Joe Lieberman makes plans to run as an independent, and Dems are in a quandary.
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut said on Monday that he would run as an independent Democratic candidate if he loses the state Democratic primary next month. The announcement by Mr. Lieberman, a political moderate and longtime party leader seeking his fourth term, underscores the increasing vulnerability he feels over his support for the Iraq war.
Reacting to a strong challenge from Ned Lamont, a wealthy businessman and political newcomer who has criticized him for supporting President Bush on the war and other issues, Senator Lieberman said that he would begin gathering the 7,500 petition signatures necessary to put his name on the ballot should he lose the primary on Aug. 8.
He said that even if elected as a petition candidate, he would remain "a proud Democrat" and would caucus with other Democratic senators. Still, the prospect that Mr. Lieberman may challenge his own party's nominee is a startling turn for the senator, who has spent his entire three decades in politics within the Democratic Party and ran as its vice-presidential nominee in 2000 alongside Al Gore.
The senator's announcement signaled his growing concern over Mr. Lamont's candidacy. Left-leaning Internet bloggers have marked Mr. Lieberman for defeat, drawing national attention and money for Mr. Lamont — and posing a difficult choice for Democratic leaders, who have vigorously backed Mr. Lieberman.
Personally, I think Ned Lamont is a political genius for his ability to ride anti-war fervor into the Billionaire Boys Club also known as the Democratic Senate Caucus.
FWIW, here are the Poole results for the 107th, 108th, and 109th Congresses. Lieberman scores to the right of about two-thirds of the Senate Dems. [The Captain picks up on this.
MORE: Tim Blair goes to Madison Avenue - reviews of the first Kos/Lamont ad (described here), and a suggested re-write. Too funny.
I hear FDL is calling him Sore Loserman. Funny how when it was original they failed to see the humor.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 09:15 AM
Quasiblog's 4th of July compendium of http://www.quasiblog.com/2006/07/patriot_games.html>Quotes on Patriotism is up. Happy Independence Day to all!
Posted by: JM Hanes | July 04, 2006 at 09:27 AM
He said that even if elected as a petition candidate, he would remain "a proud Democrat" and would caucus with other Democratic senators.
Lieberman is loyal to a fault, you gotta give the guy that.
Posted by: Dwilkers | July 04, 2006 at 09:45 AM
Unbelievable.
Posted by: Sue | July 04, 2006 at 09:46 AM
Dwilkers,
I would give them the middle finger after being treated the way they have treated him. And remember, they are the party that proudly proclaims 'free thinkers'. Of course, as long as you think the way they want you to think. Pfffftttt...
Posted by: Sue | July 04, 2006 at 09:47 AM
I bet he wins the nomination.
Posted by: Jane | July 04, 2006 at 09:54 AM
Thanks for the quote compendium, JMH. An interesting assemblage of many views.
Darleen's Place has a slightly different take. Heinlein took a rather practical view of patriotism.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 04, 2006 at 10:07 AM
It sounds like a great opportunity for the GOP to pick up a Senate seat.
Posted by: John Loki | July 04, 2006 at 10:16 AM
Let's help Leiberman and Irey. Hope Leiberman wins all the way.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 10:32 AM
Ned Lamont is one of Kos Bialystok's pet projects. In fact, one of the 'wins' Kos claims was getting Ned into the primary without having to put it to the vote of the Democratic electorate.
href="http://timblair.net/ee/index.php/weblog/comments/lament_lamont/"> Tim Blair has done a couple of columns on Ned's campaign prowess.
Maybe we should be encouraging him. It can only hurt the Democratic party.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 04, 2006 at 10:34 AM
Sorry, that first link should have been Tim Blair
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 04, 2006 at 10:40 AM
G'morning all,
As many of you know, I am from CT. I have supported Lieberman in the past and will probably do so again. He is very middle of the road for a politician. His opponent in the Dem primary, Joe Lamont, has now opened his campaign up to three issues:
1. I don't like Bush so vote for me (Kerryite)
2. Joe Lieberman voted for and supports the war so vote for me.
3. We need Universal Health Care (government sponsored of course)
Of course DeStefano, who is running for Governor is running on UHC also - blaming Wal-Mart of course like a good democrat. Imagine how much it is going to cost all of us if people like Lamont get into office - just where is all that money going to come from? Like I need another hit to my pocket at the federal level. CT just raised gasoline tax - but not directly because the Democratic controlled legislature didn't want to be blamed for raising taxes. Instead they raised the tax on the distributors of oil products. Guess who pays anyways? 2-5 cents a gallon.
I think Lieberman will win the primary anyways. But if he doesn't, then it will split the Democratic party in the state and maybe a Republican could peek in the door. Even with that I think Lieberman will win. The AFL-CIO has already thrown their support his way.
Posted by: Specter | July 04, 2006 at 10:41 AM
Hey--just one minute, here.
Isn't Senator Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island also facing a tough primary race because he isn't Republican enough for quite a few members of his party?
Link.
Posted by: HeyNow | July 04, 2006 at 10:58 AM
No way the Republicans can pick this seat, they have no candidate.
Posted by: David | July 04, 2006 at 11:06 AM
I think I'll keep a score card for the Progressive Totalitaian wing of the Democratic Party. Right now I have:
Tester - MT
Brown - OH
Klobuchar - MN
Mfume - MD
Lamont - CT
as ProgTot approved. Lieberman, Cantwell, Casey and Clinton (to some extent) do not have the ProgTot seal of approval. In about 120 days we'll know the value of a ProgTot endorsement.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 04, 2006 at 11:07 AM
OT:
Lorie Byrd has some thoughts on patriotism.
Good idea, Ballard. Let's hope that the idea of ProgTot endorsement doesn't bode well.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:12 AM
You may want to check Sweetness & Light for the last few recent posts, especially about Cindy Sheehad.
This is what's making the democratic party look even worse.
And KKK was just granted a permit by the National Park Service to protest the Iraqi war at the Gettysburg park!!
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:15 AM
Rick
4 of those are going down. I will have to say that Montana and I are not really in touch so that I dont know about Tester. But he is taking on an incumbent in a nominally Red state. Rest are toast. One wont even get out of the primary.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 11:17 AM
"Hey--just one minute, here.
Isn't Senator Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island also facing a tough primary race because he isn't Republican enough for quite a few members of his party?'
Yeah, so?
One difference might be that Lieberman is trying to drag the Dems back to what they used to be.
Chafee is trying to drag the Republicans where they've never been.
I happen to think the first is a good thing and the second bad.
Opinions may vary.
Posted by: Barney Frank | July 04, 2006 at 11:28 AM
Great link JMH,
As usual Mark Twain and GB Shaw are the funniest, GK Chesterton the truest and Jimmy Carter the stupidest.
Posted by: Barney Frank | July 04, 2006 at 11:39 AM
OT:
Write a letter or email to your senators to protect the federal cross in San Diego.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 11:44 AM
Anti war fever? Well, it probably helps you to sleep at night to think of it as that. But there's a glaring discrepancy in that theory. What about all the other Dems who supported the war? Why aren't all of them facing tough primary challenges?
Answer? The war is but part of Joe's problems. His biggest problem is of course, the the pandemic that is sweeping the nation.
But hey, a guys gotta sleep right?
Posted by: Davebo | July 04, 2006 at 11:53 AM
Netwits...Joe will get more votes as an independent than a Democrat...more repubs in the state will cross over and vote for Joe with the big "D" erased
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 04, 2006 at 12:01 PM
BTW what will the net-wits do if this becomes a trend...dems in red states looking for a way to distance themselves from the fringe? (and the establishment Dems are witnessing their worst nightmare)
Not very good strategerey to take back the house !
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 04, 2006 at 12:05 PM
But there's a glaring discrepancy in that theory. What about all the other Dems who supported the war? Why aren't all of them facing tough primary challenges?
I understand that it is important to the Nutroots to pretned that this is abount more than the war. However, you ought to advise Ned Lamont to update his website to get on-message:
Take out the war and there is nothing there.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | July 04, 2006 at 12:08 PM
"Take out the war and there is nothing there."
Just like the Bush administration.
Posted by: Pisistratus | July 04, 2006 at 12:11 PM
Careful TM you are going to hurt Davebo's feelings. You know its not fair fighting like that, I mean to stoop to using facts to back up your point. Why he will probably just slink back to Ballon Juice and post a couple of invective filled tirades about you now.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 12:13 PM
Nope.
Tax cuts
Ecomony booming
Drug reform (sorta)
I know there's more...
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 12:14 PM
When asked who they'd vote for in a 3-way race, CT voters say (approximately, varies a bit from poll to poll):
50% Lieberman (I)
20% Lamont (D)
20% Undecided
10% Alan Schlesinger (R)
So the Democrats can nominate him now, or lose to him in November.
Posted by: Warmongering Lunatic | July 04, 2006 at 12:30 PM
"What about all the other Dems who supported the war? Why aren't all of them facing tough primary challenges?" Tell ya what, Davebo. Why don't you make us a list of all the incumbent Democratic senators up for re-election in 2006 who supported the war and continue to support it?
Posted by: Other Tom | July 04, 2006 at 01:10 PM
This is all because of the SOTUS hug. That's it and only it.
The depth of this effort...Bush hugged Joe.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 04, 2006 at 01:27 PM
It appears that, in addition to Lieberman, there are a total of six incumbent Democrat senators who supported the war resolution in October, 2002 and are seeking re-election this year. Maria Cantwell of Washington continues to support the war, and is "facing a tough primary challenge." Two others (the Nelsons) are from Red States. Another is Hillary, who is, well, Hillary. Carper of Delaware voted to cut and run. Kohl of Wisconsin has criticized Bush savagely on the war. So much for whatever Davebo's point was supposed to be.
Posted by: Other Tom | July 04, 2006 at 01:55 PM
Does anyone other than our new friend Davebo believe that Lieberman would be facing opposition from the Left (Lamont et al.) if he openly opposed the war?
This is all about Iraq.
C'mon Davebo, let's get in the game.
SMG
Posted by: SteveMG | July 04, 2006 at 02:01 PM
Other Tom
Falling in that trap of looking for logic and facts to support assertions again? Its so constraining. Just let your emotions run wild and say anything, but remember to repeat it ad nauseum. You too can be a liberal.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 02:01 PM
A Very Happy Fourth of July to my colonial cousins...now if you would just like to pay the back taxes,we will say no more about it.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 04, 2006 at 02:13 PM
Peter
No back taxes but I am sure the tea is well steeped at this point in the Harbor. Come on over for a spot! While you are here, make sure you introduce yourself to a pint or two of Shiner Bock beer. The only beer brewed in Texas.
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 02:15 PM
OT:
Discovery just started its T-9 hold.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 02:17 PM
Clock resumed and pray for a successful launch on Independence Day - Fitting for the best "Rockets glare" ever. Approaching another T-hold.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 02:30 PM
PeterUk — Well, you can send your navy (both of it, if Gordo Brown has his way) to try and collect...go ahead, blockade Massachusetts again (not a bad idea in principle).
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 04, 2006 at 02:55 PM
Don't need to Richard,we can sue for the royalties on the use of the English language.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 04, 2006 at 03:28 PM
We don't really use the english language - well at least the way you do.
Posted by: Jane | July 04, 2006 at 03:56 PM
Jane — My company distributes a couple of books on Estuary English ("Dijja Wanna Say Sumfin'?") and 'Newspeak'... trust me, they don't either.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 04, 2006 at 04:01 PM
Ah underclassese,we have the copyright for that also.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 04, 2006 at 04:59 PM
"An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other
Englishman despise him.
One common language I'm afraid we'll never get.
Oh, why can't the English learn to set
A good example to people whose
English is painful to your ears?
The Scotch and the Irish leave you close to tears.
There even are places where English completely
disappears. In America, they haven't used it for years!"
PeterUK, sorry, no royalties for you because, according to Henry Higgens, we in America don't speak English. (It was too good to resist)
Posted by: Lesley | July 04, 2006 at 05:05 PM
Wasn't it Churchill who said "two countries separated by a common language."
Posted by: Gary Maxwell | July 04, 2006 at 05:56 PM
Sorry Lesley,
I ran your post by our linguistics department, that was English.
Sorry the Democratic party is not in power,you can not therefore,base your case on a fictional character.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 04, 2006 at 06:45 PM
You're on a roll.
OT: Sweetness and Light discovered a few interesting things about Cindy Sheehan and her sister. Donja know that Cindy's son talks to his mother from the grave? Find out why from this site. Strange.
Posted by: lurker | July 04, 2006 at 07:29 PM
What is happening in Connecticut, and the poll results there, tell us a great deal about the Democratic party and next to nothing about the American electorate. Davebo's silence suggests that he is having trouble with the raw data; one can picture the furrows in the brow.
Posted by: Other Tom | July 04, 2006 at 07:54 PM
What is puzzling is why Kos himself is not treading the tried and tested route up the greasy pole of politics.Why didn't he get himself shot in the arse,drop a shell on some German teenager the run home and denounce the occupation of Germany?
Why is he loitering in the ether and hanging on the coat tails of some lumpen politico with the charisma of a coffin lid?
Posted by: PeterUK | July 04, 2006 at 08:41 PM
PeterUK — The money, the clout and the safety from prosectuion are all behind the throne. Kos Bialystok fancies himself one'a them greasy eminences...
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 04, 2006 at 08:49 PM
Lieberman will win in a walk in the primary. Dems would have to be complete idiots to tamper with "Joltin Joe's"campaign for the Senate. Even Imus likes lieberman. Lamont is much ado about nothing and I don't believe at the end of the day he wins out. Typical ingratitude of dems toward one of their most effective leaders.
Posted by: maryrose | July 04, 2006 at 08:49 PM
Peter,
Think Röhm - there is a tiny lack of personal charisma that would be very difficult to overcome. Then there is the small problem of actual accomplishments - siphoning dopes wallets may be what politicians actually do but it's not what they run on.
He's doing a decent job of leading the SA but his time is just about up.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 04, 2006 at 08:57 PM
Kos has marginalized himself and is a victim of over-reach-similar to Howard Dean. The rank and file can't abide that.
Posted by: maryrose | July 04, 2006 at 09:19 PM
Rick,I trust that Kos does not have the prdilections that Rohm had,that lead him to the night of the long knives,Sorry I lied. yes I do hope his fate is entertaining.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 04, 2006 at 10:05 PM
It was desire for the center spot light that finished off Röhm and it's the same for Kos - an eminence greasy who steps from the shadows is just too much of a liability - not to mention that he's not much of an eminence to begin with.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | July 04, 2006 at 10:26 PM
Busy with house guests until tomorrow, but Dan Riehl has a very interesting post about the lefty blogosphere, its funding, its problems (including with the FEC regs) and, of course, how the big money goofed in giving so much gelt to Kos and Armstrong.
http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2006/07/how_the_grassro.html>big money for big losers
Posted by: clarice | July 04, 2006 at 11:21 PM
Hillary has announced she won't support Lieberman if he runs as an independent Democrat. So I guess Joe can't count on the chickenhawk vote...
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 04, 2006 at 11:25 PM
This is already a net loss for the Democrats. They're sending a powerful message than a lifetime of loyalty to the party means nothing to the current generation of powerbrokers. Lifelong Democrats watching the treatment of Lieberman realize that they are looking at the opening backstabbings of a purge.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 05, 2006 at 12:08 AM
"Some of the key PG players, though far from all, are Howard Dean, George Soros, Simon Rosenberg, Andy Rappaport, and SEIU President Andy Stern. All of them, and others, have channeled serious money and support to the Netroots movement, including to Moulitsas and Armstrong, since it began. In fact, it likely wouldn't have taken off or even survived without that financial support."
Wow, verner was quick to note the connections.
Posted by: lurker | July 05, 2006 at 12:08 AM
Ya think, we'll be seeing far more backstabbing among the dems over the next few months?
Posted by: lurker | July 05, 2006 at 12:10 AM
---Hillary has announced she won't support Lieberman if he runs as an independent Democrat. So I guess Joe can't count on the chickenhawk vote...--
Dauo advice...and dumb at that.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | July 05, 2006 at 01:43 AM
Looks like this Lieberman thing is shaping up to be fun. If he wins without Hillary's support, does that gain her Kos-cred for having supported the leftier loser (assuming she has the guts to do more than stay neutral)? Presumably, that would help her with the nomination, but at a price.
Nah, she'll try to stay out of it, and the MSM will be happy to accomodate her.
Posted by: Extraneus | July 05, 2006 at 08:00 AM
Even as a democrat Joe won big-time in CT. With lots, and lots of Republicans voting for him. That power block won't vote for Nothing Ned. His new campaign ads up here are to "cut and run" and then use the money (which he claims is already the major contributor to the deficit) to fund Universal Health Care. Wow. The money is not good in Iraq and is the deficit problem - but we can spend it anyways on some huge overblown government bureaucracy.
Posted by: Specter | July 05, 2006 at 08:31 AM
This is typical Hillary behavior-why am I not surprised. She's still mad that Lieberman called her husband Bill on his philandering and exposed the lie of Hil's claim of a "right wing conspiracy". Note to Hil : the right wing still doesn't like you or your cheating spouse.
Posted by: maryrose | July 05, 2006 at 11:42 AM
On the subject of Universal Health Care,one has only to look at the figures for our National Health Service to understand that it will bankrupt you. As further point is it is impossible to have Universal Health Care with open borders.
I don't know what kind of business Ned Two Short Planks is engaged in,but the man is obviously clueless.
Posted by: PeterUK | July 05, 2006 at 12:04 PM
PeterUk
"Sorry Lesley,
I ran your post by our linguistics department, that was English."
Peter, well, yes and no. There's something about that baffling geological fault known as The Great Atlantic Ocean Accent Divide. Like all cultured and refined people, I spend my days glued to BBC America. Unfortunately, I don't understand a word they are saying. It might as well be Sengalese or High Urdu for all I know.
I fear, if I were to invite you to one of my elegant Candlelight Suppers, you and I might be forced to communicate by Morse Code, International Sign Language, smoke signals, simultaneous interpreters, or constantly passing notes back and forth across the table.
I would be perfectly willing to send you all my English Language Reparation Royalties if you would teach me to speak and comprehend Mitford-esque U (or even non-U, you decide) English. Given that most recent distressing polling data, perhaps your compatriots would not find us so objectionable if we all sounded just like Laurence Olivier or sumpthin.
Posted by: Lesley | July 05, 2006 at 06:08 PM
PeterUK? National Health Service? Look at the bright side. It will probably kill a lot of us before we go broke. The Brit version has knocked off two and perhaps three people I know already.
Posted by: richard mcenroe | July 05, 2006 at 08:04 PM
Biden,Salazar and Boxer plan to campaign in Connecticut for Lieberman between now and the Aug. 8 primary.
MarKOS is angry.
Posted by: colin | July 05, 2006 at 09:48 PM
Didn't read all the comments, but looking the rankings for 107, 108, 109 -- one thing stands out. Democrats more conservative than Leiberman tend to come from states that you would traditionally think are more conservative than Conneticuit. If you normalized for how liberal/conseravtive the represenative's state was, I think Leiberman would stand out way more as sore thumb.
Posted by: Jor | July 05, 2006 at 09:51 PM
Specter list 3 things he thinks Ned is about. Make sure you listen to the debate tonight, on C-Span to get your facts clear!
And quit worrying about your Wallet! Didn't you learn after 12 yrs of Republicans, then 8 years of Clinton, that the alternative to Taxation is BORROWING! SOMEBODY has to pay that back! maybe you don't care about your kids and grandkids. Some of us do!
DLC Lieberman should take a lesson from his riding the center. The DLC lost the Dems the last Elections with their trying to take the party to the Center, when are they going to learn???
And yeah, really. When Republicans are in that booth, faced with an R, a D or an I, they will really pull the lever for the I!
HA! They will pull it for the Repub. And should the Dems lose the seat to the Repubs, well let's face it, they don't really have the seat anyways! This is a message to all the DLC Democrats! Take the party back to the left where SS, Medicare, rural electrification, Head Start, Peace Corp, Min. Wage, GI bill of rights, Clean air act, water quality act, Workers Comp, etc, etc, etc. If that is not what American want, then let's just all elect Republicans and live under the theocracy they want us to.
Posted by: Bergs | July 06, 2006 at 03:54 PM
NHS is a twofer--bad health care for everyone leads to less payout of social security funds.
Of course, it's also good news for denture makers--ever look at British teeth?
Posted by: clarice | July 06, 2006 at 04:03 PM
Bergs:
Who is going to pay for all those free hand-outs that you listed above that the far-left wants?
Teraysuh Kerry is being taxed at the 12% rate so she definitely ain't paying. All Heinz money is tied up in trusts for her kids and to the Tides and other left-wing which curiously have a tax-free designation even though they are BLATANTLY political. Hil wants to borrow from hard-working middle class people like myself to REDISTRIBUTE the wealth across America. Of course none of her book profits will go toward helping as long as she has to feed her multiple PACS. Hypocritical and disengenious in the same breath.
Posted by: maryrose | July 06, 2006 at 04:21 PM
Kerry has also announced he will not campaign for Lieberman and that additionally he won't support him in the primary. Kerry is true to form-a Putz to the end.
Posted by: maryrose | July 06, 2006 at 06:58 PM
Ned Lamont is a twerp, my initial impression seeing him on C-Span.
Posted by: maryrose | July 06, 2006 at 07:31 PM
Don't look for Buffett or Gates who are for estate taxes either...they just avoided them. (BTW Buffett made a lot of his money buying up companies at fire sale prices from heirs who couldn't afford the estate taxes.)Nor from the Kennedys whose money is socked away in tax free trusts in Tahiti. Taxes are for dummies, the super rich liberals think.
Posted by: clarice | July 06, 2006 at 07:55 PM