Display:


Re: Challenging Lieberman? (none / 0)

Two things:  first if Lieberman was only bad on the war, I would be more inclined to agree with your post.  At the very least I would want to know alot of specifics on where Weicker is on a vast number of domestic-economic issues.  But Lieberman is bad on every issue but choice and the environment.  Plus, as long as he is in the Senate and the Republicans are in the majority, he will constantly sell out our party by cutting a deal with them.  Second, I have no fear of what the Republicans might say about this.  I think Democrats worry way too much about what the Republicans might say in general, and in this matter in particular, since Lieberman has no national following at all, what ever the Republicans say wont hurt a bit.
Andy Katz
by Andy Katz on Tue Dec 06, 2005 at 11:40:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

"Only bad on the war" would be enough (none / 0)

It's not the same as, say, "only bad on tort reform."

I agree with the rest of your post.

It would be better for Weicker to run as a Dem, however, because him running as an indy could ruin what little chance we have of retaking the Senate if it allows the Repug to sneak through.

"We are building a political movement - not one that wields the power of lobbyists and corporate interests, but the power of millions... who seek change." -Dean
by Jim in Chicago on Tue Dec 06, 2005 at 02:44:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "Only bad on the war" . . . (none / 0)

My understanding (guess?) is that Weicker wont run as a Republican for two reasons.  First, he is unlikely to win the primary if he has an opponent and second, it is hard for me to imagine him getting along with the current conservatives who dominate that party in the Senate.  I think he will run as an independant.  I think he'd havea fair chance to win against two hardline pro-war opponents.  If so, it will be important for him to declare that he would vote for the Dems in organizing the Senate.
Andy Katz
by Andy Katz on Tue Dec 06, 2005 at 04:07:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]