I'm not from Connecticut so I don't vote for their candidates.

[lonehalf]

(Edited to change date)

Also, I wasn't on DU in 2000.

What I see here is a lot of opposition to Lieberman.

Tell me, how many here supported him for Vice President then?

And why do you think he's any different now?

[wakeme2008]

1. I think you are thinking about 2000 and him with Gore...

I did not support him then. I did not like him running for his Senate seat the same time as he was running for VP. Plus being from Florida, I believed Senator Graham would have got tens of thousands more Indep. votes than Joe.

[liberal N proud]

2. Maybe what we thought we saw in 2000 was not real?

Maybe he changed as the republicans took over in Congress, he became a chameleon, playing what ever side was the winning side.

Besides, bu$h has not outlawed changing my mind YET!

They may have done a damn good job smearing those who do change their mind as flip floppers but last I checked I can still change my mind when the urge is there.

[Clark2008]

3. I think most people liked Gore and voted for him hoping

Leiberman wouldn't ever be needed.

[Benhurst]

4. The Devil himself would have been preferable to Dick Cheney. NT

[sharp_stick]

5. I did

plus I would support him now if he would have won the Democratic primary. By continuing on as an "independant democrat" he's showing that he's just too damned lazy to get a real job. He's too comfortable with the paycheck and perks of a Senate job and that's bad news for anybody in Government.

[MessiahRp]

6. I think, and I'm not speaking for all of DU but

When Lieberman was the VP candidate in 2000, MOST DUers cringed but supported him because they supported Al Gore. After Bush got into office, Lieberman did everything he could to become more and more aligned with a Bush Administration that felt the Constitution didn't matter and that endless war without any true resolution was the right course for the infinite future.

The further Joe moved away from our party, the further DUers moved from Joe.

But, in defense of most people here... they were onto him before 2000. They did NOT vote for him in the 2004 Presidential primaries and did not like him as the VP selection by Gore. They voted for him out of support for Gore and the bigger picture.

Rp

[drbtg1]

7. A few factors...

I've been in CT for over a decade, so let me give some insight.

1.) Obviously, the Iraq war wasn't a factor in 2000, so there was some Joementum (although we aren't dopey enough to get behind that phrase).

2.) Democratic Attorney General Richard Blumenthal was too comfy in his slot and there weren't enough other strong Democratic options here (the perennial and pitiful Bill Curry is a prime example).

2.) In 2000, sleazy Rupublican governor John Rowland, who eventually went to jail, was considered an up-and-coming in the party. Yet, back in 2000, Joe's opponent, Waterbury mayor Philip Giordano, wasn't endorsed by Rowland. In fact, Rowland said publically he shouldn't run and should concentrate on being mayor. This outright opposition seemed very odd. A couple of years later, it all made sense. Philip Giordano was arrested and convicted for soliciting for child prostitution. Little children, single digit age.

In essence, Joe's success and failure is due in large measure not just to his decisions but also the circumstances around him over time.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

8. Lieberman was Gore's Dan Quayle

A sad mistake. I have never liked lieberman, and honestly think Gore would have had a decisive win in 2000 if he had chosen a different running mate.

[dtotire]

9. Liebermann

During the Presidential debates in 2004, Gov. Dean made a statement about the Mideast, stating that our policy between the Israelis and the Palestinians should be more even handed, as a one-sided support for Israel was causing us to being hated by Muslims. Liebermann immediately objected, saying that the conflict should be decided by the two sides. It was obvious that he wants us to continue supporting Israel, although it does not benefit us at all. I feel our involvement there should be more balanced. The policy of the first Bush was more even handed.