DSCC endorses Ned Lamont

[LynneSin]

http://www.dscc.org/news/roundup/20060809_lamont/

Statement from Senators Reid and Schumer
August 9, 2006
By: Phil Singer, DSCC

Democratic Leader Harry Reid and DSCC Chair Chuck Schumer issued the following joint statement today on the Connecticut Senate race:

“The Democratic voters of Connecticut have spoken and chosen Ned Lamont as their nominee. Both we and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) fully support Mr. Lamont’s candidacy. Congratulations to Ned on his victory and on a race well run.

“Joe Lieberman has been an effective Democratic Senator for Connecticut and for America. But the perception was that he was too close to George Bush and this election was, in many respects, a referendum on the President more than anything else. The results bode well for Democratic victories in November and our efforts to take the country in a new direction.”

[kurth]

1. 'Bout damn time

Now send Joe to the Senate basement.

[LynneSin]

I find no fault for their support before the election

Joe was a longtime collegue of many and without a doubt still a threat to win the democratic primary and an extremely strong threat to win in November.

Let's play Devil's advocate and say Lieberman DOES win the November general election as an independant. Sure, he's no longer a "D" but we still want him to align with the democrats in making up the majority (like what Jeffords and Bernie Sanders have done). Knowing that the bulk of democrats supported him in the primary will hopefully mend enough bridges for him to at least align with that democratic majority

[rodeodance]

14. I agree with you. And this is post -primary now. Things have changed. I

am glad to see this statement.

[WCGreen]

2. Best news all morning.......

Good statement...

[IndyOp]

3. YES! YES! Now get him OFF the Committees!

He is no longer a Democratic Party member, he should be OFF!

Reid & Schumer: :applause:

[Atman]

5. But his IS still a party member. A traitor, but still a Democrat.

He actually isn't an Independent, in the sense of party affiliation. He is running in CT as what's called a "Petitioning Candidate." He retains his party affiliation. This is what it's all about for Joe. Maintaining his plump committee seats so he can keep the paychecks coming. And he has a 2 million war chest he has to spend or give back. So in reality, he's pulling a bigger fast one on us than many of us even realize. He is STILL a democrat, he is NOT running as an "Independent."

[marylanddem]

11. nevertheless

he is saying "fuck you" to the Democratic party, so they should say "fuck you" right back.

[LincolnMcGrath]

13. I agree. This ain't Jeffords side stepping a bit left to grab some power,

This was *kisser sprinting to the right for attention.

[cali]

43. I take offense at that comment

With Jeffords you get what you see. He left the republican party, a party his family had been involved with for over a century and a half, because its values had shifted and he no longer fit in. He did NOT do it for power or to grandstand, and anyone who is familiar with him, knows that.

[rodeodance]

12. anyone know what the "rules" are on this issue? Or is it basically left up

to the Senate Dem caucus?


I am recalling DeLay and seems to me it was up to the party leaders to push for his removal.

[leveymg]

4. I was beginning to worry that they wouldn't get around to saying that.

That was a long time to leave us hanging.

[C_U_L8R]

6. perception? perception?

will these folks stop being so friggin wishy-washy?
What are we.. the Charlie Brown party ???

[citizen snips]

7. When is the DNC going to endorse Lamont?

[LynneSin]

9. Howard Dean is in charge of the DNC and you think they won't

Dean knows better than anyone.

[rodeodance]

15. Dean will endorse Lamont. No doubt

[citizen snips]

16. I am sure Dean will endorse Lamont

He should endorse Lamont soon.

[DinahMoeHum]

17. Absolutely. Ned Lamont is Dean's kind of candidate.

:kick::kick::kick:

[IronLionZion]

24. Jim Dean's DFA endorsed Ned BEFORE the primary

and you better believe that the full power of the DNC is backing Ned and all Democrats this November. This race is still Ned vs. Joe since the Repub is completely worthless.

[MaineDem]

25. However, the DFA is not the DNC

The DFA's endorsement has nothing to do with what the DNC will do. But, of course, the DNC will be behind the Democatic candidate. Goes without saying.

[Recursion]

19. Isn't it a given...

...that the DNC will support the candidate the party elects in the primary? I mean, is that even a question, short of somebody like Lyndon Larouche getting nominated?

[BlueJac]

8. About time

:woohoo:

[rodeodance]

10. I read in the WP earlier that they were to have a "unity" press conf. Has

anyone heard anymore?

[Mabus]

18. When they will remove Joe's page

http://www.dscc.org/2006races/ct/ and replace it with Ned's I will be satisfied.

[LynneSin]

30. Yeah, Is saw that too

I'm sure they'll have that updated. Main thing is on their home page is acknowledged that they are in support of Lamont.

[Mabus]

31. At least they have Reid and Schumer's endorsement of Lamont

on the same page. They've had the statement up for a while.

[mcscajun]

20. Well, that settles it.

The DSCC won't be sending any funds Joe's way. They've sent him the message, "Son, you're on you're own."

And that is as it should be: he's making a MY Party run, so he can foot the bill.

I doubt they'll cut him loose from any committees any time soon; he's still a "Democrat", and he may yet win his seat (I strongly doubt that and hope otherwise, I merely explain the political calculus.) so they won't want to really piss him off should he remain Senator. If he loses in November, as I expect and hope he will, that takes care of everything.

[LincolnMcGrath]

21. I think they need to kick Joe to the curb Immediately, for the good of

the party and more importantly, the good of the nation.

I man with loyalties to nobody but himself, cannot be trusted.

[Pachamama]

23. They need to privately and firmly tell Lieberman he needs to stop his

intentions to run as an independent because his actions are going to split the party and cause them to not win the Senate majority in the fall.

And if he still runs as an independent, they should remove him from the committee rolls he has and make him public enemy #1.

Hey, that would be kind compared to how the Republicans treat their traitors!

[TankLV]

28. He needs to be made an example of.

You do NOT diss the party and get to keep the perks.

It's that simple.

He can sit in his chair and vote - with the repukes - and still kiss repuke ass - as he has PUBLICLY done in the past.

He just doen't get to sit in the BIG CHAIR anymore.

LIEberman - SORELOSERMAN - is now an EMBARASSMENT to himself.

He is no longer a Democrat - he has said so himself. He's an "INDEPENDENT".

LAMONT is the Democrat.

He needs to be kicked off all leadership positions PRONTO.

[CTLawGuy]

22. hooray to the DSCC for doing the right thing

:)

[berni_mccoy]

26. Oh.My.Goodness. Democrats Uniting!!!

Woot!

[insane_cratic_gal]

27. I saw that but the website under 2006 races

still shows LowJoe as the poster boy for the democratic primary

[GreenArrow]

29. Lieberman will be endorsing Lamont

before the month is over. The party is taking him behind the woodshed even as we type.

[eridani]

34. If you have real information here--

--please share. I really hope that is the case, but I worry that Lamont might get treated like McGovern in 1972.

[GreenArrow]

40. no real information

just speculation like everyone else. Joe has nothing to gain from continuing this, which of course, doesn't mean he isn't egotistical/venal/crazy enough to do so. I simply suspect that powers behind the scenes will take him in hand and show him where his real intersts are.

Of course, a Lamont as McGovern role is a real possibility too. We'll know soon enough.

[MrBenchley]

41. Now what does that mean?

McGovern fucked up royally in the Eagleton fiasco.....he failed to check out his vice presidential candidate, then tossed him overboard when the seas got rough.

And it's worth noting again the most saliet fact about the McGovern 1972 campaign--his ascendance to the nomination was a Republican dirty trick--Nixon and his plumbers ratfucked the primaries because they WANTED McGovern as the candidate.

[Little Star]

32. Who woke them up?????? n/t

[skipos]

33. Great!

:kick:

[inthebrain]

35. Could that letter be anymore impersonal?

They should give Lieberman two weeks to withdraw or throw him out of the party.

I have no problem with Joe running but they should remove the D from his name. The Republican challenger is polling at 9%.

[welshTerrier2]

36. what a pathetic endorsement ...

i'm sorry to spoil the lovefest but that is among the most pathetic endorsements i've ever read ...

did it occur to Reid and Schumer that the massive turnout and the rejection of Lieberman is a call for an end to the war and a change in the Democratic Party's positions on many issues? no, of course not ... it was all about "a perception" that Lieberman was too close to bush ... they didn't say he was too close; they said the voters had "a perception" ... it sounds like they were trying to convince themselves that they are insulated from a very active grassroots movement ...

the message from voters was not narrowly about Lieberman; they'd better understand that or they may soon find themselves in Lieberman's position ... it's time for them to realize the status quo has got to go!!

finally, their comments about Lamont could have just as easily been a "your name here" pre-recorded message ... "we blah blah blah "your name here" on a fine effort and we blah blah blah support what's-his-name because it wouldn't look too good if we opposed a candidate running on our ticket as a Democrat ... sheesh ... can you imagine Lamont using that "warm endorsement" from Reid and Schumer in his campaign ads against Lieberman??? there's no way that will happen ...

[inthebrain]

37. Good catch

I agree!!!

Their premise seems to be that they should work with smoke and mirrors rather than make a clear cut stance on Iraq. Twas more than just a kiss!!!

Maybe Reid and Schumer are due for a little primary voter uprising as well!!!!

[welshTerrier2]

38. "primary voter uprising"

i truly hope that does NOT become necessary ... but we should not just try to sweep our differences under the rug ... they need to call for reforms in the party to "open things up" ...

by criticizing them, perhaps they will understand that we will not just go away and we will not just go along ... those days are over ... my goal is not a purge but that is an option is there's no better alternative ...

and while i'm criticizing what they said, let me add one more point ... to say a few nice words about Lieberman is fine; to fail to criticize him for saying he was abandoning the Democratic Party and was planning to run against our nominee is NOT OK ... maybe they hadn't heard the news yet or they just forgot to mention it ... the two of them should be ashamed ...

[inthebrain]

39. I don't want reform

I want a revolution in this party; top to bottom. Perhaps that's where I differ from the rest of this party. Reform is nothing more than just a new coat of paint but what's underneath remains the same. I want the the whole house rebuilt from the foundation on up.

I don't like the way this party has gone the 20 or so years. It's statements that are made in this letter that are part of the problem. It's party leaders refusing to diassacosiate themselves from Liebermans indy run that are part of the problem.

[MrBenchley]

42. Since they live in the real world

they probably don't consider a four-point squeaker much of a call to anything....much less a total change in the party.

"can you imagine Lamont using that "warm endorsement" from Reid and Schumer in his campaign ads against Lieberman??? "
No, but I can imagine the DSCC now having to spend a fortune to hang on to what was the Democrats' safest seat, thanks to the far left's idiotic quest for "purity." Remember, every dime that has to go to prop up the Unknown Millionaire is money we can't spend getting rid of a bigoted fuckwit like Allen of Virginia, or Santorum of PA.

[welshTerrier2]

44. time for a new script Benchley

i understand the excercise of democracy is painful for you; you would prefer a system of royalty where once elected, the seat is yours for life ... a majority of Democrats who voted in the CT primary voted for Lamont ...

are they all the "far left"? are they all "purists"? or is your view that CT Dems are so ignorant they were all duped by the "far left"?

time for a new script Benchley ... the problem in CT isn't the "far left" draining resources, it's jackass Lieberman from your wing of the party ...

[MrBenchley]

45. Why, it's not like the far left suddenly grasped reality....

And as for the "excercise of democracy is painful", it's not me trying to pretend Lieberman has no right to run independent if he wishes (as the laws clearly state he can).

"a majority of Democrats who voted in the CT primary voted for Lamont"
Yup. The Unknown Millionaire squeaked out a four-point win, and alienated many Democrats while doing it. Now he's the candidate for the third largest voting bloc in the state (there are many more independents, and slightly more Republicans).

And every dime that has to be spent in Connecticut, trying to hang on to what had been the safest seat the party had, now can't be spent getting rid of Santorum, Allen or any other Republican asswipe. And that IS a fact.

[welshTerrier2]

46. just for the record

i think Lieberman has every right to run ...

[MrBenchley]

47. It shows...(snicker)

And now every dime that has to be spent propping up the Unknown Millionaire to hang on to Joe's seat can't be spent in gaining a seat we didn't have...

And the rest of us should listen to you guys about election strategy? Fuck that noise.

The far left in the Democratic party are like cockroaches in the soup pot...they don't enjoy it, and they ruin it for the rest of us.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

48. Straw man. "It'll be dumb, petty, and harmful" is VERY different from

"He has no right to do it."

And you KNOW that.

Nader also had the right to run in 2000, and you see what the results were.

[MrBenchley]

49. "dumb, petty, and harmful" pretty much sums up the Unknown Millionaire

and his scorched earth campaign.

"Nader also had the right to run in 2000, and you see what the results were."
When HASN'T the far left been a cancer on the democratic party. It's no coincidence that the last two Democratic presidents both gave them a thumb in the eye publicly.

[Vidar]

50. Glad they're doing the right thing.