I think we elect people who will represent what WE want them to do, not what THEY want. If I recall correctly, Sen. Joe lost in the Dem. race and switched to Ind. to keep his seat. The fact that he was re-elected seems to indicate he represents someone. Personally, he’s fallen in my esteem but him being a moderate is OK, could use some more of them.
But your evidence did not support that point.
Why?
I think fixating on a letter or two following his name is missing the point. If this were a General Question posted in search of a factual answer, I’d post the dictionary definition of Democrat:
Oops. Let’s try that again:
Then, if I could present evidence that Lieberman was registered as a member of the party, we’d have our factual answer. But it wouldn’t be very interesting. Nor would it be much of a debate. But the question was posted in Great Debates, wasn’t it? So maybe a simplistic, cut-and-dried answer wasn’t what was called for. Maybe it’s a question of political philosophy, whether his aligns more closely with the Democratic or Republican party, or somewhere in between, or an amalgam of the two, or something else. If only we had some statement of Lieberman’s political philosophy… oh, wait, here’s something:
I agree. That 60 vote thing is vastly overrated. How cloture votes go is going to depend on the issue involved and Lieberman in particular isn’t going to feel compelled to vote with the Dems whether or not he caucuses with them. If I was Reid, I’d tell Joementum to go suck eggs and join the elephant parade.
If the Dems want to make nicey-nice with Joe, I have no problem with that. But he should definitely be booted from his Homeland Security chairmanship, particularly after his refusal to investigate Katrina.
I personally think Lieberman is a douche-bag.
Even after being rejected by Democratic voters in the CT primary he ran as an independent and then traded his caucusing status to retain his personal power via committee privileges.
I wouldn’t say he’s a DINO in all his views, such as labour-market policy, etc., but his heavily neo-conservative views on national security and foreign policy issues are basically anathema to the modern Democratic Party. A long time ago he found a political niche for himself by being a pet Democrat on Fox News, and with the GOP generally, where he would aggrandise himself and attack the party with grossly inflammatory rhetoric. It’s one thing to have deeply held views you’re passionate about, but Lieberman continually crossed the line on that score - going far beyond constructive criticism to outright demagogy.
What is most galling is that Obama actually came and campaigned for him in his primary battle with Lamont, and Reid continually defends his retention of committee privileges, yet he still openly supports the McCain ticket and baits the party as having lost its way.
I doubt CT will elect the bastard again and it will be good riddance. The party doesn’t need or want Democrats like him. Blue Dogs are one thing, and a big tent is desirable, but Lieberman is something else entirely.
I’d like to see a cite for that. According to some measures, such as vote view, the last two Senate and House configurations have had a perfect ordering, with the most conservative Democrat more liberal than the most liberal Republican.
http://www.voteview.com/hou109.htm
http://www.voteview.com/sen109.htm
http://www.voteview.com/hou110.htm
http://www.voteview.com/sen110.htm
The new make-up is going to be even stark, with many moderate Republicans leaving or being beaten by Democrats - leaving the reactionary conservative rump behind.
Actually, it did. The assertion was that “if Lieberman were a Democrat, then there would have been a ‘(D)’ after his name.” The link was to a Google search of “Lieberman (I).” My point was that you could also do a search of “Lieberman (D)” and “Lieberman (ID)” and Lieberman would have a “(D)” or an “(ID)” after his name.
Because that’s how party affiliation works in this country. It’s not based on an examination of a person’s political philosophy. If a person chooses to put “D” after his name, then he’s a Democrat. It’s unequivocal. If he chooses, as Lieberman does, to put “ID” after his name, then he’s an “Independent Democrat.” Period.
Nah. Republicans and Democrats are so yesterday. He’s on the forefront of the new Maverick party, starring Joe Lieberman, John “Joe” McCain, Sarah “Josephina” Palin, Joe Sixpack, and Joe Plumber. The new party insignia will be a sixpack and plumbers wrench.
You can vote in the senate for whatever you want. But, when you actively campaign for repubs and speak at their convention you are no longer a dem.