# 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:** 9
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/161 "2006-08-09T15:04:27Z")
[QUOTE=Steve MB] Great Jehosophat. Does he still have enough pull to avoid the usual consequences of filing frivolous criminal complaints? [/QUOTE] He’s probably got enough friends in high places to make it a non-issue. ---
**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 9, 2006, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/162 "2006-08-09T15:43:47Z")
[QUOTE=Marley23] He’s probably got enough friends in high places to make it a non-issue. [/QUOTE] I dunno. DOS attacks leave pretty clear records in the server logs, don’t they? It seems trivially easy to figure out whether an attack occurred; and if one did occur, even if the website was poorly run, the attackers ought to be prosecuted. If they’re claiming an attack that’s not backed up in the logs, then they’re really idiots. And I think there are other explanations for Clinton’s support of Lieberman than his belief that Lieberman-style democrats are essential to the party. Lieberman has a fair amount of pull; maybe Clinton believes that his support for JL would later translate into JL’s support for a HRC presidency. Or maybe he owes JL a favor. **John** , I think it’s going overboard to suggest that claims of JL’s closet Republicanhood are Nonsense. They might be slight exaggerations, but the basic complaint–that he sides pretty often with Republicans, and that he undermines Democratic positions more often than he loudly champions them–seems pretty valid. I’m not wanting the party to consist entirely of Cynthia McKinney, but I am glad that someone as conservative as JL isn’t going to be the Democratic candidate for Connecticut. Calling this a “purge” is really hyperbolic. This is a democratic election, not a purge; and if the more liberal candidates win, there’s some chance that’s because they hold more popular positions. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/163 "2006-08-09T16:07:32Z")
Bold prediction: Lieberman is going to fade, fade, fade, and have a humiliating loss in the general election. Joe is going to find himself with leprosy, all the centrist Democrats who supported him in the past are going to support Lamont when all is said and done. Bill Clinton, no matter what his personal feelings are, is going to support Lamont. Every Democrat who holds elective office is going to support Lamont. They can’t support Lieberman without cutting the throat of the Democratic party. Sure, there’ll be a few retired guys like Ed Koch, a few pundits and such. But Lieberman is finished. ---
**Author:** ![Airblairxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Airblairxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airblairxxx)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/164 "2006-08-09T16:34:17Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] I think the Democratic party should be getting rid of its pro-war faction. That party should be united in its opposition to the war. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. A Democratic party without its centrist elements will not be effective in national politics. Why do you think Clinton was so active in trying to help Lieberman? It was in spite of JL’s pro-war stance, not because of it. [/QUOTE] I’ve said this before in this thread: Using terms like ‘centrist’ and ‘moderate’ is not applicable in this primary, because Ned Lamont is most likely going to take a moderate approach to governance, not tack hard left. This was all about defeating a senator who preferred to spew GOP talking points on Iraq, and gave cover to right-wing shrills who screamed about directionless Democrats. It’s not about mere policy differences; it’s the fact that he confused bipartisanship with capitulation. The public isn’t stupid; they can see that the Bush administration sees the War on Terror as a vehicle to re-election first, a threat to the Republic second. If Lieberman in the next few months starts taking a more active role against the Bush administration’s Iraq policy–and pulls Karl Rove’s hand out of his ass–then I frankly almost wouldn’t mind his re-election. It gives credibility to the notion that Bush has mismanaged the War on Terror so poorly he’s lost even his most ardent supporters, as well as any shred of bipartisanship. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/165 "2006-08-09T16:39:43Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] This is a democratic election, not a purge [/QUOTE] If you want evidence a purge, you need look no further than [Walberg’s 53-47 victory over Schwarz](http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060808/UPDATE/608080430/1022/POLITICS) in Michigan. Of course, that’s in a _different_ party. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/166 "2006-08-09T16:40:34Z")
Listening to Rush just a moment ago. “Hezbollah Democrats, funded by George Soros…” So it appears that one result of the primary is to send a moderate, temperate fellow like Rush into a bit of a snit. Either that, or he’s jonesing. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/167 "2006-08-09T16:53:06Z")
[QUOTE=Airblairxxx] If Lieberman in the next few months starts taking a more active role against the Bush administration’s Iraq policy–and pulls Karl Rove’s hand out of his ass–then I frankly almost wouldn’t mind his re-election. It gives credibility to the notion that Bush has mismanaged the War on Terror so poorly he’s lost even his most ardent supporters, as well as any shred of bipartisanship. [/QUOTE] Yes. It’s doubtful that a junior senator from Connecticut without connections among the other Senators will have any effect on the course of things for the next two years. The good think is that this might show other Senators that at least a pretty substantial number of voters support a political stance calling for getting the hell out. If some lamebrain spinning clone of Rove wants to call that “cut and run” so be it. However, will Lieberman do what you aske of him? His statement that his defeat is a triumph for the “old politics of polarization” doesn’t give me a lot of confidence in him. It appears to me that he still thinks bipartisaship means complete subservience of Congress to the Executive in this matter of Iraq. That whatever the Executive decides is what is to be done and Congress is merely there to supply the money. I am trouble that he doesn’t seem to see that “stay the course” is meaningless babble unless “the course” is defined, and “establish democracy in Iraq and thus the region” is a goal and not a plan. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/168 "2006-08-09T17:10:04Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Absolutely. There are lots of reasons that Liberman isn’t a good fit for CT. But look at what posters here are saying-- that he’s a closet Republican, or that he’s “too close” to Bush. That is nonsense. And if that nonsense spreads to other races, pruging Democratic candidates who aren’t liberal enough, then that will not bode well for that party. I don’t know if that is going to happen, but that seems to be the desire of many people on this board. [/QUOTE] I find it somewhat amusing that Republicans are “advising” Democrats to stay “centrist”, while at the same time the Republican party is moving further and further to the right. ---
**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 9, 2006, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/169 "2006-08-09T17:22:11Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] **John** , I think it’s going overboard to suggest that claims of JL’s closet Republicanhood are Nonsense. They might be slight exaggerations, but the basic complaint–that he sides pretty often with Republicans… [/QUOTE] I keep hearing people say that, but where’s the supporting evidence? Maybe we have different definitions of “pretty often”. I don’t consider 10% of the time to be “pretty often”. Let’s see something more than the mere assertion. > [@Blalron](#): > > I find it somewhat amusing that Republicans are “advising” Democrats to stay “centrist”, while at the same time the Republican party is moving further and further to the right. Well, you can adress to the Republicans, then. I’m not a Republican, and my advice to them is that they’ve moved way too far to the (religious) right. Will someone answer this question for me, because it seems to be something that everyone is ignoring in this story: **Why did Bill Clinton so actively campaign for JL?** Surely he didn’t do so because he supports the war. Could it just be that he thinks the party is in danger of moving too far to the left…? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/170 "2006-08-09T17:24:13Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Absolutely. There are lots of reasons that Liberman isn’t a good fit for CT. But look at what posters here are saying-- that he’s a closet Republican, or that he’s “too close” to Bush. That is nonsense. And if that nonsense spreads to other races, pruging Democratic candidates who aren’t liberal enough, then that will not bode well for that party. I don’t know if that is going to happen, but that seems to be the desire of many people on this board. I think the Democratic party should be getting rid of its pro-war faction. That party should be united in its opposition to the war. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. A Democratic party without its centrist elements will not be effective in national politics. [/QUOTE] Like **LHoD** says, it takes _voters_ to engage in this hypothetical purge. It’s not like Howard Dean or Markos Moulitsas can say, “Will no one rid me of this troublesome centrist?” and someone will take the hint and purge the party of Mark Warner. (OK, not Warner - Kos is a fan of his. Which kinda illustrates the level of support in the lefty blogsphere for such a purge.) The blogsphere can organize, it can raise some cash, it can raise awareness of a candidate. But the bulk of the money, and practically all the votes, has to come from non-bloggers. If what’s being said in the blogs doesn’t resonate with a good many other Dems who are in a position to vote for the blogsphere’s candidate, then what’s being said there won’t have any effect. Even if Kos, Atrios, Jane Hamsher, John Aravosis, and a bunch of other opinion leaders in the ‘fever swamp’ decided Sen. Ben Nelson had to go - which they wouldn’t - it would accomplish nothing if the voters of Nebraska thought they were full of it. There ain’t no purge; there ain’t gonna be no purge. Nobody of note even _wants_ such a purge. We’ve gotten rid of the Democrats Who Hate Democrats caucus. Now we can go fight Republicans. Oh yeah - [Lieberman’s new campaign forgot to register its name as a domain name](http://www.connecticutforlieberman.com/). Somebody beat them to it, and it’s mildly amusing. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/171 "2006-08-09T17:44:33Z")
[From ABC:](http://abcnews.blogs.com/theworldnewser/) > [@](#): > > According to a close Lieberman adviser, the President’s political guru, Karl Rove, has reached out to the Lieberman camp with a message straight from the Oval Office: “The boss wants to help. Whatever we can do, we will do.” I wonder if Rove intends to extend this kind offer to _other_ Democrats? ---
**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 9, 2006, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/172 "2006-08-09T17:48:38Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] [From ABC:](http://abcnews.blogs.com/theworldnewser/) I wonder if Rove intends to extend this kind offer to _other_ Democrats? [/QUOTE] Message from Lieberman: _Give me just another kiss, just another kiss…_ Serioiusly, I think Bush has done more than enough to “help” Lieberman. If Liberman does decide to run, the Republicans should just stay out of the race altogether and let the two Dems slug it out. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/173 "2006-08-09T17:52:00Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Will someone answer this question for me, because it seems to be something that everyone is ignoring in this story: **Why did Bill Clinton so actively campaign for JL?** Surely he didn’t do so because he supports the war. Could it just be that he thinks the party is in danger of moving too far to the left…? [/QUOTE] I dare say it’s to cover Hillary’s butt. If a hawkish Dem Senator can’t win renomination in a true blue state, it bodes ill for a hawkish Dem to be nominated to the national ticket. ---
**Author:** ![Airblairxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Airblairxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airblairxxx)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/174 "2006-08-09T18:12:35Z")
[QUOTE=me, in post #164] If Lieberman in the next few months starts taking a more active role against the Bush administration’s Iraq policy– **and pulls Karl Rove’s hand out of his ass** –then I frankly almost wouldn’t mind his re-election. It gives credibility to the notion that Bush has mismanaged the War on Terror so poorly he’s lost even his most ardent supporters, as well as any shred of bipartisanship. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=ABC News] According to a close Lieberman adviser, the President’s political guru, Karl Rove, has reached out to the Lieberman camp with a message straight from the Oval Office: “The boss wants to help. Whatever we can do, we will do.” [/QUOTE] Well, there’s one question answered. 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. Kneecap it before Labor Day, any wavering support will avoid Lieberman like the plague and Lamont should be able to cruise to victory. [QUOTE=John Mace] Will someone answer this question for me, because it seems to be something that everyone is ignoring in this story: Why did Bill Clinton so actively campaign for JL? Surely he didn’t do so because he supports the war. Could it just be that he thinks the party is in danger of moving too far to the left…? [/QUOTE] Bill Clinton made a few campaign appearances, maybe just one; I can’t find out right now how many, but it was my impression that while he did pop up at the end it is a stretch to say that he was “actively campaigning” for Lieberman. As to why, keep in mind that Clinton and Lieberman both represent the DLC faction of the Democratic party, and this primary could be seen as a referendum on the DLC. Maybe he does think the party is in danger of moving too far leftward; maybe he’s concerned about the political environment for his wife’s 2008 presidential bid; or maybe Joe called in a marker, we don’t know. ---
**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 9, 2006, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/175 "2006-08-09T18:18:32Z")
[QUOTE=Airblairxxx] Bill Clinton made a few campaign appearances, maybe just one; I can’t find out right now how many, but it was my impression that while he did pop up at the end it is a stretch to say that he was “actively campaigning” for Lieberman. [/quote] Point taken, although who else is he campaigning for these days? Also, it wasn’t just Clinton, remember. Lieberman had a lot of other Big-name Dems behind him, and Max Cleland aslo made at least one trip up to CT to get out the JL vote. > [@](#): > > As to why, keep in mind that Clinton and Lieberman both represent the DLC faction of the Democratic party, and this primary could be seen as a referendum on the DLC. Maybe he does think the party is in danger of moving too far leftward; maybe he’s concerned about the political environment for his wife’s 2008 presidential bid; or maybe Joe called in a marker, we don’t know. Of course we don’t know, but the DLC hypothesis is probably the best one. It would be wise for use to watch the next moves Clinton makes as we march towards November. Not just what he does wrt JL, but if he starts taking a more active role in other campaigns. ---
**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 9, 2006, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/176 "2006-08-09T18:21:59Z")
[QUOTE=Airblairxxx] Bill Clinton made a few campaign appearances, maybe just one; I can’t find out right now how many, but it was my impression that while he did pop up at the end it is a stretch to say that he was “actively campaigning” for Lieberman. [/QUOTE] I agree - calling Clinton’s efforts re: Lieberman “actively campaigning” is vastly misstating what actually happened. I also thought it telling that in the one speech Clinton did make for Lieberman, he pointedly brought up the “pink elephant” in the room, and didn’t offer any sort of defense of Lieberman’s support of the war. Listening to the audio clip of Clinton at the time, I wondered if he were sneakily working against Lieberman by bringing it up. I also had to wonder about “pink elephant.” Probably just a slip from the usually sharp Clinton. But pink elephants used to be associated with drunks, and such a colorful slip-up helped to make sure that people would attend to the comment. ---
**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 9, 2006, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/177 "2006-08-09T18:45:01Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] I keep hearing people say that, but where’s the supporting evidence? Maybe we have different definitions of “pretty often”. I don’t consider 10% of the time to be “pretty often”. Let’s see something more than the mere assertion. [/quote] It’s not about a percentage. If he opposes the president on small issues, but supports the president on major issues, that’s what matters. And as I understand it, he’s supported school vouchers, the president’s social security modification proposal, the war, the Schiavo case. And as I understand it, these are the issues that he made the most noise about. If you think that he’s otherwise been an effective champion for traditional Democratic principles, can you point out some specifics? Can you link me to an article in which he’s not in campaign mode and is criticizing the Administration on specific issues from a Democratic perspective? Can you point me toward the bills he sponsored that were from a Democratic perspective? Seriously, I’d like to see these things. The impression I’ve gotten is that he spent his political capital on showing his conservative credentials, and now that strategy has paid up. > [@](#): > > Will someone answer this question for me, because it seems to be something that everyone is ignoring in this story: **Why did Bill Clinton so actively campaign for JL?** Surely he didn’t do so because he supports the war. Could it just be that he thinks the party is in danger of moving too far to the left…? Post 162, which you quoted from, contains some other possible answers: > [@me](#): > > And I think there are other explanations for Clinton’s support of Lieberman than his belief that Lieberman-style democrats are essential to the party. Lieberman has a fair amount of pull; maybe Clinton believes that his support for JL would later translate into JL’s support for a HRC presidency. Or maybe he owes JL a favor. Clinton is all about the politics; he may be doing this for areason other than the health of the overall party. He may even be doing this because he supports incumbents, given that incumbents have a better chance of winning. We can’t know, and so to conclude that he’s doing it to keep the party from losing the general election is quite a reach. Daniel ---
**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 9, 2006, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/178 "2006-08-09T18:53:41Z")
[QUOTE=Left Hand of Dorkness] It’s not about a percentage. If he opposes the president on small issues, but supports the president on major issues, that’s what matters. And as I understand it, he’s supported school vouchers, the president’s social security modification proposal, the war, the Schiavo case. And as I understand it, these are the issues that he made the most noise about. If you think that he’s otherwise been an effective champion for traditional Democratic principles, can you point out some specifics? Can you link me to an article in which he’s not in campaign mode and is criticizing the Administration on specific issues from a Democratic perspective? Can you point me toward the bills he sponsored that were from a Democratic perspective? Seriously, I’d like to see these things. The impression I’ve gotten is that he spent his political capital on showing his conservative credentials, and now that strategy has paid up. [/quote] I think a reasonable response would also have to provide some idea as to why, if Lieberman were such a solid Democrat, he’s garnered the support of Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Ann Coulter, and a host of other clearly partisan Republicans. Pointing at a 90% voting record, as has been repeatedly pointed out, fails to acknowledge that there are many ways to subvert the interests of Democrats other than the final votes one casts. How many other Democrats chastized Democrats by saying that we undermine the president’s credibility at our own peril. The voting record also doesn’t illustrate subtle things like being the first or only Democrat out of the seat to applaud the president at the state of the union. Voting for Alito before voting against him doesn’t make a Democratic voter happy, it just looks squirrelly. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/179 "2006-08-09T19:05:00Z")
Not sure if this has been put in yet, but thought I’d put in this [Time](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1224692,00.html) article into the pot. It gives some insight into how the Republican’s are viewing all this. > [@](#): > > Why the Republicans Are Loving the Lieberman Loss > At a time when the GOP should be back on its heels, Connecticut voters’ rejection of a centrist Senator gives the party a potentially powerful new weapon to use against the Democrats this fall > [@](#): > > From Washington State to Missouri to Pennsylvaina, Democratic candidates found themselves on the defensive Wednesday as the Republican Party worked ferociously at every level to try to use the primary defeat of Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut to portray the oppposition as the party of weakness and isolation on national security and liberal leanings on domestic policy. Doleful Democrats bemoaned the irony: At a time when Republicans should be back on their heels because of chaos abroad and President Bush’s unpopularity, the Democrats’ rejection of a sensible, moralistic centrist has handed the GOP a weapon that could have vast ramifications for both the midterm elections of '06 and the big dance of '08. > [@](#): > > Some senior Democrats hoped Lieberman would bow out to avoid underscoring party divisions. But Dan Gerstein, a strategic communications consultant who is a senior adviser to Lieberman, tells TIME that the independent campaign — formally called “Connecticut for Lieberman” — is “full steam ahead” and that the Senator’s remarks on election night were “a point-of-no-return speech.” Lieberman was doing a series of interviews, mostly with Connecticut reporters, and plans some campaign stops on Thursday with Democrats who supported him and will continue to do so. Organizers shied away from calling it a kick-off tour, instead saying it is a new phase of the campaign. “He’s committed,” Gerstein said. “He feels liberated and he feels very strongly it’s the right thing to do.” Gerstein said the Senator is prepared to have some tough conversations with senior Democrats, perhaps even former President Bill Clinton, who may pressure him to withdraw. “He feels there’s something much larger at stake,” Gerstein said. > [@](#): > > Gleeful Republicans across the country mocked their opponents as isolationist “Defeat-ocrats,” and even some Democratic officials said they can already imagine the ads in November races saying that Lieberman, once within a few hundred votes of being Vice President of the United States, is now “not liberal enough” for the Democratic Party. Republican officials, who have had little but bad news for months as Iraq festered and U.S. voters showed increasing signs of pessimism and discontent, said the Ned Lamont victory gave them a chance to paint Democrats as a party that had become captive to the liberal wing symbolized by the [MoveOn.org](http://MoveOn.org) civic action group. Mary Matalin, an outside adviser to the White House, signaled the message when she said on Fox News Channel shortly after the polls closed: “MoveOn is not fringe. They’re the heart of the party.” > [@](#): > > Trying to look on the bright side, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued a statement this morning pointing to strong turnout in the primaries and declaring that Democratic voters “are energized.” The challenge for Dean, and his party, is to channel that energy in a direction that makes victory more likely, not less. Personally I feel the Republicans are both full of shit and out of touch on this one…but I thought I’d put this in just to give their perspective. -XT ---
**Author:** ![spazattak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@spazattak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spazattak)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2006, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541/180 "2006-08-09T19:16:10Z")
I think they’re in for a big suprise. All they seem to know is ‘attack’. This isn’t some orchestration by a left wing mob - its the will of the connecticut voters. Instead of using this as a chance to look in the mirror with respect to their and lieberman’s positions, they’re mocking the choice of voters. I don’t think directing “They don’t get it” at voters is going to fly. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/if-lieberman-loses-on-tuesday/367541.md?page=10)