Time.com: Why the Republicans Are Loving the Lieberman Loss

[wicket]

Time.com

At a time when the GOP should be back on its heels, Connecticut voters' rejection of a centrist Senator gives the party a potentially powerful new weapon to use against the Democrats this fall

From Washington State to Missouri to Pennsylvania, Democratic candidates found themselves on the defensive Wednesday as the Republican Party worked ferociously at every level to try to use the primary defeat of Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut to portray the oppposition as the party of weakness and isolation on national security and liberal leanings on domestic policy. Doleful Democrats bemoaned the irony: At a time when Republicans should be back on their heels because of chaos abroad and President Bush's unpopularity, the Democrats' rejection of a sensible, moralistic centrist has handed the GOP a weapon that could have vast ramifications for both the midterm elections of '06 and the big dance of '08.

One of the nip-and-tuck Senate races this year is in Missouri, and backers of Sen. Jim Talent are preparing an attack on his opponent, State Auditor Claire McCaskill, that is emblematic of the sort that will be seen all over the country within 24 hours. "Does Claire McCaskill support the wishes of the angry left by endorsing Ned Lamont's candidacy or will she support the man who was chosen by Al Gore as the Democrat's 2000 nominee for Vice President?" Republicans ask in a statment that will force McCaskill to talk about messy party business instead of her favored issues of government accountablity and affordable health care.

-snipped-

Gleeful Republicans across the country mocked their opponents as isolationist "Defeat-ocrats," and even some Democratic officials said they can already imagine the ads in November races saying that Lieberman, once within a few hundred votes of being Vice President of the United States, is now "not liberal enough" for the Democratic Party. Republican officials, who have had little but bad news for months as Iraq festered and U.S. voters showed increasing signs of pessimism and discontent, said the Ned Lamont victory gave them a chance to paint Democrats as a party that had become captive to the liberal wing symbolized by the MoveOn.org civic action group. Mary Matalin, an outside adviser to the White House, signaled the message when she said on Fox News Channel shortly after the polls closed: "MoveOn is not fringe. They're the heart of the party."

On television and in speeches in coming days, party officials and strategists plan to talk about their respect for Lieberman as a distinguished public servant and argue that Lamont's victory represents the end of the long tradition of strong-on-national-defense Democratic leaders in the mold of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and John F. Kennedy. The GOP plans to try to broaden the argument beyond Connecticut, a liberal stronghold, and work to convince viewers and voters that Democratic nominees across the country have more in common with Michael Moore and liberal bloggers than Main Street America.

-snipped-

More at link.

:puke: :puke: :puke:

[LeftCoast]

1. They love his primary loss so much that Rove is going to help him in the

general election? Yeah, right. :eyes:

[Marr]

7. Exactly. They certainly don't appear to be "loving it" to me.

[AZBlue]

28. If it's true that Rove offered to help Joe, he was only helping the Reps.

Rove is a mastermind when it comes to campaigning and spin. And winning. Don't misunderstand me - I think he's a soulless troll who deserves whatever new depths of hell are awaiting him. But, that's because he's so diabolical when it comes to winning. Don't think his offer of assistance to help Lieberman for one second - he was strategizing and angling for the GOP. Don't let him fool you.

[villager]

2. The MSM will fall in line, the Dems, such as they are,

had better be ready...

[grytpype]

3. Let's see how gleeful they are when they are picking up their heads

off the ground in November.

That's all those assholes can do, gleefully smear and mock.

[AlCzervik]

4. i heard some talking head say last night the minute they heard about

Joe's loss the GOP issued a "Joebituary" which actually made me laugh but i think thats pretty telling.

[deadparrot]

5. I fail to see how Lamont is "far left."

His signature issue is his position against the Iraq War, a stance which a majority of Americans now hold. Opposition to the war doesn't make you a radical by any stretch of the imagination. So are the Republicans insulting over half the country?

[JHB]

19. He's not. That's all the more reason they'll paint him as such...

...just ask Bill Clinton.

Back in 1992, he was arguably the most conservative (or least liberal, if you prefer) of the Democratic primary contenders. The real "far left" either rallied around Jerry Brown or went Green, and the "liberal" pick was probably Tom Harkin. By the time he wrapped up the nomination, The Bush camp knew they clearly couldn't treat Clinton the way they'd treated Dukakis. (Heck, remember that bit in The Hunting of the President where someone connected with Bush offered clear sailing in '96 if only he'd sit out '92 and let Bush win a second term?)

So what did they do? They ignored reality and just called him a "radical leftist": made hay about his trip to Russia, played on Hillary's work on the rights of children (to spook the evangelicals who see that as a great socialist/communist/satanic plot to have the state usurp the role of parents and make all the kids grey stalinistic drones), when nuts looking for proof that he'd smoked pot, you know the rest.

And as a wierd side effect, this "radical" treatment by the Right (coupled with Bill's own personal charm) actually got a lot of liberals to embrace him as "one of theirs" (even as he pushed NAFTA, flubbed national health care, didn't pursue investigations of Bush & Reagan's dirty dealings, etc.

[NJCher]

25. figures don't lie, but liars do figure

Opposition to the war doesn't make you a radical by any stretch of the imagination. So are the Republicans insulting over half the country?

On another thread is a figure stating that 60 per cent of Americans are now against the war.
These republican strategies smack of desperation to me.






Cher

[wicket]

29. They are so screwed

And they are finally realizing it.

[mhatrw]

37. How was Howard Dean "far left"?

Far left now means "not afraid to call Bush on his bs."

[VolcanoJen]

6. Is Time having an identity crisis?

:shrug:

That's so strange, I had just finished reading this other article over at Time:

Why the GOP May Not Gain from Lieberman's Loss - TIME

Excerpt:

Unfortunately for the Republicans, there is no way to remove Schlesinger from the ballot — he can only step down voluntarily. Connecticut's party chair and Republican governor both made it clear they wanted him to go, but Schlesinger is having none of it. "I'm not leaving the race under any circumstances," he says. Party operatives have even started comparing him to Katherine Harris, the unloved Florida Congresswoman whose seemingly hopeless insistence on running for the Senate has infuriated Republicans who see a chance to take a seat there slipping away thanks to her unpopularity.

But Schlesinger's intransigence hasn't stopped Republicans from dreaming. At the Republican National Committee meeting in Minneapolis last week, there was talk of how the Democratic split might be exploited. Says one GOP strategist who was at the Minneapolis meetings: "If Lieberman loses the primary and runs as an independent, there are people in Republican circles who want to raise money for him because they agree with him. Then the question is how much acrimony is left over from his excommunication."

Lieberman caucusing with the Republicans seems about as likely right now as Schlesinger dropping out. But you can still sense unease when talking to Democrats. Some have worried about what would happen if the popular Governor Jody Rell or centrist Republican House member Chris Shays were slotted in for Schlesinger. But both are in hot races important to the GOP, and neither is likely capable of taking out even a wounded Lieberman. One thing is clear: If the GOP has any plans to make Schlesinger disappear and pull a magic candidate out of the hat, the Dems haven't caught wind of it. "I have yet to see evidence that they've got a viable candidate to put on the ticket," says a Democratic strategist.

[wryter2000]

8. I guess the liberal wing

I guess the liberal wing includes 60% of the population as a whole. Oddly enough, I thought that was a majority.

[MissWaverly]

9. They had total control for 6 years = chaos, failed war

now they are gleeful that the dems were manly enough to quit being passive victims, well, the
American people are fed up with their little game.

[TexasLawyer]

10. Huh?-- This article is baloney

Republicans aren't gleeful-- they've just had to turn their spin machines up to the "stun" setting.

Suddenly the disastrous decision of their president to take this country needlessly into war is going to have a big, fat spotlight on it.

And they see that people who perpetrated this disaster may have to pay a political price, as Joe did.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Yeah. And what % is support for the Iraq war running at, nowadays?

This is a crock.

Remember how Rove and co. tried to convince us, in 2004, that they had a huge hard-on for Howard Dean to be the nominee, but they were terrified of running against Kerry and his "unassailable" war record?

Can anyone say political ju-jitsu? In hindsight, I fully believe Dean- with his moral clarity on Iraq- would have been a far better nominee. And the war is WAY LESS popular than it was two years ago.

Any time the GOP says they're "gleeful" read it as "Shit Scared".

[fishwax]

12. what desperate spin

yes, republicans everywhere are really pumped about lieberman's loss in a primary that was touted by everyone from sea to sea as a referendum on bush and the iraq war. Riiiight.

:puke:

[SoCalDem]

13. And yet, without Time et al, DWELLING on what republicans think

how ever would people "know"?

THAT's the question Time should be exploring.. WHY they spend acres of printed space telling the world why republicans are correct and democrats are wrong....when everything that's happened in the last 6 years points to exactly the opposite..

If Time was an honest broker of news, they would be trumpeting from the rooftops, the news that "people are mad as hell and they aren't gonna take it anymore"...but instead we get just another in a long line of republican lamentations and strategy suggestions on how to "beat the dems in the fall"...

:puke:

[mrdmk]

14. I guess it is not good enough for them if Joseph Lieberman goes to

work for Fox News.

[scarletwoman]

15. Wow. Way to frame the narrative, Time. One must admit -- these guys are

GOOD at what they do.

Thanks for posting this. It's funny -- as I was driving home from work this afternoon, listening to NPR featuring E.J. Dionne & David Brooks punditizing about Lamont's primary election win over Lieberman -- I started wondering what the right wing spin on this event was going to be.

Now I need wonder no longer. And I would hope that every DUer reading the Time article you've posted understands that Time-Warner, Inc. works for the corporate plutocrats of this country, and thus will spare no effort to seed and promote the "conventional wisdom" narrative deemed most effective in disempowering the masses.

Our most crucial task at this time in our nation's history is to wrest the power of setting the "official narrative" away from the plutocrats and corporatists.

sw

[Swamp Rat]

17. Pure propaganda - Repukes are scared shitless about the loss.

It means when we retake control of our government, many of them will be charged with crimes against humanity, election theft, fraud... ad infinitum.

[wicket]

22. My thoughts exactly!

First November, then let the investigations begin!!!

:kick:

[Swamp Rat]

24. When we are in control again, I say let's show them the same amount of

mercy as Rash Limpballs, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, etc. have shown toward Iraqi, Afghani, and Lebanese children, gay people, minorities, atheists, Mexican immigrants, et al.

:grr:

[Redbear]

16. Pure spin.

They are just trying to get that idea out there.

60% of Americans are against the war. You can't wina on a pro-war theme with that background.

[Justice Is Comin]

18. They ought to start taking some classes

from Criss Angel because the country is on to their prestidigitation Their deceptive mindfreak bullshit won't sell anymore.

[Old and In the Way]

20. Time: "I am the Great Oz....fear me!"

Hey, no peeking behind the curtin....

[flaminbats]

21. but wait a second..

Lieberman is one of them now!

doesn't this mean the Republicans are the sore isolationists?

[lonestarnot]

23. Heh heh heh is that all they've got?

Tangents are usually just distractions. So I say fuck 'em, in reality, they're pissing in their boots.

[Nutmegger]

26. Funny how they attack "Freedom and Democracy".

:eyes:

[Tsiyu]

27. McCaskill is focusing on Missouri

and all of its constituents, including the rural ones. She lost her last bid in MO because she failed to address the rural voters of MO. She understands her mistake now. She has no time to answer stupid Repuke questions.

Here's a question for all Repuke candidates, "Aren't you tired of your party destroying our nation, YET?"

That's the only question of any import.

[aaronbees]

30. Gleeful Republicans????

They're scared shitless, that's for damn sure. This "article" is a joke and direct from the age-old GOP playbook: "Dem Crazy Libruls." This whole litany of pablum is just meant to portray the spin machine as some kind of Republican war tool (a la "shock and awe"). Just disgusting.

Here's a scary little nugget:
"Karl Rove, White House senior adviser and deputy chief of staff, telephoned Lieberman but an aide said the call was personal in nature and did not include any offer of assistance with his independent bid against Tuesday night's victor, Ned Lamont of Greenwich."

Personal in nature my ass.

[Nikki Stone 1]

31. The saddest part is that Lieberman will help the GOP by staying in

Even he's gotta see the light

[blue neen]

32. Only 36% of Americans now support the war in Iraq.

Those numbers are not going to go up just because Lamont defeated Lieberman. America no longer supports this illegal war because people are finally seeing it for the quagmire that it is.

The GOP needs to be plenty nervous.

[LaPera]

36. The same 32% to 36% who support Bush (the swill) also support the war

and believe all of Bush's lies...stupid fucking idiot sheep, who can't and don't read nor do they think for themselves...they let Fox news and the Limbaugh's & Hannity's tell them what to believe.

[wicket]

33. kick

:kick:

[wicket]

34. And another

:kick:

[LaPera]

35. I too, am ecstatic republican Lieberman is out of the democratic party!!!

This is too good to be true....let the republicans put all their bullshit spin they want, Because most aware people know it's great to have the asshole Lieberman GONE!!!!