Lieberman Lost the Election

[Pale Blue Dot]

From the CT blog My Left nutmeg:

I lucked into attending a panel discussion at Yale today, presented by the Yale Political Science Department and the Center for the Study of American Politics, featuring people involved in the Lamont, Lieberman, and Schlesinger campaigns for US Senate.

The intention was there, but some of the panelists were less than generous when it came time to discuss their campaign strategies.

<snip>

It started out smoothly enough, but when Lanny Davis got a chance to speak ... it became clear that Lieberman actually lost this election. The body language from the Lamont and Schlesinger side of the panel was open and relaxed, while the palpable tension of Occhiogrosso and Smith was added to by Davis' constant twitching, twisting, and grunts of disgust.

<snip>

The defensiveness of Lanny Davis is a fitting wrap-up to the stunning loss of Joe Lieberman in this historic Senate race. The demeanor of the team reflects the demeanor of the candidate. Lieberman's guys do not act or talk like winners. They act angry and scared, just like their candidate. The Lamont team looked friendly, confident, and pleased.

http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=4883

This event will be shown on CSPAN sometime next week.

[KingFlorez]

1. What a nice way to spin it

If he lost, why don't we have Senator-elect Ned Lamont?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. But Lieberman won

No, I don't like it that he won, but he did. I don't see how the demeanor of his aides changes things.

[robinlynne]

3. exactly. i'm not sure what you (or the writer) are saying. Election fraud?

moral loss?

[peacetalksforall]

4. He won because of Republican votes and Republican money.

That is to say he lost the primary and followed it with a win because of Repbulicans. No matter what he calls his Independent position or Independent Party, he's now more a Republican than a Democrat.

The twitching could be a subtle recognition of it all - of it could be resentment from the first blatant loss and the second hidden win and the seeming non-support of other Democrats. (Though Dems in the Senate seem to be going all the way by not showing resentment.)

I get the subtlety of what is being said about the loss - maybe in my own way.

[cmkramer]

9. No

He won because he appealed to a much broader spectrum of voters than did the other two candidates. That's always the secret of winning a general election.

[AnnInLa]

5. Interesting scenario

Via Trapper John in a kos diary:


Imagine, if you will, that the three front-runners for the Democratic nomination were: 1) Joe Lieberman; 2) a fundamentalist Christian governor of Utah, and; 3) an anti-choice former mayor of Colorado Springs who isn't just against gay marriage, but who actively and publicly dislikes gay people.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/12/8/204147/318

Also: Who in the Senate, is Waxman's counterpart? (who is supposed to carry on these "investigations" of the behavior of the bush administration?) That's right...lieberman

[Larkspur]

6. Lieberman won the election but lost the rest of his soul

Jesus said, "it does not profit a man to gain the world and lose his soul". Since Jesus was a Jew, I assume he was referring to some wisdom from Jewish texts.

Lieberman had been selling bits of his soul to the Devil by taking corporate lobbyists money and doing their bidding against the the welfare of unions and other working Americans, but he willingly sold of the rest of his soul in 2006 to keep the senate seat.

Lieberman sold his soul to the Devil in the guise of Karl Rove and the Republican machine. Donors like Melvin Sembler, who ran a notorious juvenile rehab center that used North Korean and Chinese torture tactics on troubled teens and their siblings, was one of Lieberman's most prominent donors. Sembler was a pioneer for Bush.

I do believe that Karma will get Lieberman. He deseves to be bitch slapped by Karma as much as Bush does.

[roody]

8. doubly agreed

[goforit]

7. ageed.