Why Lieberman Announced Today

So Lieberman made his announcement.  If you want to watch a really angry politician with superb control over his composure, Crooks and Liars has the video from his appearance on CNN.  

Throughout the video, you'll notice that Lieberman is somewhat inconsistent.  On the one hand, he says that he thinks he'll win the primary, and this is just 'an insurance policy'.  On the other, he talks about how he'll do a better job in the Senate than his "Democratic or Republican opponents".  

One thing to consider is how badly Lieberman didn't want to make this announcement.  Today is the slowest news day of the year, a hot summer day during a long weekend.  DC is deserted.  People are at the beach.  If he really thought this was just an insurance policy, would he really try to bury this announcement on a slow summer day?  I don't think so.

Lieberman is a proud man, and an angry man.  But he's no dummy.

Tags: Connecticut, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)



Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today
Lieberman says he has higher loyalities and I'll bet he does!
He seems to have loyalties to many other things than to the people, the state of Conn. and his country.
Perhaps with Bush they listen to voices.  Higher voices.  The citizens voices don't count and probably are not counted to begin with.
When it votes Republican, praises Republicans--  just believe the facts, it's a Republican.
by Druthers 2006-07-03 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Instead of working to activate his base for the primary, lieberman dismisses it as unrepresentative of the Democrats of connecticut.  it is a very specious argument, and i am disappointed he was not asked to reconsider his thoughts.

by illinois062006 2006-07-03 02:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

     Somebody--probably not the Lamont campaign, but MoveOn or some independent group--needs to make an add of that "higher loyalties" line with the picture of the Bush kiss.

by Ron Thompson 2006-07-03 02:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Sorry, cannot agree with you. Here is a man who had solid support from the citizens of his state and what does he do?

Throws it all away so he can French Kiss the acknowledged 'Worst President in American History'.

I say he is one stupid asshole. Much like the rest of the DSCC and we are gonna drive them all out of office. The times demand pricipled, intelligent leadership not this tired old fart who think Bush had the brains of a marmoset.

Joe 'richly' deserves what he's getting for doing the bidding of the super-wealthy.

by Pericles 2006-07-03 03:06PM | 0 recs
Not stupid...

Complacent. Privileged.

Joe expects to keep his prestige position as long as he wants it, and the rabble have no right to tell him he can't have it. It's called "Washington Syndrome", where you eventually believe you are entitled to be on top.

These folks are both full of contempt and fear of the public.

by ElitistJohn 2006-07-03 03:22PM | 0 recs
John King

My disgust with the media has grown so stong that I no longer watch any television news, but I think John King deserves high marks for his performance on this video. He asked tough question and did his best to try to get answers to them. I wish there were more reporters like him.

by herodotus 2006-07-03 03:38PM | 0 recs
Re: John King

     John King's usually among the worst CNN reporters, parroting the White House line. I wonder what got into him today. I can only guess that the people who usually give him his talking points couldn't be reached, and his best guess was that, since they're opposed to anything that divides Republicans, they'd feel the same about a Democrat who turns against his party.

by Ron Thompson 2006-07-03 03:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

I know very little about the science of politics, but people here do, right?  What are the chances that Lieberman will formally announce that he's leaving the party two or three days before the primary, and then spin any result under 100% as a loss for Lamont?

by Venha Futuro 2006-07-03 03:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

IMHO that chance is very slim.  Better for Lieberman to ride out the primary.  If he wins, he's vindicated.  If he loses narrowly, he can play the low-turnout card.  If he loses decisively, ha can play the low-turnout card, and the "party has been hijacked by radicals" card.  (Guess that last one's a two-fer!)

If he wer to pull out 2-3 days before the primary vote, he'd would appear (even for him) to be acting too much in bad faith.  Plus, he'd anger the dem viters who still support him and were planning to vote/work for him to get the dem nomination.

by matty fred 2006-07-03 03:55PM | 0 recs

for the lousy typing.

by matty fred 2006-07-03 03:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

It just seems like he wouldn't do this unless he knows that he'll need to.  Is the deadline for filing as an independent the day of the primary?  Otherwise why start collecting signatures so soon?  (And why announce it at all?)

by Venha Futuro 2006-07-03 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

The deadline for filing the signatures is the day after the primary.  I don't know how many he will need, but I'm sure the Lieberman campaign will go above and beyond the necessary amount.  They'll need to make sure that they have enough signatures that are valid (I don't know the CT election law, but there are rules as to what constitutes a "valid" signature, and often petitions have many "invalid" signatures when they're examined and tallied by the Sec of State).  

Perhaps more importantly, if Lieberman's campaign had been engaging in such a signature drive w/out Lieberman formally announcing such a signature drive, then it would have looked VERY bad.  You can't engage in a signature drive without people noticing, and it would have come out.

by matty fred 2006-07-03 04:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Okay, kids, time for one of my roundly despised "thought experiments!" Here it is: Put yourself in the shoes of any party official, (of any party, any time, anywhere). Today, you, the party official, are asked to vote on a new party rule: Is it permissible for a candidate to say, in the run-up to a primary, that she or he will run for the party's nomination, but in the event she or he fails to win the nomination, she or he will just quit the party, and run as an independent?



Well why is there not such a rule? Answer: the only reason why such a rule could fail to exist is that party officials unconsciously accept that such a situation is too peculiar to arise.

Now were are we? Bottom line: Joe Lieberman just did a very peculiar thing.

Interpretation in terms of current history: Peculiar is bad. Bush does many, many, peculiar things that are very, very, bad for voters. Voters know it. Voters will not vote for people who do peculiar things, such as what Joe just did.

Conclusion: Joe Lieberman is screwed.

(Well, I have been (tentatively) wrong a few times.)

by blues 2006-07-03 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

While it certainly seems like the DSCC is going to waffle on this I'd like to see what Dean and the DNC will have to say.  And it would be nice to hear what the DCCC would do under similar circumstances.

While I can't imagine that the DSCC gets much money from people who follow this blog, I'm sure many of you get calls from them.  Whenever they call, I'm going to be very clear that they can't expect a single dime until they can assure me that it won't go to non-Democrats (sheesh, crazy that this should be a concern).  Maybe if they hear this enough times, they'll start rethinking the plan to tie themselves to the anchor that is Lieberman.

by cthulhu 2006-07-03 05:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

You do not need to watch the PuffBalls of CNN or any other Corporate Media.

FireDogLake is in CT and they are following 'Gurney Joe' around and posting tape after tape of his shiftless assholiness.

The Internet News Bureau is born!

by Pericles 2006-07-03 04:39PM | 0 recs
presmptive nominiee

and to think, if Gore had won, we'd be talking about this guy as the preumptive nominee of the Dem party in 2008....

by brooklyngreenie 2006-07-03 05:12PM | 0 recs

Does anyone know anything about the Republican running for Senate in CT? Is he/she a factor?

by howardpark 2006-07-03 05:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

thanks to lea-p commenting over at roger ailes (the good one), we've got the phone numbers of the dscc over at skippy.

call them and let them know we will not support someone who deserts the party, and, more to the point, we will definitely not stand for any other democrat that condones such a move, or refuses to support the democratic nominee in any senate race.

by skippy 2006-07-03 05:41PM | 0 recs
A few random thoughts on this

 1. If only Joe Lieberman had been so focused on a backup plan for getting elected in November of 2000. When the office at stake was the White House, Joe Lieberman waved the white flag high and wide like he was leading a merchant fleet into Blackbeard's hideaway. But now he's pulling out all the stops to save his own neocon butt for his personal Senate sinecure. If there had been ANY residual doubt about his ideological loyalties, they're scattered to the four winds now. This man is a Klingon.

 2. In every political race I've ever witnessed in my 42 years, at every level, I have NEVER seen a candidate publicly project anything but confidence that he or she will win. Michael Dukakis, George Bush Sr., Walter Mondale -- bad as the internal polls might have looked, they still did their best to display the bravest, most confident images they could. What Lieberman has done here is tell the nation that he has NO confidence in his own ability to win a primary, despite eighteen years of incumbency and across-the-board name recognition. It is the most spectacular intentional public display of weakness -- not to mention disloyalty -- I have ever seen a political candidate put forth.

 3. Joe has no one to blame for his predicament but Joe. If he'd been a loyal Democrat, if he'd shown real opposition to Bush, if he hadn't made a mini-career out of bashing other Democrats, if he'd stood up for Democratic values, if he'd eviscerated Bush for his Iraq lies as aggressively as he went after Clinton for his Monica escapades, he wouldn't be facing a primary challenge today. But he did all that, and arrogantly thought he could get away with it. In the pre-blog era, he could and did. Not anymore. Win or lose, the blogosphere has played a significant part in exposing a phony Democrat and driving him out of the party with his tail between his legs.  This is a critical first step in reclaiming FDR's party.


by Master Jack 2006-07-03 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: A few random thoughts on this

Re Joe, I would add Kos' valid complaint that he waited until Bush's Social Security privatization plan was clealy dead before "opposing" it.  That's the opposite of leadership.  That's Joe.

Frankly, I am more conservative on economic issues than a lot of Dems are, and Joe's policy positions anger me less than his arrogant sense of entitlement and his treason against the party that nominated him to the highest office in the country, save one.  But Joe did everyone a favor by announcing that he doesn't think he can win a primary in Connecticut.  Hilarious.

by Bruce Godfrey 2006-07-03 09:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

there's one moment early in the cnn interview that crystalizes everything for me: listen to the single word 'service' when holy joe is ready to compare his years of "se-e-e-r-r-v-vv-icce" with any of his critics. In that one word you can hear all the rage, indignation, pride, blindness, intolerance, confusion etc that makes him such an unworthy public servant. . .

and a loser

by lovedog7 2006-07-03 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today


I agree with Lieberman's assertion that he should be judged by his entire record -- Iraq included.  Voters are, of course, entitled to give greater weight to one portion of his record than another.  But, as with any politician, the entire record should be considered.

Having said that, the DSCC and the DNC exist to support our Democratic nominees.  Unless a nominee is clearly unqualified (an unlikely scenario in a fair and free election), the nominee should have their unequivocal support.

We don't know how this primary will turn out.  However it turns out, I hope the nominee will have the full support of the DSCC and the DNC.

by Jerry Meek 2006-07-03 07:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Well put.

In the beginning I had no dog in this race, favoring no candidate over the other. Lieberman's record outside of Iraq has been relatively solid.

HOWEVER, the talk he has put out of not remaining loyal to the democratic party has turned me off today to be a soft Lamont supporter. Best way to describe it would be if I was a Conneticut resident I would vote for Lamont but not fhave a bumper sticker or work hard to gotv for him.

Today though seals the deal. I'm in the business of electing Democrats, if Joe won't hold his own and bite the leather strap should the primary vote be agaisnt him, he does deserve the support of me nor any other democrat. Now does this mean I am going to start donating to Lamont? No, I have other candidates that I like a bit more who need the cash more than the wealthy Lamont. It does mean though I will speak of him with mroe favor among my friends and in blog's comments.

I'm in a district where my congressman abandoned us (DeLay). THe way I see it, Lieberman is abandoning his constituency right now as well. Knowing your rep has left you is not a good feeling and that rep should be loathed and despised long after they have been run out of town.

by Trowaman 2006-07-03 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Russ Feingold on Meet the Press says it all.  Let the Connecticut voters speak.

MR. RUSSERT: Your colleague Joe Lieberman in Connecticut in a tough primary battle. If Senator Lieberman asks you to come to Connecticut to campaign for him, will you?

SEN. FEINGOLD: I have a lot of admiration for Joe. He's a fine guy. He helped me a great deal in campaign finance reform. I think Ned Lamont's positions on the issues are much closer to mine on the critical issues. I think that this is going to be something decided by the people of Connecticut. I'm not going to go up there, but I'll tell you this, Tim. I will support the Democratic nominee, whoever that is.

MR. RUSSERT: So if Lamont beats Lieberman, you're for Lamont.

SEN. FEINGOLD: That's correct.

MR. RUSSERT: And you will not campaign for Lieberman if they ask you?

SEN. FEINGOLD: I'm not getting involved in the primary. If Joe Lieberman wins the primary, I campaign for him. If Ned Lamont wins the primary, I campaign for him. I'll be supporting the Democrat.

by Ex 2006-07-03 07:43PM | 0 recs

  If Joe Lieberman TRULY were the favorite in a three-way race, the Republicans would be falling all over themselves helping out Ned Lamont right now.

 They're not.

by Master Jack 2006-07-03 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Glad that FDL is following joementum now.  They totally screwed up the fitzmas thing, though that one-trick pony (always wrong, but always more endless speculation and conjector).

I have to salute anyone that will help mobilize people against one of chimpy's most public supporters.  Just watching him kiss the "great decider" was enough to make me rethink my stand on gay-marriage.

by bugmenot 2006-07-03 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

It's an interesting move and one that Matt saw coming a long time before the rest of us. The speculation had got to the point where most people assumed he would stand as an independent if he lost the primary so he might as well get it announced officially and start getting the signatures he needs.

But as for being an "independent democrat" that's a very strange choice of name even if he could use it on the ballot paper, which he can't. Surely his real strength is with independents and moderate republicans? So why not be an "independent" candidate?

Ned must surely win the August primary now. Joe's campaign is so bad that it's almost in Katherine Harris territory.

by kundalini 2006-07-04 02:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

Maybe Lieberman knows something about the vote-flipping software - does anyone have the details about the election procedures in CT?

It will be easier to steal that election by using the lie  that joementum has "energized" his independent "base."

Its a lie when the repugs claim it and it provides a distraction from the real issue -- the US needs open, free, and verifiable to be a democracy.  Course, don't expect the real issues to be discussed on any of the faux "advertise libearlly" circle of links.  

by bugmenot 2006-07-04 03:00AM | 0 recs

  Connecticut is a non-Diebold state.

 Lieberman's project is that much harder.

by Master Jack 2006-07-04 05:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Why Lieberman Announced Today

On the other hand, Joe now has go to all those Fourth of July picnic and parades around the state, where he probably is going to get booed. I would have waited until the Fifth.

by Bob H 2006-07-04 03:35AM | 0 recs
This is symptomatic of a deeper issue in the party

Lieberman has been convinced that he is good democrat and that his support for some of the right wing issues is helpful to Democrats in some way.

Somehow since his repudiation of Bill Clinton, he has been stoked by the right into this persona that he truly believes is the direction the Democrats should be heading.

What so astounding is that he believes that even if Democrats repudiate at the polls in a primary that will be vindicated by "enough good democrats" in the general election. What a general election will only prove if he is running and wins is that he was put in office not by democrats but republicans.  It would only make sense that the Democrats repudiate a candidate that the republicans prefer.

And I would like to hear who Hannity and Malkin would support if Lieberman were in the general election? Would they support Lieberman or the republican?

I already know the answer.  So why do we allow the right to pick the Dems Canidates al the time.

by wdmosely 2006-07-04 08:19AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads