http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/05/politics/main1774454.shtml
Yeah, that is Hillary, but she is the one working now. 
hard to see Bill doing otherwise. As the Daily Kos reports, Clinton has already cut a check for Lamont.
I’m not sure why you think that was significant-- it’s almost exaclty the way the primary vote came out.
It needn’t be a disaster, but it sure is going to be interesting to watch. What does Hillary do? What does Bill do? What do the other power brokers who backed JL do? If there is indeed a fight for control of the party, as a lot of people think there is, then they may try and close ranks by supporting Lieberman. If they don’t, then they may be next. Hillary is safe for re-election in NY, but if she has any presidential aspirations at all she either has to catch the new wave, or nip it in the bud. The question is, does Hillary think she even can catch this new wave? Her poll numbers on places like DailyKos are abysmal. If she thinks she can’t then she faces two choices: give up those aspirations, or go down fighting.
And remember, Lamant still will have to define himself a lot better than he has so far when he campaings in the general election. If the war is the primary issue, how will his getting into the Senate make any difference in terms of how soon the troops are brought home? Do the folks of CT want to trade in a very senior Senator for a junior Senator who goes to the end of the line when it comes to committee asignments, etc? There are lots of potential twists and turns in the road still.
The Republicans have plenty to worry about even without the JL issue. Sure, it would certainly be better for them if he had won, but they’re in a heap of trouble no matter what. The war is unpopular and getting more so by the month.
Interesting days ahead! I think we’ll learn a lot more about the behind-the-scenes manuevoring in the Democratic party over the next few days and weeks than we learned leading up to this primary.
Now that he’s officially a loser, I think Lieberman is going to lose some of that bigwig backing. It will change public perception of him, and he’ll probably get some behind-the-scenes calls asking him not to run. If nothing else, the party will want to make sure the seat stays with a Democrat and doesn’t get lost because of a split vote. (I know that isn’t likely.) I think that will probably kill his effectiveness even if he does run in November.
Later polls showed he began to close to gap on the last days. I was actually expecting (with reluctance, but I’m pragmatic) that Lieberman was going to make the comeback, and then like Daily Kos, give him my support in November. Alas, too late.
Well, I have my sources… 
Hillary was already on record on where her support is going.
Like I said, I do picture Lieberman chances as being good, provided he shows more in the open attacking Republican plans.
Interesting indeed! I think it is Joe who will find sooner rather than later how that behind-the-scenes is going to be, he is walking on a mine field.
Well, if I were a Republican, I’d still be me. So…I’d check em out and see. If I just knee jerk voted the party line I wouldn’t be me anymore…so the question wouldn’t be relevant.
Or something. I think I managed to confuse myself there…
-XT
I agree with John that the July 20 poll is as good an approximation of pre-primary public opinion as you’re likely to get. Sure, they did two polls after that where Lamont’s margin went up, then back down again, but the July 20 poll had Lamont winning the primary 51-47, which was as close as you can get to how it played out.
So I figure the 51-27-9 three-way numbers from that poll (and that’s the last poll that polled a 3-way race) are a pretty good indication of how people felt, pre-primary.
I said then that the actual winning of the primary by Lamont would change the equation substantially, and I still think that. I expect Lieberman to still have a lead in the next Q-poll, but I bet it’s a lot closer to 10 points than 24; I’d be really surprised if it was 15 or more.
Apparently Lamont’s victory party was in a ballroom right next door to the hotel’s swimming pool. What I’m wondering is, did anyone get tossed in the pool during the victory celebrations?
No doubt the spread will narrow. I don’t know when the next poll will be, so the exact number is going to depend on what we learn between now and then-- how many big name Dems withdraw or don’t withdraw their support and whether Lieberman actually announces what he’s going to do.
I didn’d know about Hillary’s earlier commitment, but remember that only puts her in my #2 scenario for sure. Someone mentioned Ed Koch above, but I don’t know how much that helps. He’s known for what-- still supporting the war! It’s tough enough for a Republican who supports the war these days.
Well, re-winning friends among democrats doesn’t appear to be on Lieberman’s to do list:
Depends on which Democrats you’re talking about. I don’t think many people will disagree that WJC was the most successful Democratic politician in the last few decades. He went all out to support JL. Maybe times have changed, and Clinton is a dinosaur. Do you want to bet the party on that?
Now, the Democratic party can survive without JL. Maybe it’ll even be a better party. But if this is a trend (ejecting the moderates), then it won’t be a good.
Yup, he’s going to show how true-blue a Democrat he is by running against the Democratic Party.
As Aravosis said, it’s funny how Lieberman’s desire for finding common ground and making nice only applies to Republicans.
Whether or not Lamont beats Lieberman this fall, the important thing was to delegitimize Lieberman as a Democrat. The primary has done that - the Democratic party voters of his state showed up in droves to show him the door. (Turnout: over 283,000. I’m hearing that was ~43%, pretty damned impressive for a primary at this time of year.) Now Loserman can slander Dems all he wants, but he doesn’t represent our party when he says it. And that’s big. He may be a drag on the country, but so’s practically the entire GOP. But he’s no longer a drag on the Dems as they try to confront what the GOP does; they don’t have to worry about keeping Joe on board when they try to take a unified stand on an issue.
And it’s goodbye, Joe, I know you hate to go
but I had to make sure you were the last to know
Can’t tear me down no more, I’ve evened the score with you.
One could argue that the trend would be bucking senators who aren’t being effective representatives. Lieberman was representing a liberal state, maybe he should have taken that into consideration while in office, instead of just pushing his own personal views. Maybe that’s the lesson here instead? Represent your electors?
Given the indications that the problem was not “hacking” but rather his choice of a web hosting package more suitable for sharing pictures of your cat with both of the people who care than for running a major political campaign, has he formally backed off on this?
John Kerry realllly could’ve used you on his campaign staff, friend.
I like how they’re talking about Lieberman in the past tense, and how Lamont’s win is a good sign. As did Rahm Emmanuel:
Lieberman’s gonna wake up and realize he’s basically all alone out there; ‘his’ party’s not even kinda sorta with him anymore. Clinton and all the other big guns could support him up through yesterday, but not anymore.
Hopefully Dodd can talk him off the ledge of his ‘Lieberman for Lieberman’ campaign. I think it’s gonna be tough for him to get the support of CT moderates when only Republicans and lobbyists (all the people who gave him $1.3 million in contributions of >= $1000 in the last 2 weeks of the primary campaign) are supporting his campaign.
Not according to their site. They’ve got nothing to lose by pressing on with that ridiculousness. They already lost the primary, and even if the investigation turns up nothing they can hope to create the perception in people’s minds that something nefarious happened.
While it’s flattering of you to imply that libertarians (with or without the uppercase) are the only people who actually vote intelligently, I’m must beg to disagree. :dubious:
Oops, left out the link about those contributions.
He filed formal complaints with the Chief State’s Attorney’s office, the U.S. Attorney’s office, and the Attorney General’s office. I haven’t read that he’s withdrawn those complaints or asked that the matter be dropped.
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. 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.
Great Jehosophat. Does he still have enough pull to avoid the usual consequences of filing frivolous criminal complaints?