Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007...5:44 pm
Hey Joe, Ever Have a Party and Nobody Came?
Jump to Comments
Those of you that followed the Senate election in Connecticut may remember that Joe Lieberman, when bolting the Democratic party, formed his own party “Connecticut for Lieberman.” The weird part was, this party had no actual voters as registered members, not even Lieberman himself.
A fella named John Orman, who is styled as a Lieberman critic, has now registered as the party’s only member and filed paperwork naming himself chairman. Because of Lieberman’s performance, the party has won limited ballot status. Orman plans to recruit other Lieberman critics and use the party as a way to “hold Lieberman accountable.”
Where does Lieberman go if he loses the CFL primary?
16 Comments
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:08 pm
I grew up in Connecticut and remember when Lowell Weikert formed “A Constitution Party” (in order to appear on the CT ballot first). He won the race for Governor
Sen. Lieberman defeated the former Senator and took that Seat for the Democrats.
I also remember when he was OUR VP candidate, and you Prezelski pimped the hell out of him.
I understand that you need to toss some red meat to your base. Have you looked at the exit polls in the race between Joe and the darling of the super Left?
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/20061108_ELECTION_PORTRAIT_CT.html
Lieberman beat the hell out of your fellow traveler in almost every demographic. Jews, Roman Catholics and Protestants (black and white). Education, yep Joe won, income, yes sir. Joe lost the 18 to 29 year old vote and liberal (ops I mean progressive) vote. The FDR coalition voted for Joe OVERWHELMINGLY. This is proof positive that that the super left needs the Democrats more that the Democrats need the super left.
I have childhood friends and family who still live in Connecticut and they love Joe and hated Lamont that is why Senator Lieberman won. I wish you would blog about the split between the left and the traditional democrats. I would love to see a real debate about who are the real inheritors of the Party of FDR, JFK and Robert Kennedy. It seems to me that you would rather “look good and lose” instead of speaking for the rank and file (and winning!!).
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:19 pm
The link and yes you can cut and paste
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/20061108_ELECTION
January 3rd, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Guess you can’r it is at Nytimes.com click politics you can’t miss it
January 4th, 2007 at 6:25 am
I’ve praised many conservative Democrats on this blog. And, yes, I’ve written about the splits between the pragmatists and the activist left (go back to what I wrote during the CD 8 primary, for example).
My trouble with Lieberman is that unlike other moderate Democrats, even more conservative ones, he plays footsie with the Republican party to the detriment of Democrats and the Democratic agenda. You may have a lot of Democrats who will vote against progressive initiatives, but Lieberman is the one that will run to Fox News to call out his colleagues.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:38 am
Um, Lieberman LOST the rank-and-file vote in the primary. That’s what primaries are for - to determine who the party’s rank-and-file members support.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:54 am
Mike,
The turn out in the primary is really, really low 20-30 %. The rank and file are not represented, just the super left. If the rank and file picked Lamont why did he lose everybody in the general? Why will the left want to look good at the local green watering hole and lose all the voters who work for a living?
If I recall Joe was the first person to ask for Rummy’s job and he is a new deal Democrat. How is that to the “detriment of Democrats and the Democratic Agenda?”
All I ever read is the Liberals, ooops I did it again Progressives, whining about party loyalty. Then they run off and protest the party (like in Pima when Joe was our VP nominee and today at the capitol.
Is the Party a “big tent” or do the greens define ideological purity ?
January 4th, 2007 at 11:37 am
Leiberman continues to support the invasion and occupation of Iraq as well as any military action taken by Israel. Also, if he’s a “New Deal Democrat” then I’m the Queen of England. He should register as a Republican and be done with it.
I think its good news that the 18-29 year olds and the “liberals” supported Lamont. That means there is hope, further down the line.
Blue Dog, its the message from what you refer to as the “super left” that is spreading at the grassroots level and moving toward the center. Leiberman is a fossil. Let’s just hope he doesn’t plan to be another Strom Thurmond (with respect to longevity.)
January 4th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
blue dog, did you remember that a huge portion of Lieberman’s votes came from Republicans? Didn’t think so…
January 4th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Lisa,
Do you even know what a New Deal Democrat is?? They were not check book liberals (limo riding, white wine drinking and brie eating) Joe has been a strong voice for working people in CT since day one. He was the only one who could have beat Lowell Weikert. The last liberal GOPer. The FDR coalition is and was made up of Roman Catholics, Jews, African American, Labor and you guessed it White Southern Conservative Democrats.
As an Irish American should I call you your majesty or something profane?
You are happy that the 18-29 and Liberals voted against the winner? These demographics are weak at best. The 18-29 do not vote. The Liberals don’t even have the stones to call themselves liberal anymore.
When was the last time you walked door to door? If you think the anti war (the people who protested at the capitol today and yesterday are “moving towards the center” you think the liberals won this election for the Party.
The Kucinich Democrats only ensure GOP victories. Like the greens did with Nader.
Spare me the poo9r PLO rap, hell Hamas made them look moderate, I am a supporter of Israel, your bias shows very clearly.
Democrats, working people and the United States can not afford the Greens, Cindy Sheehan and the super left All they do is ensure the R-wing kooks (GOP) wins
This is the debate Democrats need. I want to say that the Liberal wing of the Party is very important to our success. Having said that do you on the left feel the same way about the moderate and conservatives (Blue Dogs)?
Tim Did you recall that we hold the Senate by 1 vote ?? Didn’t think so
January 4th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Tim, Do you mind he won the Indy vote also?
The GOP is not the majority in Conn (like AZ).
Are you bent The Gov took the GOP vote in AZ?
January 4th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Blue Dog,
I think I understand the New Deal Democrat but just for clarification I will quote directly from Wikipedia:
“The New Deal coalition was the alignment of interest groups and voting blocs who supported the New Deal and voted for Democratic presidential candidates from 1932 until approximately 1966, which made the Democratic Party the majority party during the Fifth Party System. Franklin Delano Roosevelt created a coalition that included the Democratic party, big city machines, labor unions, minorities (racial, ethnic and religious), liberal farm groups, intellectuals, and the South.”
I think the main point is that most historians consider the New Deal Coalition to be just that - history. Perhaps you are using the terminology in some looser context that I do not understand. However, as I welcome you to the 21st century, I would just mention that no one else seems to be using that terminology anymore.
Yes, I am happy that young voters and liberals in Connecticut voted against Leiberman. To repeat myself, this may be indicative of hope for the future.
The last time I walked door to door was just before the Democratic primary. My candidate, a progressive, did not win and I chose not to walk for the candidate who did win the primary.
Lastly, I feel I should respond to this quote from you, “As an Irish American should I call you your majesty or something profane?”
This will be our last exchange, hopefully, so save your profanity for someone who thinks its an appropriate response.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Wikipedia ??
Isn’t that the source written by the users? Great source. One thing we can agree about is that most “historians” do not use Wikipedia
1st if you understood what the English did to and are still doing to Ireland you would know what I was trying to say, look it up in Wikipedia.
As for my question about the liberals, oh progressives you answered it for me
“My candidate, a progressive, did not win and I chose not to walk for the candidate who did win the primary.”
As I stated earlier, you would rather look good and lose rather than get behind the Party. Loved the comment about Joe being a GOPer. (He should register as a Republican and be done with it.) People like you think the Party is a liberal progressive party. You may be a wing of the Party you are not the keepers of ideological purity. The Blue Dogs and the other centrists are just as welcome in our big tent. As a matter of fact perhaps the left should go back to the greens, not a bad idea we would win more elections.
Let me tell you what the FDR coalition is: Roman Catholics, African Americans, Jews, Labor and Southern Conservative Democrats. The Democrats cannot win with out these “tribes”. Kerry lost the RC vote and he lost the election. No Democrat on the national stage can win with out this crucial vote.
Thank you for welcoming me to the 21st century, with the help of Progressives like you The R-wing kooks will win and win and win. I am sure you can slip on your Birkenstocks hop in your Volvo and drive to the foothills (in Tucson). Then you can bitch and whine about how the “people don’t get it” & “If we just nominated someone more liberal-I mean progressive we would win” Sure
January 4th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Blue Dog, instead of going back and forth about “who” the New Deal Coalition was, let’s look a little at what it did: expanded social programs to the poor, fought WW2 and the Korean War, signed the US up to the UN, laid the groundwork and started working toward greater civil rights to all, and made damn sure that the money they were spending wasn’t being thrown out the window.
The problem many liberals (haha, very funny, you’re hilarious when you keep saying “oops, I mean…) had with Lieberman was his monotone support for not “the Iraq war,” but Bush’s Iraq War. I’ve known conservatives who support “the Iraq war” but admit that there have been many mistakes and that one of them has been the complete and irresponsible lack of oversight of our tax dollars in Bush’s Iraq War. Meanwhile, Lieberman has been supporting Bush’s Iraq War, appearing to insist like many pundits and conservative armchair generals that we’re undoubtedly winning and anyone who says otherwise is either stupid or unpatriotic.
And really, cut with the conservative talking points– brie-eating limousine liberals is so 1994. Aside from that, ask my father, a small business owner who gets up every morning at 4:30 to do landscaping for rich Republicans in Scottsdale and Paradise Valley how often he rides in a limo or eats expensive cheese– you’ll either be laughed at or punched in the face. Ask him about anything political and you’ll find him to be something like Eugene Debs cutting fronds off a 30 foot palm.
And you’re still not debating the point that Liberman received almost all of the Republican vote (because the GOP nominee was a crook (go figure)), and picked up independents who opposed the war because they thought of him as “independent.”
January 4th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
Phx guy,
You are correct on all of your points. The point I was making is the very left, liberal or progressives have made the mods and conservatives in the Party feel as if unless we whole-heartedly support the most extreme positions they espouse we are not real Democrats. My position is simple we are a party that has different wings, all of whom we need to win.
I have heard all kinds of insults regarding weather or not I (we) are loyal Party members. Joe should just register as a republican…ect. If a liberal/progressive is going to lead and WIN then I will support him/her. The idea that my guy is the only true Democrat is silly and just hands the election over the R-wing (GOP) kooks. Lamont spent the entire cycle saying, “I am not Joe.” We need Joe and Bernie Sanders in the Senate to stop the common enemy, the extreme right wing fundamentalist republicans. I may not be crazy about Sen. Sanders but the people elected him to represent VT in the Senate. We need him & (Joe) to stop the President and his harmful agenda. I was working in construction in CT when President Regan was sticking it to working people. It just is not enough for me to see the Party put up a loser and say we will get them next time. The most conservative Democrat is better that the most liberal GOPer. Why, the Blue Dogs have to work with the lib/progressives to move our common agenda. We Democrats, Left Right and center have more in common than separates us. I still have yet to hear that from the Lib/progressives
January 5th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Yes, we do have alot more in common than some people in both camps like to believe. But just like the people on the left of the party have to accept that they’re not the entire party, so do the other wings– but that’s not always the case.
I think the left wouldn’t kvetch so much if Blue Dogs and DLC Dems weren’t so quick to call us extremists or work against us. Take CAFTA for example– that vote came down to the wire, and about ten Dems voted for it in the House, even while moderate-to-conservative Ted Strickland (now Gov of Ohio) worked himself raw against it.
Also, Blue Dogs and DLC Dems both pose a greater threat to party unity when they don’t endorse a candidate. In recent years, the Republicans have gone crazy with the outright lie that the Party is completely taken over by whacked-out leftists, so when a moderate or conservative dem acts out that way it gives them more ammunition, and we’re much more likely to lose an election. Think back to 2004– had Zell Miller at least paid lip service to the ideals he once held or the party that put him in power, John Kerry (a DLC dem) might be in the White House right now.
January 5th, 2007 at 11:53 am
You have a valid point regarding my side of the Party. It seems as if it is easy to call others names because I have been called them. It is really hard when one gets labeled for positions that you do not agree with. First and formost I am a Democrat, and proud of it!
The DLC is a tad too imperious for this Blue dog and the way they did Dean was an unpardonable sin. The DLC needs to get out of the beltway once, way to many lawyers not enough Union folk.
Take pity on the repugs, any one left of Attila the Hun is a crazed leftist. If more of guys (I grew up in the NY area , guys like God has not gender) in your wing conversed like you do we might follow the Regan commandment, don’t speak ill about another DEM