# If Lieberman Loses On Tuesday... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 6, 2006, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541 "2006-08-06T07:41:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/201 "2006-08-09T21:40:38Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] Calling this a “purge” is really hyperbolic. This is a democratic election, not a purge . . . [/QUOTE] You say that is if “purge” were a negative thing. It isn’t. So long as it isn’t a Soviet-style purge with the purged getting shot or jailed, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a purge – by electoral means or otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/202 "2006-08-09T21:50:08Z")
[QUOTE=spazattak] We can only hope… Lots of social problems out there that need good bipartisan solutions to solve them. [/QUOTE] I’m afraid the only solutions that would work would be unacceptable even to moderate Pubs. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/203 "2006-08-10T02:40:53Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Because Bush and Cheney are grasping at whatever staws they’ve got. As for Rush et al, they sure seem quite happy that the Dems are kicking JL out. What of that? Are we to believe that they just want us to think that they’re happy? Let’s not go down that road, because it just leads to an endless second guessing of what is a feint and what is not. [/quote] Huh? Their support for Lieberman was all over the place _before_ he lost. Changing their tune afterwards is irrelevant. [Here’s a video compilation](http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2458) of the “smooches” of Lieberman from the following collection of people: Dick Cheney, George Bush, Scott McClellan, former White House spokesperson, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Steve Gill, former Congressional candidate, Pat Robertson, William F. Buckley, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, David Brooks, Carl Cameron, Fox News, Chris Shays, Nancy Johnson, Fred Barnes, Oliver North, Ed Rogers, Republican strategist, Ken Mehlman, RNC Chair. If Lieberman is a good and steadfast Democrat, why in particular does he get all the love from this collection of people? > [@John Mace](#): > > I’ve not seen the entire quote in context, but I took it to mean: Criticize the prez’s policies = OK. Call the prez a liar = bad. If you want to explore it further, I’ll be happy to. But do you have a cite that shows the what he said in full? What the…? Where did lying have anything to do with that quote. For someone so expert on Lieberman and the Democrats, I’d expect a greater grasp on these key points of Lieberman’s relationship with the Dems.[CNN](http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/08/democrats.iraq/?section=cnn_latest): > [@](#): > > On Wednesday, Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut reproached fellow Democrats for criticizing President Bush during a time of war. > > “It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril,” Lieberman said. > > Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, a leading Democratic congressman on military issues, voiced his disagreement with Lieberman’s statement and reiterated his call for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq “at the earliest practicable date.” > [@John Mace](#): > > Never saw it. Can we get some more details? What was the issue or issues, and how many times did it happen? How many times did it have to happen? [Here’s the video.](http://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/see-lieberman-jump-for-joy.html) > [@John Mace](#): > > Now that is “vastly misstating what actually happened”. A vote for cloture is not a vote for something. I already quoted what Harry Reid said on that issue-- do you want me to quote him again? They didn’t have enough votes. A fillibuster would not even have been on the table if Kerry and few other '08 hopefuls hadn’t wanted to do some poltical posturing. Again, what the fuck are you talking about? Pulled from your own goddamn cite: > [@](#): > > Senator John Kerry (D-MA) called for a filibuster to block Alito’s nomination on Thursday, January 26. **Despite the support of** his fellow Massachusetts Senator, Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY).[12][13][14] and **Harry Reid (D-NV)**, the top Democrat in the Senate, other Democrats were afraid the measure would backfire and were cautious to support it. Just one day after Senator Kerry’s call for a filibuster, Senator Reid further stated that the Democrats did not have the votes needed to sustain a filibuster to block the confirmation of Samuel Alito. “We’re going to have a vote Tuesday morning,” Reid said. “Everyone knows there are not enough votes to support a filibuster.”[15][16] > > A motion to invoke cloture and end debate was made on Friday, January 27, and passed on Monday, January 30 by a vote of 72-24 with four senators not voting (including Republican John Ensign, who had been injured in a car accident earlier that day). All of the members of the Gang of Fourteen voted for cloture with the majority. The final confirmation vote occurred on Tuesday, January 31st, with the nomination approved by a vote of 58 to 42.] Part of the very reason why there weren’t enough votes for a filibuster was **Lieberman**. Damn dude - I know you say you aren’t a Republican, but it seems like you are trying very, very hard to toe the party line on this. You’ve got no reasoning, no grasp of key events, you’re misrepresenting things at odds with your own cite, and are just trying to hand-wave everything away. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/204 "2006-08-10T19:25:12Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] What the…? Where did lying have anything to do with that quote. [/quote] What do you think “credibilty” means? > [@](#): > > How many times did it have to happen? [Here’s the video.](http://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/see-lieberman-jump-for-joy.html) A fuzzy picture in someone’s blog. BFD. > [@](#): > > Again, what the fuck are you talking about? Pulled from your own goddamn cite: > > Part of the very reason why there weren’t enough votes for a filibuster was **Lieberman**. Damn dude - I know you say you aren’t a Republican, but it seems like you are trying very, very hard to toe the party line on this. You’ve got no reasoning, no grasp of key events, you’re misrepresenting things at odds with your own cite, and are just trying to hand-wave everything away. There were 72 votes in favor of cloture. If Lieberman voted against, it would’ve been 71. Not enought votes. Not even close. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/205 "2006-08-10T19:44:59Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] What do you think “credibilty” means? [/quote] It doesn’t mean “not lying.” It means credible. Lieberman’s point had nothing to do with concerns that people were calling Bush a liar. It had everything to do with suggesting that if he is getting criticized, he will be seen as less credible. > [@](#): > > A fuzzy picture in someone’s blog. BFD. As I said, there’s a VIDEO clip. You suggested that there was no good evidence that Lieberman was a lapdog of the president. Many Democrats saw his having been the first in the whole room to leap to his feet in applause as overly ingratiating. Handwave it away, if you will, but this is why you don’t understand the meaning of the backlash against Lieberman. Otherwise, watch the fucking clip. > [@](#): > > There were 72 votes in favor of cloture. If Lieberman voted against, it would’ve been 71. Not enought votes. Not even close. Again, my perception of you is that you are smarter than this, so I think you are being obtuse here. Votes, as those not ignorant of the process, are not static, but are subject to being swayed, coerced, influenced… Lieberman was working as part of a gang of Senators to come to an agreement by which the Democrats would not filibuster, in exchange for the Republicans not engaging their nuclear option of removing the filibuster. These efforts must have undoubtedly influenced others’ votes. If you know its going to be tight, and one of your own party takes a chunk of votes into some sort of commitment to vote a particular way, it becomes moot how you will vote. Come on, man. Give these issues a little more thought, if you really are having trouble understanding that this was not a “purge” of some run of the mill moderate, centrist Democrat. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/206 "2006-08-10T20:08:56Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] Lieberman was working as part of a gang of Senators to come to an agreement by which the Democrats would not filibuster, in exchange for the Republicans not engaging their nuclear option of removing the filibuster. These efforts must have undoubtedly influenced others’ votes. If you know its going to be tight, and one of your own party takes a chunk of votes into some sort of commitment to vote a particular way, it becomes moot how you will vote. Come on, man. Give these issues a little more thought, if you really are having trouble understanding that this was not a “purge” of some run of the mill moderate, centrist Democrat. [/QUOTE] Ok, let’s do some more math. The working group was 14 Senators-- 7 from each party. If all 7 had voted against cloture, that would’ve still been 65 votes for. It only takes 60 votes to invoke cloture. There weren’t enough votes. It wasn’t Lieberman. There were 17 Democratic Senators who voted for cloture. It’s pretty clear what your problem with Lieberman’s position in the Democratic party is. He votes with the Democrats most of the time, but he doesn’t like to betray his own principles for purely partisan reasons. If he were a Republican doing that you’d be praising him as the one of the mots honorable politicians in the nation. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/207 "2006-08-10T20:18:06Z")
Just speaking for myself, I would think that said Pubbie politician was either a)belatedly recognizing the blazingly obvious or b) exhibiting typical rodent behavior when confronted with nautical disaster. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/208 "2006-08-10T20:20:58Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] It’s pretty clear what your problem with Lieberman’s position in the Democratic party is. He votes with the Democrats most of the time, but he doesn’t like to betray his own principles for purely partisan reasons. If he were a Republican doing that you’d be praising him as the one of the mots honorable politicians in the nation. [/QUOTE] I want to be clear on something: I don’t think Lieberman is dishonorable. He’s probably more honorable than a majority of politicians in DC. It’s not his honor I question; it’s his agreement with the positions that I value. I want the Democratic party to represent the positions I value, and Lieberman does so to a lesser degree than most Democrats. That’s why I’m glad to see him go, not because I think he’s a skank. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/209 "2006-08-10T20:29:50Z")
Another point is the obstinance of his position. Two years ago, maybe even one, such a position of support for failed policy might make a degree of sense, and it simply takes some people longer to catch on. Witness several of our own he had to be dragged kicking and screaming into awareness that they were supporting an utterly bankrupt position, and had the good sense to bail. There comes a point where it isn’t a matter of maintaining personal honor, but denying that honor. That point is pride, when one simply will not admit having been wrong. There’s nothing left, right or centrist about being wrong. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/210 "2006-08-10T20:33:07Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] I want to be clear on something: I don’t think Lieberman is dishonorable. He’s probably more honorable than a majority of politicians in DC. It’s not his honor I question; it’s his agreement with the positions that I value. I want the Democratic party to represent the positions I value, and Lieberman does so to a lesser degree than most Democrats. That’s why I’m glad to see him go, not because I think he’s a skank. [/QUOTE] I never said you thought that. But what you’re saying is that you do want to “purge” the Democratic party of its more centrist elements. The war may be the main issue here, but would you feel differently about Lieberman if he opposed the war but otherwise held the same poltical position on the rest of the issues? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/211 "2006-08-10T20:41:05Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] But what you’re saying is that you do want to “purge” the Democratic party of its more centrist elements. The war may be the main issue here, but would you feel differently about Lieberman if he opposed the war but otherwise held the same poltical position on the rest of the issues? [/QUOTE] You got that I want to purge the Democratic party from my statement that I think “purge” is a hyperbolic description? Huh. I don’t want to purge anyone. I really want to get rid of the two-party system. But as long as we have it, I want at least one of the choices to be as close possible to the views I want to vote for. And with Lieberman in power, neither of the CT candidates was very close at all to the views I want to vote for. There’s no purging going on here. And of course if he opposed the war but otherwise held the same political position, that would be exactly one big important issue more that he and I agreed on. So that would make me that less opposed to his being the Democratic candidate. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/212 "2006-08-10T20:46:31Z")
Is it really necessary to get so hung up on that one word, Daniel? I put it in quotes because I know you don’t like it. Subsitute any word you prefer-- it doesn’t matter to me. You want them out of office, no? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/213 "2006-08-10T20:50:08Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Is it really necessary to get so hung up on that one word, Daniel? I put it in quotes because I know you don’t like it. Subsitute any word you prefer-- it doesn’t matter to me. You want them out of office, no? [/QUOTE] Well, yes, in the same way that I want Republicans out of office; that doesn’t mean I want to purge the Republican party. “Purge” does carry very negative connotations in politics, calling to mind Stalin and Mao’s famous purges. So yeah, I don’t appreciate it. What I want is for folks to be in office who share my beliefs. Lieberman doesn’t. What’s so complicated about that? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/214 "2006-08-10T20:58:09Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] I want the Democratic party to represent the positions I value, and Lieberman does so to a lesser degree than most Democrats. [/QUOTE] I have a few problems with this statement (I think it hints at some of our political problems). First, since you don’t live in CT, why is it any of your business wether or not JL adheres to all (heck, any) of your beliefs? He’s not representing you. Second, why do you expect an entire party to possess all of the same values that you do? Thats asking an awful lot out of such a large group of individuals isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/215 "2006-08-10T21:12:09Z")
[QUOTE=spazattak] First, since you don’t live in CT, why is it any of your business wether or not JL adheres to all (heck, any) of your beliefs? He’s not representing you. [/quote] Yeah, but I am bullshitting on an Internet messageboard. It’s my business because, as a dude making federal laws, it affects me. > [@](#): > > Second, why do you expect an entire party to possess all of the same values that you do? Thats asking an awful lot out of such a large group of individuals isn’t it? I don’t expect them to, but the more that do, the happier I am. Don’t turn this into anything bigger than it is, please. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/216 "2006-08-10T21:20:45Z")
alrighty, those statements just rubbed me the wrong way 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/217 "2006-08-10T21:24:44Z")
Fair enough! Daniel ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2006, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/218 "2006-08-10T21:24:47Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] … Subsitute any word you prefer-- it doesn’t matter to me. You want them out of office, no? [/QUOTE] You could use “a semantic nitpick of no consequence…” But that would be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2006, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/219 "2006-08-12T02:40:45Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Subsitute any word you prefer-- it doesn’t matter to me. [/QUOTE] How about \*you \* use whatever word \*you \* think most accurately represents what \*you \* think? :dubious: > [@](#): > > But if this is a trend (ejecting the moderates), then it won’t be a good. Popular sentiment against the war is in the 60-70% range, depending on the polls. Looks like the moderate candidate \*won \* the nomination, don’t it? > [@](#): > > Clinton went to CT and stumped around for JL. That’s what “active” means. True, he only did it recently, but it’s only been recently that JL got in serious trouble and needed help. Out of a sense of personal obligation to a friend, as he made clear. You also missed the part where Clinton simultaneously made it quite clear that he would support his party’s nominee anyway. A real show of support does not include pulling one’s punches so blatantly, or at all, and it’s questionable if Clinton’s efforts didn’t actually have a negative effect because of that - given his political shrewdness, he might actually have intended that. > [@spazattak](#): > > First, since you don’t live in CT, why is it any of your business wether or not JL adheres to all (heck, any) of your beliefs? He’s not representing you. In fact, he is. The Senate acts as a single body. Its actions and votes affect all of us. Lieberman’s vote has as much effect on, say, California as Boxer’s does on Connecticut. It matters. > [@airblairxx](#): > > If Lamont were smart, he’d slug Karl Rove’s corpulent mug on billboards all across the state, and soon. The best thing to do against the new Lieberman campaign is define it quickly as a pawn of the White House. If he did, that would only further entrench Lieberman’s self-centered stubbornness. Better to let ol’ Joe finally absorb what’s happened, break out of his denial, and pull out on his own. I don’t doubt that he has many friends in the party speaking quietly to him about that. Let them do their work. Even if he doesn’tIt might not help Lamont to keep hammering on the theme that Lieberman is a crypto-Rep, not when there are so few minds left to change. The greater damage to Lieberman would be any continued show of support from the GOP - it would be like jumping from the iceberg onto the Titanic, this year. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2006, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/220 "2006-08-13T01:04:50Z")
[This new poll](http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-joepoll0812.artaug12,0,4774083.story?coll=hc-headlines-nationworld), taken after the primaries, gives Lieberman a 46 to 41 percent lead over Lamont. It’ll be interesting to see how that continues to develop. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541.md?page=12)