for CAFTA
7. He did not stand up for voting rights in Ohio
8. He voted for cloture on Alito
8. He voted to extend the Patriot Act
9. He voted for the US-Oman free trade agreement
10. He voted for Roberts

He missed three important votes, as well.

This is his record for the last two years. Notice that the Iraq war isn't even on my list? So much for this being about just one issue.

But thanks for making that info available to the uninitiated! :hi:

But sometimes I cannot resist filling in the blanks.

And welcome to DU!

Not his current record by a long shot.

and declare himself formally for what he really is.

after all.

Put a fork in him.

a DINO or more likely a REPUKE-lite owe us all an apology!

BIG TIME!

I'm not from Connecticut but I hope Ned Lamont wins that primary in August with 99.9 percentage of the vote.

Although I do think it would be better if the battle lines were clearer and he wasn't constantly on FAux news dissing Dems as a Dem.

Let him go there.

again of how good a Democrat Joe is and why I should vote for him.

:wtf:

just last week in pro-Joe threads?

"Come out, come out, whereever you are!"

:hi:

anyway. How anybody can support a man with zero dignity is just amazing to me.

C'mon guys! C'mon out, we're waiting for you. We've got a nice, comfy spot waiting for you (NOT).

I'm just sayin'.

:D

ol' sag face was there in the rose garden with bush and gephardt that infamous day!

He's still proud of it. What a loser, man.

:evilgrin:



Educate Your Local Freepers!
Flaunt Your Opinions With Buttons, Stickers and Magnets from BrainButtons.com
>

Joe is soooo confused! He doesn't know what he is. :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

can stand out, the only way he will receive repeat invitations to appear on FOX News, the only way he can be elevated.

Standing next to other Democrats, he is a faint presence.

I take that back...I saw two on a traffic island on the Silas Deane Hiway. I guess they couldn't find actual voters willing to deface their lawns, so they had to resort to placing them on public property. OTOH, you can't swing a dead cat without knocking down a Ned Lamont sign. I don't know what it's like in other parts of CT, but here near Hartford, it is Lamont, Lamont, Lamont signs everywhere. But no Joe.

good work.

Go, Ned.

They were out on the road on public property, as the ones you saw.

Get the vote out!! :headbang:

I have yet to see a LIEberman lawn sign or bumpersticker. There are lots of Lamonts and even a couple of Malloys (Gubernatorial primary)

I have a long drive to work each day, so I see a lot of signs.

I see slightly more DeStefano than Malloy signs, but nothing close to the spread I see for Lamont/Lieberman.

As I've stated in other threads: In driving around Hartford, Windham and Tolland Counties, I've seen dozens of Lamont signs, but hardly any for Lieberman. Now, let's hope those people actually vote on August 8th!

un-freakin'-believable. I wonder how the DU Defenders of the DLC will justify Joementum's latest insult to the Democratic party and Connecticut's Democratic voters? Note to Joe: See ya. Don't let the door hit you in the ass.

History has not been kind to politicians changing partys...especially this late in the race. If he does this he will lose in a landslide, name recognition or no.

commiserate with--Katherine Harris.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Well, it IS the Party where he belongs. What a creep.

TC

This guy is really REALLY pissing me off. To say he has no shame is to understate it fantastically. He kisses the devil, he supports a war that knows full well is wrong for the country, threatens to go as an independent as his constitutents see his true colors and now "mulls" becoming a Repuke??? At this point this man must simply be booted out of the congress regardless of how his punk ass runs.

:sarcasm:

Well let's see 'em! Where are all the "there are no DINOs" people to tell us how noble and great he is, despite his support for the worst of bush's policies?

:grr:

An awful lapse in and of itself.

IF they don't answer the question, than we'll know, but I would not be surprised if we get a real denial later on this afternoon. Just have to see.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

Eeets about Weeeee-innnning! n/t

astoundingly, his face looked even more drawn and haggard than usual after he took the VIP version of the Katrina bus tour.

Verdict: Decent human being. Terrible politician.

Solution: After Lamont boots him out of the Senate, he should seriously consider hooking up with one of the many fine aid organizations out there (i.e. NOT the Red Cross).

He is NOT a human.

My bad. :P

interests before his party or his consituents. Nor does a decent person constantly trash members of his own party.

Just from memory - Gore ( to get people medical help), Kerry (a few times - to bring stuff from MA businesses and for meetings with small businesses because he was working on the amendment to help them), Edwards (to lead students working on Habitat for humanity houses), Clinton and GHWB (as part of their campaign to raise money to help), and Frist.

I would be willing to bet that at least half the Senators went there.

Sorry, but I see him as totally self serving. He is no Jimmy Carter. Just because his VIP tour of NOLA left him drawn and haggard it does not equal humanitarian. Has he done anything personally to help NOLA? Joe & Zell the me,me,me GOP twins.

how he appeared to have such sympathy for New Orleanians while continuing to support the war that's bringing Baghdad a similar collection of debris piles.

CLearly he won't be showing his human side as long as he's in the Senate. Go Lamont!

Don't effect him like his tour of NOLA.

I can't wait to pull the lever for Ned Lamont!

I presume that means no Diebold? If so, your vote will likely be actually counted.

We still have the old rolling booths with Levers.

Better than Diebold.....I think?

Unless, of course, the Klan is too interested in his services to let him go.

nt

He would finally not be lying as to his real agenda and beliefs.

He ain't no Dem...that's for sure!

then again, Mikey was looking to break into politics while Joementum has held his seat for over a decade.

Note: The one and only time I EVER voted repuke for any office higher than state treasurer was for Lowell Weicker over Joementum. Soon after, Weicker repaid my trust in him by bolting the repukes and forming the independent "A Connecticut Party" -- BEFORE the primaries, I might add.

Precious! Precious! Precious! Precious! Precious! My precious Senate seat! Precious!

Nasty, EVIL Lamont want to take seat away from Joe, yesssss....

And all the other dems who are still supporting this schmuck.

Think I'll send her a short little note pointing that out.

Who needs or wants him anyway? Certainly not democrats. Or at least not this one! :popcorn: :rofl: :popcorn: :rofl: :popcorn: :rofl: Talk about a flip flopper!

http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=21106



But even Tom Tomorrow didn't come up with Liebermann admitting that he might run as a GOP.

Go Lamont!

Chickenhawk Lie-berman is going down.

He's a DINO. DEMOCRAT IN NAME ONLY. The repuke candidate was caught using a BOGUS name at a casino so he wouldn't get caught counting cards...I guess the guy is a KNOWN card counter which is not welcomed at casinos. To get around that, he used a bogus name.:rofl:

I wonder how Carlos would spin this one. :D

Carlos would be wetting his pants.

if he won as an independent. I had no idea he'd consider jumping parties.

I wonder if Rash Limpballs will call him Jumping Joe now?

Lieberman is no Democrat. And I'm beginning to detect the aroma of burnt toast ....

Bake

if he ran as an independent he would be a spoiler.

Aside from Joe losing the Democratic primary and slinking home it's the best possible outcome.

"The question has been posed to Lieberman campaign deputy press secretary Noah Kores, and the campaign is mulling it."

There is no evidence presented that they are mulling it. For all we know, they sent an email and are getting ignored for acting like fuckwads.

Anyone who falls for it is about as smart as 29% of hardcore Bush* supporters or deliberately lying.

An immediate, unequivocal, "no way in hell would Joe run as a Republican" from the Lieberman campaign would seem to be in order, no? I mean, how hard is that? Should we assume that such a statement is forthcoming?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And TPM is generally a reliable and interesting blog. Here's the link to the original piece, which went up at 12:40 EST. And really, I don't appreciate being called a dimwit.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/jul/19/ct_sen_will_lieberman_rule_out_accepting_gop_line

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

true, committed Democrat would make! He'd be outraged at the mere suggestion!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Yes or no?

ain't it? :rofl: :rofl:

They are so desperate

Kos, I think you may have overstepped (3+ / 0-)

Recommended by:
McHaskel, Caj, Hanna for Change

A spokesman was asked a question and didn't respond right away.

Now, I myself know that there is a problem when he can't even imediately say "NO!" However, he didn't say "maybe" either. So to say that "Lieberman mulls" is a little misleading.

It's the Lieberman people who have resorted to lies, innuendo and personal attacks. Any attacks on the incumbent have *not* come from the Lamont campaign.

Mr. "I have loyalties that are greater than loyalty to my party" himself?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"When did you stop beating your wife" is premised on the implication that that questionee did, at one point, beat his wife--and leaves him no opportunity to say "I never beat my wife." Sargent's question to the Lieberman campaign contains no such trap: it's a simple choice. Would he run as a Republican if he lost the Dem primary, and the opportunity were presented to him? He's already said he'd run as an Indy; his failure to support the Dem caucus on key votes is a matter of public record. The question is not unreasonable, IMO.

You're old enough to figure out that just because someone doesn't answer a question doesn't mean they're indecisive, and old enough to figure out the similarity between the wife thing and that.

You have been given the unearned privelidge of being temporarily taken off of my ignore list. Use it for your benefit and not your detriment.

a shit about being on or off of your ignore list.

I can't tell you how excited I am about not being on your ignore list anymore. Really. Thrilled.

In fact, you did not say "similar." At least not in the post I replied to. You said "the same." It's not even close to being the same--one's a cheap rhetorical trap and the other's a perfectly valid question. You seem not only afraid of the potential answer to that question, you obviously resent the fact that it's even been asked--why is that? What's your particular interest in the Lieberman campaign?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2724556

I've clearly stated what I resent, and it's not asking questions. It's asinine to assume that given my clearly-stated opinion.

My particular interest in the Lieberman campaign comes from trying to prevent the kind of insane direction Lamont's supporters are taking things as demonstrated by this goofy gag they're pulling, among other things. Do a search on my posts from the last month and you'll find some other reasons.

unless you consider standing up for the core principles of the Democratic party to be a form of mental illness. Lieberman is, if anything, a far more insidious kind of fake Democrat than Zell Miller ever was--at least Miller was out in the open with his loony duplicitousness. Lieberman tongues Bush's bunghole behind a screen of meaningless cover votes and bogus "centrist" pieties about not offending the wingnuts or rocking W's imperial boat. Fuck Joementum--the sooner he and his ilk are out of the party, the better.

If he wasn't even contemplating running as a repuke, he'd say so easily in a heartbeat.

What he's NOT saying speaks LOUDLY. Speaks VOLUMES.

Fuck LIEberman, the closet REPUKE.

office as a Republican, claimed to have voted for Al Gore in 2000 until his voting records came out and now it is apparent that Kinky was lying about voting for Gore in 2000 (because Kinky didn't bother to vote in any elections between 1994 and 2004), and then Kinky voted for Bush in 2004 and gave an interview explaining:

Question: So does this idea of the honorable cowboy have anything to do with why you threw your support behind President Bush in this last election? You did, didn’t you?

Kinky: Yes.... I agree with most of his political positions overseas, his foreign policy. On domestic issues, I’m more in line with the Democrats. I basically think he played a poor hand well after September 11. What he’s been doing in the Near East and in the Middle East, he’s handling that well, I think.

After all that, Kinky says he's an "Independent" (someone should tell Kinky that just because his mind operates independently from rationality that doesn't mean he's an "Independent").

Now they LOVE Kinky at freerepublic:

"YOU GO BOY!!!! Vote Kinky. Yahoooooooo!!" by no dems
"As Governor, Perry has abandoned me. I will...{vote Kinky}" by jy8z
"kinky will kill the rat {Democrat}. He will draw off the wild insane rank and file rat voters." by jmaroneps37
"Kinky is a frikkin' loone, but I love him!" by LIConFem
"As far as I'm concerned, Rick Perry is selling Texas highways, that we bought and paid for, to the toll road people. I've met Kinky a few times over the years and at least know he'll be interesting and sincere." by Brucifer
"I've been an ACTIVE Republican since 66 and have never voted for a dim for Governor, but I WILL NOT vote for Perry again. Kinky may be a nut but goodness knows we've had nutty Governors before. If I'm healthy in November I will do all I can to beat Perry." by HoustonCurmudgeon
"Kinky is a lot more conservative than most people realize. He has a good campaign strategy. He's appealing to young adults and college students who think he's a liberal, which he clearly is not if you look at his stance on immigration, death penalty, prayer in school, and energy. The stupid college students think he's a hippie who's obviously a liberal and are throwing their support behind him without knowing better." by returnofthemack
"I have to imagine half his supporters in Austin would drop dead of shock if they read this interview on line here http://www.ruminator.com/content/040501.html. Here's the excerpt that would KILL those Austinistas: SM: So does this idea of the honorable cowboy have anything to do with why you threw your support behind President Bush in this last election? You did, didn’t you? KF: Yes. I did in this last election, but I didn’t vote for him the first time. SM: Who did you vote for in 2000? KF: I voted for Gore then. I was conflicted. . .but I was not for Bush that time. Since then, though, we’ve become friends. And that’s what’s changed things. SM: So it’s your friendship with him that’s changed your mind about having him as president more than his specific political positions? KF: Well, actually, I agree with most of his political positions overseas, his foreign policy. On domestic issues, I’m more in line with the Democrats. I basically think he played a poor hand well after September 11. What he’s been doing in the Near East and in the Middle East, he’s handling that well, I think. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! (I'm just wondering: how many blame-American-first liberals in Kinky's campaign have read this interview?). One especially funny "bonus fact" about this interview is that Kinky was just pulling the interviewer's leg when Kinky said he voted for Gore in 2000 (no doubt trying to appear more "independent" in light of his support for Bush and his past run for office as a Republican). Kinky's voting records confirm he didn't vote for Gore (or anyone) in 2000." by NoTaxTexas
"If I lived there, I would vote for Kinky." by ridesthemiles
"I hate to say it, but it's come down to voting for that wacked out Kinky." by mtbopfuyn
"I knew that he supported prayer in schools but do not recall his other comments on this subject. He is not politically correct (but many of his volunteers are). I also know that he has not taken the anti-Bush stance of many in Austin music. He has visited the Bush White House." by weegee
"I think more important than Kinky winning the election in 2006 is that Chris Bell (D) come in a distant third in Texas. And if Perry wins but sees any considerable drop in Republican voters, then maybe the politicians will wake up." by weegee
"Kinky has my vote. And I'm not alone." by RichardW
"We could do better than Kinky I'm sure but I am also certain that we could do worse. This is not an endorsement or even any committment from me. I'm an still undecided between Perry and Kinky, and there is a lot of difference between them. Perry had better play to the Republican base but good. Maybe he should start reading the party platform." by weegee

of succeeding as a R in Ct?

You're gonna need a lot of these, Skinner! :grouphug:

Go Lamont - the Dem who stays a Dem on every day that ends in y!:applause:

Looking forward to it.

The party by going independent, I find this hard to believe. Gonna need more proof than this.

Basically because this would be utter stupidity on his part, and would guarantee he would lose the election.

Which is clear as mud. He got no reply or got a "we're thinking it over" reply? Two waaay different things.

I've long held Joe to be a useless fucking turncoat, but if this guy has got everyone hopping up and down because he didn't get an email back as quick as he would like, then he's a dumbass.

Was this a non-response to an email? Was it at a press conference? Is it some dumb-ass press secretary being an idiot.

Like I said, politically this would be about the dumbest thing he could do which makes me skeptical that how it is being presented is the reality.

That is the best thing that could happen.

edit: I don't have a problem with Dems invading the repub party. Sounds great to me.

After all, the repubs are trying to do the same thing to the Dem party.

Lieberman ♥ Lieberman
Lieberman ♥ Bush

Arrogant, self absorbed narcissists unite!

Let him run as a Republican. That way, ALL the conservatives who claim this is a "liberal witch hunt" can then start treating him with the same scrutiny as the very Democrats who they now insult.

I want real Democrats representing me.

This story does not sound very credible.

He told Gore to 'stand down' and just admit defeat (which worked). I've always thought Lieberman a Judas and sure enough he goes and proves me right!

Yeah run as a Repuke Joe, you fit right in with that crowd. What I don't get is his voting record is pretty liberal, WTF would he smooze with Bush of all people?

I'd like a link to a MSM report documenting this.

Threatening to switch parties is extreme, and would all but guarantee that Lamont wins the primary.

I may not agree with many of his stances, by he's no idiot.

Anybody have a link?

This guy asked a question (by what means he did not disclose - he could have sent an email or even just slipped a note under the door), and didn't get an answer back (he gave no indication of how long he waited for a response) and says they are "mulling it over" (he provided no documentation for that, such as the text of an email response or a quote from the campaign).

Lieberman knows that he could never win as a Repug. Most Democrats would vote Democratic and the Repug base would stay home.

--------
Threatening to run as an independent is Machiavellian. There are flaws in his plan. Barbara Boxer and the DNC might be prepared to make the Faustian bargain but the grass roots does not work like that. The emotional argument will prevail. He would probably split the Democratic vote and the Repug might win. He can not win as an independent.

His pet projects will be far safer in the hands of another Democrat. Also, I still believe that he is a Democrat at heart. He should drop out gracefully if he looses the primary.

he's always been at least rePiglican Lite...

Nothings more pathetic than a desperate politician.

no more DINOs....

for years for him to switch parties...makes no difference he is a rePUNK .... and tell me why didn't he have enough faith in is vice presidential run to not run for Senate in 2000 - Holy Joe SUCKS....

I still don't really get it. I think he's an asshole turncoat and it chills me to imagine what influence he would have had, had he and President Gore been allowed to ascend to office. Is it really just sucking up to power? If anyone knows, did Lieberan give any indications of this whoreishness earlier in his political career?

PB

Because this sounds like a snow job.

Don't get me wrong, I think there is no reason for ant Democrat to support Lieberman at this point.

He's an ass no matter, and I used to defend him here.

Who needs a Dem who votes Republican anyway?

I don't buy that the Lieberman camp is mulling any such thing, why would they when he is already preparing to go independent. Ned Lamont must be desperate if he's spreading dirt like this.

:eyes:
Let me guess, you are a Lieberman supporter?

It's too late to run as a Republican. Aside from the snarky attitude that Kos displays.

to share with the rest of us?

The source is not kos:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/jul/19/ct_sen_will_lieberman_rule_out_accepting_gop_line

Here's a snippet:

"This morning, Election Central posed the question in a phone call to campaign deputy press secretary Noah Kores. He said the campaign would get back to us, and we said we'd let you know when (or if) the campaign did.

Well, now it has, and their answer is: "Joe Lieberman will never run as a Republican. Never."

The rumor mill runs rampant anymore on this forum and so does blatant lying, which is usually directed toward centrist Democrats. It's pathetic.

He will choose whatever he thinks will get him elected.

How he can gather signatures before the primary is beyond me. How can someone anticipate a defeat a month or two before an election and start gathering sigs?

Somehow... that doesn't seem quite democratic to me

Instead of splitting the progressive vote, he and Lamont would be the only two major candidates running. Liberal Democrat vs. Moderate Democrat running as a Republican. That would work much better for our side than Lieberman running as an Independent..However, if he loses the primary, I still think getting behind Lamont would be the right thing for Lieberman to do.

Republican fascist traitor, why would he suddenly become a patriot now? Lieberman is beholden to Israel, his other country. To United States citizens it may be confusing but to informed people its clear as day. Maybe if Lieberman loses here he can win in his other country, you know the one he truly loves, Israel.

The word "homeland" as in Homeland Security grates on my ears. Americans don't say "homeland" we don't talk like that.

Germans say "fatherland", Russians say "motherland" only Israelis say "homeland". I am an American. Chertoff has a dual citizenship, one in the US and one in Israel. Do you or anyone believe that an Israeli will protect you? Fuck that! Damn That! We Americans don't need Israeli's to protect us from squat. Fuck off Israel! And stop trying to drag us into your war and force Americans to fight as a proxy army on your behalf, you want mercenaries? Then hire them. In the mean time don't ask our young men to fight and die for your idiotic bronze age mythological idea of manifest destiny and a "greater Israel". In fact, go to "hail".Pronounced with a Texas accent its "hail".



PS no offense to Jews intended.

:sarcasm: Get all of the Jews out of government!! :sarcasm:

Somehow the no offense to Jews postscript rings hollow.

That sounds like something from Aryan Nation or Free Republic.

well.................

How could you tell?

(Thanks, Dorothy Parker.)

Lamont pulls even with Lieberman in latest poll
July 20, 2006

HAMDEN, Conn. --Democratic challenger Ned Lamont has pulled into a dead heat in his U.S. Senate race with incumbent Joe Lieberman, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday.

for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts The poll shows Lamont ahead 51-47 percent among likely voters in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary. That compares to a 55-40 percent lead for Lieberman in a similar poll in June.

The telephone survey of 2,502 registered voters was conducted July 13-18. It has a sampling error margin of about 2 percentage points. But the error margin among the 653 likely Democratic primary voters is 3.8 percentage points, putting the candidates in a statistical dead heat.


Click here: Lamont pulls even with Lieberman in latest poll - Boston.com

:nopity:
It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to
Cry if I want to, cry if I want to
You would cry too if it happened to you
:nopity: