Will The Clinton's Pull A Lieberman?

[SoFlaJet]

if they don't win the democratic nomination and run as a 3rd party Independent Democrat or something like holy Joe did in '06? That would pretty much assure John McCain as the president in November and give the Clinton's another shot in 2012. I'm wondering what you people think-is it a possible scenario we should be considering?

[Obamaniac]

1. It won't give the Clinton's another shot...

It'll destroy them within the party forever. She might even get a Democratic challenger for her Senate seat.

[billyoc]

16. I can personally guarantee a primary challenge for Sen. Clinton in '10

whether she pulls a "Leiberman" or not.

[CorpGovActivist]

52. .

[liberalnurse]

2. My concern is will Obama?

Rumor has it that he and Colin Powell might just go Independent!

[sniffa]

7. That's just silly

Bloomberg would be the running mate.

[UALRBSofL]

27. liberalnurse I have heard that as well

It wouldn't be good for the party

[Gman]

35. It would be disastrous for the country

[Blue-Jay]

28. I gotta ask....Where did you hear this rumor?

[liberalnurse]

38. Strongly implied by Colin Powell himself on CNN

this weekend. He remains his cautious, coy self but why was he on in the first place...nothing new in his life or career? :shrug:

[madaboutharry]

3. If Hillary doesn't win the nomination,

I believe that they will get behind Obama and do everything they can to help with his election. Any other scenerio will make them outcasts in the democratic party.

[0007]

6. I can just hear John Wayne saying, "That'll be the day"

[Stuckinthebush]

4. NO

They are true Democrats unlike Joe. They fight for their party and for what they think is best for the party. Upon losing, they will both rally around the winner.

Assuming Hillary loses.

We still have a few months to go and anything can happen.

[Tesha]

37. Funny, they weren't all that "Democratic" when Ned Lamont kicked Liberman's ass in CT.

After that, the Clintons were pretty quiet about who
Nutmeg Staters should vote for.

Tesha

[Stuckinthebush]

42. Liberman was a Dem then

And a sitting Senator. I think that would explain a lot of their support.

Hillary and Bill are real Dems...never fake ones. Sure they have middle of the road policies, but they are still die-hard Dems. Joe always flirted with the right wing.

[Tesha]

43. No, Lieberman was an independent by then. But the Clintons couldn't be motivated...

No, Lieberman was an independent by then. But the
Clintons couldn't be motivated to come out and
campaign for the nominated Democrat over their
buddy, the former DLCer, now complete and open
turncoat.

Tesha

[Stuckinthebush]

45. Oh, OK

I know what time period you are talking about now.

Yeah, that was crappy of them.

But I still don't see them pulling a "Joe".

[Tesha]

46. I agree.

> But I still don't see them pulling a "Joe".

I agree.

Tesha

[Tesha]

51. Expanding my comment from last night...

I agree that the Clintons won't "pull a Lieberman"
and launch a third-party effort.

But I can certainly see them playing the same scenario
they played in 2000 and 2004 where they did essentially
nothing to help the nominated Democratic candidate win.
This is analagous to what they did in 2006 with Lamont/
Lieberman.

The DLC aren't real Democrats and they can't be counted
upon to do what they so often tell Progressives to do:

"Hold your nose and vote for the Democrat!".

Tesha

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. That's what I've been thinking for some time now.

I don't think it will happen, but I wouldn't put it past her character.

[Tom Rinaldo]

9. I just love smears against Democrats based on what someone "thinks" they might be capable of.

Hillary Clinton is firmly on public record on numerous occaisions stating that she will support our Democratic nominee.

How on earth anyone can pretend that there even is a remote possibility Hillary would run a third party campaign against the Democrats would be impossible to understand if I did not factor in the possibility that just by suggesting it someone gets to land a free low blow against her.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

People were defending Lieberman the same way back before he split. But it was pretty clear with him then too.

[thoughtcrime1984]

25. Now, I respect your opinion, Tom, however

The union of Clinton and McCain to take Obama to task over campaign financing in the GE, shows me that she is willing to work with the Repubs to damage Obama's electability. She should not be speaking negatively about a fellow Dem when it comes to matters concerning the GE. No way, no how. Attack him all she wants about the here and now (and she is), but leave his GE financing to his campaign to deal with, for if he gets to the GE, it is all on him to decide what he needs to do. I wouldn't have dreamed that a fellow Democrat would be taking him to task on something that hasn't even been decided yet, especially in tandem with the enemy. Just my two cents.

[Tom Rinaldo]

30. Obama uses some attack lines against Clinton that Republicans use also

Candidates in primaries will use issues that they think reflect poorly on an opponents character, credability, and or consistency against their opponents. When Clinton was the front runner Republicans in their debates teed off on Hillary all of the time and Clinton's Democratic opponents were frequently willing to piggy back off those attacks on Hillary's character, credability and/or consistency. Now McCain knows he is the Republican nominee and he will use all of his time to attack both Democrats on a range of matters. However Obama and Clinton still have to run against each other, and they both show a continuing willingness to say things about each other that are less than flattering while doing so.

It actually is one of the arguments used against having primaries pick our candidates; that Democrats dig up dirt on each other during them, and reenforce the arguments that the Republicans will use against our eventual nominee. It is an unfortunate side effect of internal democracy, but overall it is worth it if the alternative is not allowing Democratic voters to be fully informed of the arguments for and against each of our candidates so that the members of our Party are the ones making an informed choice who to run.

I almost ended up as big a Howard Dean supporter as I am a Wes Clark supporter, but I remember Dean saying about Clark during the 04 primaries that if Clark becomes the Democratic nominee then the General Election in Novemeber 04 would turn into a Republican primary instead. Democrats in 2004 used attack lines against Clark that Republicans were digging up against him and which Republicans would then have use against him, quoting Democrats, had Clark won our nomination back then. It goes with the territory of a primary battle, and this one has been gentler than most.

[4themind]

40. hmmm

As disturbing as it may seem, the arguments should be judged based on their own merits, rather than who makes them. That being said, I have not seen sufficient criteria presented either on this thread or otherwise to indicate that obama has "gone back" on his word, at least depending upon how that word was "interpreted" let alone intended by the speaker ( I highly doubt anyone has a reproducible metric for, or has outlined and proven the sufficient critera for). So in that light I question the Clinton campaign's interpretation of the statement in that light, and it certainly has not added positively to my regard for them, even independent of past behavior.While other candidates may be said to engage in the same behavior, individual perceptions as to the number and values placed upon the "severity" of these cases of behavior may shape attitudes towards a candidate, and not be simply believed to be in equivalence, in respect to values that a person may hold. Ultimately, in the absence of justification and proof of the sufficient criteria necessary to judge between these two candidates attacks in number and severity, we're left with an incomplete picture in terms of perception and persuasion.

[elixir]

48. Hey, TR. How are you? Yeh, I agree. She's behind whomever the nominee is.

:hi:

[dkf]

8. She would if she thought she could win.

[Metric System]

10. I've always assumed that Obama would do this if he didn't get the Democratic nomination. n/t

[NastyRiffraff]

11. Real cute...ask a question hoping that people will take it as a real issue

The answer is "no." And I'd bet everything I have on it.

Good God. Talk about reaching, just to slam Hillary (who is the one actually running, not "the Clintons")

[Lone_Star_Dem]

13. No. Neither will Obama, neither will Kucinich and neither will Gore...

Just to preempt any of those threads from popping up.

Lieberman is a rare breed of idiot. Please, don't assume that other, more intelligent, Democrats would want to follow in his footsteps.

[conservdem]

14. Yes. I think its very possible, if they can fund it.

[JimGinPA]

15. No, They'll Give The "Appearance" Of Support...

But if she does "fight on, all the way to the convention" it would prove they care more aout themselves than the party.

[Tarc]

17. Per usual, the Obamaniacs are pulling fantasy situations out of their backside

No connections to anything the Clinton campaign has said, or done, hinted at, or alluded to. Just one more sad little smearjob attempt.

If there's any candidate to worry about in this scenario it would be Obama, and the numerous times he has pushed the idea that those that voted for him now would be unlikely to vote for Clinton in a general election.

[SoFlaJet]

19. it's no smear job

I think it's a legitimate question and a possible scenario-from what I've been seeing from the Clinton's who seem to want to re-write a lot of the rules-may as well start their own party and they can count delegates the way THEY want to and won't have to be "forced" into adhering to rules that don't seem to favor them at any particular moment-you know like what they are trying to do with Florida and Michigan and also with the "automatic" delegates

[Tarc]

24. Bull Shit. From what I see of of you and your fellow team members here

disruption and withdrawal of support in the general election is much more likely to come from the Obama side of the fence, I'm afraid. When he has said so himself, there's no other conclusion to make.

[SoFlaJet]

32. what team?

getting a little paranoid are we now tarc? Oh yea that's right the whole world is against Clinton...

[leftynyc]

33. It is a smear job and a shitty one

at that. There is no evidence Hillary is contemplating something like this. Just more shit from Senator Obama supporters to smear Hillary and the former president. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[SoFlaJet]

39. I guess we'll find out after she loses

and then we can see where the shame lies-what WILL they do? Will they help the McCain campaign out through their surrogates like James Carville did against Kerry....

[leftynyc]

41. It's a good thing I don't

judge a candidate by his/her supporters. Frankly, I doubt you have the capacity for shame.

[griffi94]

18. no hillary is a democrat

but what i think would be funny is if she actually did the kind of shit she gets accused of and smeared for and silently torpedoed obama....now that would imho be poetic justice ....he could go back to the senate....hillary can run against mccain in 2012

[SoFlaJet]

21. and...as a Hillary supporter

you would be OK with that? You know poetic "justice' and all....

[griffi94]

29. sure why not

it seems cannibalism is ok now...at least as long as it's directed at hillary.....
if this primary season had been about issues and message....i wouldn't have a problem with obama...however when i got to the point where i couldn't tell from the things posted whether i was reading du...or had wandered into a rw site......i figure the obama supporters feel like the ends justify the means....so yeah i'd be ok with that form of poetic justice...ya know it's like karma

[rinsd]

20. No. The only ones who have suggested a 3rd party run are Obamatons here on DU.

[niyad]

22. will the clinton's what pull a lieberman?

please, people, you are using a singular possessive, you are NOT using a plural.

[SoFlaJet]

23. so when I refer to them

there is no apostrophe? It's Just The Clintons?

[niyad]

26. yes

unless you are saying something like "the clintons' home"

[BuyingThyme]

31. They already have. The DLC is the Clintons' parasitic. subversive, fascist

tool of choice. I don't think they'll try again if it doesn't work.

[Gman]

34. Step away from the bong...

[NJmaverick]

36. Anything is possible with them, like Joe it's all about power

Nothing else

[JVS]

44. she'd have no shot in 2012

[Blue_In_AK]

47. No

[book_worm]

49. No, for one thing if she pulled that stunt she would be finished in the Dem party.

[rove karl rove]

50. Oh ,no, she IS a sitting Senator.....

She'd have to switch to an "I" there as well, no way. I do wonder who Lieberman himself would support, her or McCain?