Did we mess up with Lieberman?

[chaz4jazz]

For years now, we've been justifiably critical of the republican leadership and what they've accomplished (badly]) and didn't accomplish (incompetently) and slapped democrats around (evilly) and we demanded that they take responsibility and admit their lies and mistakes. Now it is time for us to admit our mistakes - one in particular - what we've accomplished with Joe Lieberman. Big mistake.

Someone (me included) should have figured out that Lieberman would win his election one way or another and taking him on could possibly backfire on us. Well it has.

Lieberman now has more power than any senator in congress. He could bolt, switch parties and put the republicans back into power - as easily as that (he becomes a repuke and senate is split 50/50 and Cheney makes it 51/50). In order to keep him from bolting - or just voting with the red side - he can make incredible demands on the democratic majority. He will have to be dealt with with many legislative issues from Iraq to Justices. No other senator has his kind of "veto" power over democratic legislation.

I didn't see this coming. Neither did Move-On who should have seen it.

Comments?

[WI_DEM]

1. No, every elected official has the right to a primary challenge

Lieberman got one and he lost--he decided not to accept that verdict and ran as an Indie. We supported the winner of the Democratic primary. I think we did the right thing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. I Think The OP Questions The Wisdom Of Challenging Him In The First Place

eom

[WI_DEM]

22. As I said every politician should expect a challenge and I think

we had every right to. It may have actually helped nationally by proving that a national politician like Lieberman can be held accountable to the people.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Without Getting Into The Merits Of Lieberman Most Incumbents Don't Expect Primary Challenges...

eom

[Cosmocat]

44. answered ...

he absolutely should have been challenged ... As noted, it is a right, and part of the process to have primary challenges ...

Further ... The issue is only in part about his support of the war ... Instinctually, his electorate sensed that he had sold out, become infested with the same arrogance and hubris that has totally corrupted the republican party ... The democrats did their part to give a self deluded politician his walking papers ... Just because the republicans are insane enough to delude themselves into thinking it was in THEIR best interests to reelect this joker doesn't mean the democrats should not have done the right thing in the first place ...

As a tertiary benefit, as noted by others ... The Lamont win helped in some small way to spur the gains made last week ... It gave confidence to democrats that they COULD take down someone from the dark side ...

Joementum is going NOWHERE ... The MSM is just dutifully, doltfully, doing his bidding by making it SEEM he has all this "power" ... He has 18 years of tenure with the democrats and will lose that if he flips over the republican caucus ... He can try to make people believe he will get committee heads over there, but NO WAY the entire caucus takes a step back to let him jump over them ... Maybe one or two senators might take one for the team in return for a future favor if he was second or third in line ... But, NO WAY 40 of these egomaniacs are going to let him leapfrog over them in their own caucus ...

Further ... He WILL be toast for another reelection ... His career WILL end in six years if he flips ...

He wants to, you can see he wants to BAD ... But, he will NOT jeopardize his OWN interests to do so ...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. I Specifically Said I Wasn't Speaking To Lieberman's Situation

So you are arguing with a ghost...

Why do you think there are so few primary challenges to incumbent senators, represenatatives, or presidents?

Because it seen as a sign of disrespect. The last serious primary challenge to a sitting president was Ted Kennedy's challenge to Jimmy Carter and he was apoplectic and still places much of the blame on Ted Kennedy for his loss in the general election.

I'm not endorsing Carter's view but citing it to illuminate the rarity of primary challenges for incumbents.

[Big Sky Boy]

41. We also succeeded in forcing change

Ned Lamont rocked the boat and showed everyone you CAN criticize the Republicans on the war and win. It reframed the national debate.

If our candidates had continued using the "don't talk too much about the war" strategy they were using before Lamont beat Lieberman in the primary, we might not be as happy as we are today. There was/is a tremendous anti-war sentiment out there and no one was speaking to it back then.

Lieberman himself had to change. He had to soften his stance and start claiming that no one wanted to bring the troops home more than he does to win the election. We know he was lying through his teeth, but he cannot go back to being Bush's favorite Democrat now.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. It is frustrating for sure. Here's hoping he'll vote with the Dems like he said he would

[razorman]

38. He won't have to switch parties to screw things up for the Dems.

I think that all he would have to do is announce that he plans to caucus with the Repubs in order to throw the Senate over to them. This would basically be the same thing that Jim Jeffords did a few years ago, only in reverse.
That said, I do not think he will do it. I think he is going to keep putting the screws to the Dems that he believes betrayed him, and keep the party jumping through hoops to keep him happy.

[The Count]

3. Huh? Lieberman? Cheney? Bush? We "messed up" with all warmongers.

That's my comment.

[meegbear]

4. His attitude will show the party what to do ...

if he does the "obey or I'll vote red" whine, then let him go. Pointing a political gun to get what you want should not be tolerated.

As I've said and believe, if you have to demand respect, you probably don't deserve it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. You're Pretty Casual About Giving The GOPU Control Of The Senate...

The way I see it Joe is free to go his own way as long as he caucuses with the Democrats....

[meegbear]

12. If he's going to vote with them, does it matter?

:shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. Of Course It Matters...

If he caucuses with the Dems it means Dems head all the committees and have 10-8 majorities in them... If he caucuses with the GOPU it's vice versa...

Ask Ted Kennedy, Joe Biden, Sander Levin if they want to give up their committee chairs and ask Harry Reid if he wants to be the minority leader...

[meegbear]

27. GRRRRRR ...

I KNOW THE CONSEQUENCES IF THE SENATE GOES REPUG, THANK YOU.

The point I'm making is that if he is going to throw his weight around and do a "do what I say or I'll become a Republican", how long would you, or anyone tolerate that?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. How Would Would I Wait To Cut Off My Nose To Spite My Face?

As long as necessary...

[meegbear]

33. True, true ...

I just don't like that Sword of Damocles feeling about all this, that's all.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. You Can Bookmark This Post...

Joe will caucus with the Dems ... Other than that I have no idea what he will do...

[meegbear]

39. I hope so DSB ...

I really hope so.

[Big Sky Boy]

42. He doesn't really have a choice

He spent a lot of his own political capital in closed-door sessions while he was running as an independent to gain assurances from senior Democratic party officials that he wouldn't lose his seniority and he wouldn't lose his chair positions.

To betray them now would be political suicide.

Even if the Republicans lavish all kinds of things on him to switch -- there are things that those in the minority party can still do to completely undermine his last term in the Senate and he knows it.

[Lurking Dem]

21. Yes it matters.

Who do you want setting the agenda, Dems or Repubs? Who do you want chairing committees, Dems or Repubs? Who do you want deciding who gets a hearing on the next Supreme Court nominee, Dems or Repubs?

[FredScuttle]

6. We didn't mess up....Lieberman did

No democrat should apologize for opposing someone who's been working so hard to oppose us over the last 6 years. Joe is only out for one person - Joe - and I don't feel a inch of guilt or remorse for opposing such a self-centered, arrogant bastard. I'm not guilty for supporting the DEMOCRATIC candidate in Connecticut.

Joementum needs his bluff called.

[Liberal_Dog]

53. Very Well Said

Liebermann does not have that much power. Even if he does go Repuke, then it is 50-50 and that means shared power.

Why would Joe "The World Revolves Around Me" Liebermann give up a place in the majority for the unknown of shared power.

Liebermann isn't going anywhere and the Senate Dems should be smart enough to realize that as well.

[blm]

7. We were supposed to predict that Dem leaders would not rally with the Dem nominee in Conn.?

How do you figure that?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Just say "no" to Joe. Giving in to blackmail is a fool's game.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. We Worked Too Hard To Gain The Majority To Give It Back.

Let him do whatever he wants as long as he caucuses with the Dems...

[Coexist]

9. no - Lieberman is beholden to the Dems, not the other way around

if he switches, he loses his appointments and will be part of the minority again in two years.

[kenny blankenship]

11. CT sure did

[Jack Rabbit]

13. No.

Lieberman messed up on the war; Lieberman messed up on Social Security privitization; Lieberman messed up by being soft on neoconservatism.

[Vorta]

14. Is he the only one?

Couldn't any one of the senators turncoat on the party? Is Lieberman actually that powerful or are we giving him that power?

Surely he can be ruined if he were to do such a trecherous thing. Surely some higher up in the party has the means and the willingness to keep him in line. Or maybe, just maybe he has the integrity to not do such a thing. I don't know. I don't know him.

I still haven't gotten an answer as to why it's OK to bribe a senator to switch parties with positions of power, when to bribe him to vote with a million dollars would be illegal.

[n2doc]

15. This was always a possibility

I commented on it back in early October, when it became apparent that we might barely take the senate. And if I could see it the professionals surely could. That is probably a good part of the reason why Reid and the rest of the leadership went soft on him when he bolted the party. But if one never takes risks then one never wins anything. I for one think that the rewards of a primary system where people have to be held accountable to members of their own party are too great to allow anyone to get a "free pass". So no, we did not "mess up". Joementum would surely have extracted the same pound of flesh had he been unopposed in the primary, that is just the kind of swarmy me first pol he is. He could just as easily gone "indy" as an elected Democrat.

[sui generis]

17. absolutely not.

He did something vile, politically speaking.

As a "democrat" he took money from the republicans to run against a fellow democrat as an independent. That's how republicans fight. Clearly, he is not a democrat.

He switched parties in the same general election. He's a disgusting arrogant self-centered out of touch asshole of a politician and I couldn't be happier that he's not a democrat. He believes the "lessons learned" should all be on the side of the democrats, and not himself.

And they are. I don't believe a candidate will ever be able to switch parties and continue running after the primary in the same general election again.

He is a consummate politician, however you read that.

[gratuitous]

18. Perhaps, but I'd do it again

And if Lieberman thinks he's going to play the swing vote, I would remind him that in 2008, the Senate Republicans will have to defend 21 out of the 33 seats up for re-election. I don't see them making any pick-ups and indeed, they will probably lose some seats and find themselves further in the minority.

If Lieberman wants to play aisle-jumping games during the next two years, he will find himself on the minority side of the aisle for the rest of his career after 2008, guaranteed.

[madfloridian]

19. Tell me you are kidding! Please, tell me. Now we are going to be lectured...

that is was a mistake to take on Lieberman in the primary.

Oh, God, I swear we are being inundated here. I think I know who, but I won't say.

[chaz4jazz]

47. I'm not kidding

And I wonder who you think is "inundating" you? I guess if someone poses a thought to be discussed, you believe you're being lectured to. You have a problem, friend. Go sing with the choir.

[madfloridian]

51. Welcome to DU....

.

[MethuenProgressive]

23. "We"? You got a mouse in your pocket? He lost his own primary!

The Democrats in his own state rejected him. He then defeated the Democratic candidate only by obtaining huge Republican support. Screw him. Let him defect, he's been a DINO for years.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

24. If he wants to be re-elected again - he will have to be a better Dem.

That's all these guys care about - being re-elected. I think he's going to have to prove to people that he is a REAL Dem.

[Beelzebud]

26. No, Joe Lieberman showed his utter contempt for the democratic process.

When he lost the primary race, he should have gotten behind Lamont, and did what was best for his country.

Instead he chose to do one of the most selfish, underhanded acts I've ever seen since I've been following politics.

[chaz4jazz]

48. you're not discussing the question offered

Sure, I agree with you. If I lived in Connecticut (and I once did) I would have voted for Lamont. The thing I'm asking is, have we created a situation where one senator now has greater power because of this - those who don't care if he crosses the line and becomes a GOP senator ("good riddance") are not thinking through the result of such a move. When senator Jeffords of Vermont left the Repukes, the committee heads, and agenda switched to the Dems (lasted only 5 months, I believe). Sure he can lose his next election (6 years from now - he's what? almost 70 now). He thinks like a republican, votes like one (on most issues, not all).

[matcom]

28. NO! And HERE Is WHY

he will NEVER be able to be President now. he would be an IDIOT to even TRY for a VP ticket.

[Squeech]

31. Agreed

Moreover, his "power" is like a hand grenade, he only gets to use it once, and then it just blows everything in range to smithereens.

And if and when he does use it-- to vote cloture on yet another odious Federalist supreme court justice, say-- everyone in the world will see the true measure of that rancid little man.

And it's only good until 2008, at which point the Repukes lose another half dozen senators-- just look at the map :party:

But the real thing about it is, Ned Lamont's primary victory emboldened all sorts of left-field Dem insurgents to talk about the elephant in the room, the Iraq quagmire, and even though Lamont lost, enough of the others won that it was worth it overall.

[matcom]

34. you are a wise man and i'll add.....

that NEXT TIME the repukes will put up a real candidate (once they don't need his vote anymore) and when Holy Joe loses his RW vote base, he won't have a prayer

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

43. That's probably the best metaphor for Joe's "power" that I've read.

:applause:

I say we let him clutch that grenade in his sweaty, greedy hands for two nervous years, and when we pick up even one more seat we
kick that "Independent Democrat" to the curb and say "Go ahead! Throw your damn grenade. You're only going to blow up yourself."

[chaz4jazz]

49. You and I know - and so does Lieberman

That is days as Presidential or VP candidate are overwith.

[peacetalksforall]

30. Should we be more worried about the Nelsons, Landrieau and

some of the others who so often voted with Repubs? Yes, we are still in a delicate position, but isn't worrying about Leiberman a little bit of isolation - how many times did the one or both of the Nelsons and Landrieau vote with Dems? Even the Biden and Stabenow types voted with Repubs way too many times.

Will Reid be a Frist and use mafia style on the Dems?

What kind of support are those borderline Dems going to give the Dems without twisting and choking (which probably isn't going to happen). Committees are still going to be critical to the agenda. And Leiberman has one? Does he sit on others?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Don't Know About The Others But Bill Nelson Votes With The Dems 80% Of The Time...

eom

[sui generis]

40. it's just the other 20 percent, like reproductive and equal rights

you know, the little stuff, where those bone heads cancel out our votes.

80/20 IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH, especially if the 20 percent is "values" voting about things that directly impact people's lives, welfare, and civil rights.

So screw Nelson and Landrieu. They seem to be alright with endangering my family; they get zero support from me.

[JerseygirlCT]

35. Nothing's changed about Lieberman

Would he have fallen in line with the Dems any more than he has in the past 6 years if he hadn't been challenged in the primary? No.

He'd have a "D" after his name, alright. But he'd still be voting on all the really important issues with the Rs.

The idea that we should have forgotten about the democratic process, accepted Lieberman although he was not the choice of CT's Dems, and just sucked it up because he's too small a person is really ludicrous.

It's not our behavior that's at issue, and that will continue to be at issue. It's Joe's. And if the GOP had run a real candidate, we'd be welcoming Senator Lamont right now.

[Greyhound]

36. The Democratic "leadership" messed up by not supporting Lamont

and making this travesty possible. Now we have given a turn-coat unprecedented power over the whole legislature.

[chaz4jazz]

50. I agree with you /eom

[LeftishBrit]

45. From what I can see, no.

It's not as though he'd split the party and got the Republican into office. And no, I don't think he'll switch parties. Not after what just happened to nearly all the New England Republicans.

At the worst, you're back where you started. And I think you've actually made things much better, inasmuch as he's now a 'semi-detached' member of the party, and unlikely to become a major party leader or, worse, president. One gets all sorts of people into parliament/ Congress. It's preventing people on the far right of their parties from becoming the party leaders that is most important. (And I'll admit we haven't done such a great job of the latter over here recently.) If you've stopped him becoming a Dem party leader, or candidate for president/VP, you've already done a lot!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. Joe Was Never, Ever, Ever, Ever Going To Become President...

eom

[warrens]

46. Ned Lamont had a right to challenge Joe

And Conn. voters had a right to vote as they pleased. "We" didn't have anything to do with it. This is only a website with 100,000 members spread worldwide.