# Should the Dems boot Lieberman? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 6, 2008, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433 "2008-11-06T11:27:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Kyrie\_Eleison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kyrie_eleison/32/7682_2.png) [@Kyrie\_Eleison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyrie_Eleison)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/61 "2008-11-07T20:20:33Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > He lost that bet due to his support for the Iraq War, something that (God willing) won’t be anywhere as important in four years. I think if he manages to worm his way back into the Dems good graces and plays nice for four years, he ought to be able to put the past in the past and win his primary. The practical side of me hopes you’re right, and that we can kiss and make up and keep that seat in the (D) column, but now in addition to facing lingering resentment over Iraq, he’s got to do penance for his behavior in the 2006 Senate race and the 2008 presidential race. The other, less pragmatic, side of me says Joe gotta go. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/62 "2008-11-07T20:35:58Z")
[**Lieberman tries extortion:**](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_11/015575.php) > [@](#): > > “Senator Lieberman’s preference is to stay in the caucus, but he’s going to keep all his options open,” a Lieberman aide said. “McConnell has reached out to him and at this stage his position is he wants to remain in the caucus but losing the chairmanship is unacceptable.” Either he gets his pony, or he turns Republican. It’s time to let him go. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/63 "2008-11-07T21:23:53Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > We elected a leader. So, OK…lead. Whaddaya got, Barry? Barry’s got enough on his mind. I think this is more in the domain of Harry Reid and/or Howard Dean, personally. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/64 "2008-11-07T21:33:43Z")
> [@](#): > > I agree. I’m don’t understand those who are claiming that he would have trouble winning as a Republican. He won his last election with 70% of the GOP vote with a Republican candidate in the race, and only got 33% of the Dem vote. Assuming he can get the Republican primary nod (a pretty safe bet if he switches parties sometime soon) he can count on Republican voters, independent-minded Democratic voters, confused Democratic voters, and the independents he won over last time. I think he wins as a Republican candidate, and that it’s the only way he wins. Moreover, I think he knows it too, and that it’s the explanation for his behavior during the presidential election. Connecticut is pretty heavily Democratic, though, so if you’re seeking a senate seat from Connecticut, it’s even more essential that you be able to get the support of a good chunk of the Democratic voters. Lieberman was able to do that in 2006, but I strongly doubt that he’ll be able to do it again now. ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/65 "2008-11-07T22:08:08Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > [**Lieberman tries extortion:**](http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_11/015575.php)Either he gets his pony, or he turns Republican. It’s time to let him go. See, the point is that the Republicans can’t really offer him much at all. Lieberman has fucked himself over and everyone knows it. On the one hand he has his constituency in Connecticut which would not be happy if he changed his voting patterns. On the other hand, why would the Republicans even want him, and what could they give him? Have Lieberman on their side so they can filibuster things he approves of? They can’t offer him much power right now, so to speak, so what can he do? So should he wait for 2010? What’s going to happen then? There is of course the midterm election, but the Democrats already have +6 (+7 if you count Sanders) seats. It would be a huge shift to get the Republicans in power of the Senate again. Not likely to happen. There are still three outstanding Senate seats. Tubes, Franken, and Chambliss. Chamblis will probably face a tough runoff, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the Dems got one or two more seats. The only thing he can do is join the Republicans and hope that in 2010 the Republicans can give him something worth having. But even then he’d have to worry about 2012. And finally, let’s not forget what Joementum has done. He acted as if he were campaigning for McCain based on some kind of principled apolitical choice, when in reality he figured he could be his VP or get some sweet post. So he carried water for McCain all the way attacking Obama with boilerplate Republican talking points. He had pissed off the Democrats, and wasn’t happy enough with his chairmanship, so he went all in with the Republicans. They are completely out of power now, so he’s screwed. The only thing could be is if he doesn’t want to run for re-election. The only way that will happen is if he tows the line like a good Democrat for a while. ---
**Author:** ![Kyrie\_Eleison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kyrie_eleison/32/7682_2.png) [@Kyrie\_Eleison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyrie_Eleison)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/66 "2008-11-07T23:05:26Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Connecticut is pretty heavily Democratic, though, so if you’re seeking a senate seat from Connecticut, it’s even more essential that you be able to get the support of a good chunk of the Democratic voters. In 2006, 43% of registered voters in CT were independent, 34% were Democratic, and 23% were Republican. Considering only the independent and Republican voters, if you take those that in 2006 went to the GOP candidate and give them to Lieberman, he has 48.5% of the vote before you’ve counted the vote of a single Democrat – I’m using the exit poll numbers from **RTFirefly** ’s post #20. Combine the Lieberman and Schlesinger I & R tallies from 2006, and Lieberman needs only the support of 4.5% of the Democratic voters to win. If you throw him the support of the 8% of Republican voters that went for Lamont or a fourth party in 2006, he doesn’t need a single Democratic vote to win. Of course, the landscape has changed somewhat since 2006, but nonetheless, the 2006 results demonstrate what’s possible. > [@](#): > > Lieberman was able to do that in 2006, but I strongly doubt that he’ll be able to do it again now. Which is why I think his only shot at retaining his seat is to run as a Republican. He’s got four years to make nice, but if the election were today, he would not survive a Democratic primary challenge, and he could not win as an independent without a substantial portion of Republicans, who can’t be counted on to nominate another Alan Schlesinger next time. I don’t think he can rely on the forgiveness of CT Dems, and I don’t see a more likely path to victory for him. Unless he’s planning on leaving the Senate, I predict some nice political theater as Joe reluctantly, and with a heavy heart, finds himself unable to remain a member of the Democratic Party, and for the good of America, joins the GOP. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/67 "2008-11-08T01:25:30Z")
> [@Kyrie\_Eleison](#): > > if the election were today, he would not survive a Democratic primary challenge He’s not in the Democratic party, so he wouldn’t have to. > [@](#): > > and he could not win as an independent without a substantial portion of Republicans, who can’t be counted on to nominate another Alan Schlesinger next time. I think the Republicans deliberately ignored Schlesinger because they realized they could get a moderate Democrat elected instead of a more liberal one. As I recall, even Bush wouldn’t endorse Schlesinger. They really left him swinging in the breeze. I disagree that Lieberman is extorting the Democrats. Reid apparently told him he wants him to give up his post on the Homeland Security Committee, and the best Lieberman can do is say he might not join the caucus if they took it. But if he caucused with the GOP he’d still lose that post, so… so what? I remember saying months ago that with regard to Lieberman, it’s actually easier for the Democrats to deal with him precisely because they fell short of the supermajority. If they had exactly 60 votes with him and Sandesr, they would not be able to do this. But 58 or 59 or 57 doesn’t matter, so they can tell him what they think of him if that’s their choice. I’ve also read in one or two places that the 60-vote majority isn’t as important as some people and pundits have made it out to be. It’s not like the Republicans are going to filibuster every piece of legislation coming down the pipe. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/68 "2008-11-08T01:30:44Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I remember saying months ago that with regard to Lieberman, it’s actually easier for the Democrats to deal with him precisely because they fell short of the supermajority. If they had exactly 60 votes with him and Sandesr, they would not be able to do this. But 58 or 59 or 57 doesn’t matter, so they can tell him what they think of him if that’s their choice. 60 seats isn’t impossible yet. There are still three races left undecided (AK, MN, GA), and it’s quite possible that all three could flip. > [@Marley23](#): > > I’ve also read in one or two places that the 60-vote majority isn’t as important as some people and pundits have made it out to be. It’s not like the Republicans are going to filibuster every piece of legislation coming down the pipe. Why not? They did that in the last Congress. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/69 "2008-11-08T01:43:27Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > 60 seats isn’t impossible yet. There are still three races left undecided (AK, MN, GA), and it’s quite possible that all three could flip. It’s not impossible, but they obviously aren’t counting on it. Or else they’re stalling and doing a bad job of it. > [@](#): > > Why not? They did that in the last Congress. Looking around online I guess they did do that more often than I was aware. Having gotten their asses kicked the way they did, they’ll have to think hard about doing that. ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/70 "2008-11-08T01:51:42Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > 60 seats isn’t impossible yet. There are still three races left undecided (AK, MN, GA), and it’s quite possible that all three could flip. > Why not? They did that in the last Congress. Well I think the point is that I doubt that Republicans will have the ability to remain so united like they were in 1994. The times are completely different. We just finished with eight years of a President who will likely go down as one of the worst. I’m not prone to hyperbole with Bush, and I think he’s done a lot to improve his image in the last two years, but it’s clearly different than the state the country was in the last time the Republicans lost. Secondly, the Republican takeover in 1994 came after a period of being in the woods for a long time in the House and for a good period in the Senate too. I think there’ll be plenty of Moderate Republicans to help out on important matters. The Republicans came off of a period of prosperity with Reagan and not so terrible a time with Bush I. Then unprepared “slick Willy” came along and made several mistakes. The situation now is completely different, and I don’t suggest the Republicans cross Barack Obama without good reason. I guarantee you he won’t be making the mistakes of Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Kyrie\_Eleison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kyrie_eleison/32/7682_2.png) [@Kyrie\_Eleison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyrie_Eleison)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/71 "2008-11-08T03:08:47Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > He’s not in the Democratic party, so he wouldn’t have to. While he wasn’t elected as a Democratic candidate, as far as I know, he’s still a registered Democrat. During the 2006 race, he emphasized that he planned to remain in the party, and he still makes a point of calling himself an “Independent Democrat.” Did I miss some news? > [@](#): > > I think the Republicans deliberately ignored Schlesinger because they realized they could get a moderate Democrat elected instead of a more liberal one. As I recall, even Bush wouldn’t endorse Schlesinger. They really left him swinging in the breeze. There’s some truth to that, but getting caught gambling in Connecticut casinos using a false name is what really did Schlesinger in. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/72 "2008-11-08T03:16:25Z")
> [@Kyrie\_Eleison](#): > > While he wasn’t elected as a Democratic candidate, as far as I know, he’s still a registered Democrat. During the 2006 race, he emphasized that he planned to remain in the party, and he still makes a point of calling himself an “Independent Democrat.” Did I miss some news? He doesn’t have to compete against a Democrat in any future primary because he formed his own party (Connecticut for Lieberman) and ran under its banner. While he’s still a registered Democrat, he’s not a representative of the party. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/73 "2008-11-08T03:24:09Z")
> [@](#): > > Combine the Lieberman and Schlesinger I & R tallies from 2006, and Lieberman needs only the support of 4.5% of the Democratic voters to win. Except that, party affiliation aside, those independents tend to vote Dem. So no, I don’t think that he could get the continued support of all of those indies who voted for him last time. Look at this year’s presidential vote: McCain lost Connecticut by, what, a 20% margin? Granted, that was versus a very strong candidate in Obama, but I still doubt that someone who’s chosen to ally himself so closely with McCain has a chance there. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/74 "2008-11-08T03:31:35Z")
> [@Kyrie\_Eleison](#): > > I agree. I’m don’t understand those who are claiming that he would have trouble winning as a Republican. He won his last election with 70% of the GOP vote _with a Republican candidate in the race_, and only got 33% of the Dem vote. Assuming he can get the Republican primary nod (a pretty safe bet if he switches parties sometime soon) he can count on Republican voters, independent-minded Democratic voters, confused Democratic voters, and the independents he won over last time. I think he wins as a Republican candidate, and that it’s the only way he wins. Moreover, I think he knows it too, and that it’s the explanation for his behavior during the presidential election. Considering the fact that there is no longer a single Republican congressman from New England, I think you overestimate Joementum’s chances of winning re-election as a Republican in Connecticut. ---
**Author:** ![Kyrie\_Eleison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kyrie_eleison/32/7682_2.png) [@Kyrie\_Eleison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyrie_Eleison)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2008, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/75 "2008-11-08T03:38:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > He doesn’t have to compete against a Democrat in any future primary because he formed his own party (Connecticut for Lieberman) and ran under its banner. While he’s still a registered Democrat, he’s not a representative of the party. And then he promptly lost control of the Connecticut for Lieberman Party to a faction led by John Orman, who became the chairman, and [asked Lieberman to resign](http://crooksandliars.com/2007/06/15/party-head-asks-lieberman-to-resign) his Senate seat in 2007. It looks like he’ll have to form yet another ersatz party for the 2012 race if he doesn’t want to pursue the nomination of an existing party. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2008, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/76 "2008-11-10T17:56:09Z")
I don’t think they have any choice but to, at a minimum, strip him of his chairman gavel. Otherwise, Reid might as well show up on the floor with a “KICK ME I’M A WIMP” sign on his back. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2008, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/77 "2008-11-10T18:00:45Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > What is to be gained, practically and operationally, by booting him? I know it would make a lot of people feel better, but does it actually do any good? I ask that as an honest question, as I sincerely don’t know. As noted in my earlier message, it would send the message that the Democrats actually have spines. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2008, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/78 "2008-11-10T18:08:49Z")
> [@Frostillicus](#): > > Considering the fact that there is no longer a single Republican congressman from New England, I think you overestimate Joementum’s chances of winning re-election as a Republican in Connecticut. Because Jim Jeffords retired. Anyone remember what the Republicans did to him when he decided to run as an Independent? Just think what they would have done if he had gone out and stumped for Kerry in '04. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2008, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/79 "2008-11-10T20:55:34Z")
> [@Merkwurdigliebe](#): > > Well I think the point is that I doubt that Republicans will have the ability to remain so united like they were in 1994. The times are completely different. … I think there’ll be plenty of Moderate Republicans to help out on important matters. … I’d just like to echo this and point out a major difference between the House and the Senate in this regard. The Senate _generally_ is the less overtly partisan of the bodies. For awhile now I have been pointing out that the filibuster-proof 60 is a fantasy number of no real meaning anyway. In reality a few Democratic Senators will break ranks and so will a few Republicans. Obama actually has friends there on the other side and there is very little likelihood that every Republican Senator will stay obstructionist and unreachable. Longer terms and wider districts allow them more freedom to actually vote their real thoughts some. The House is where Obama needs the muscle. It is a more partisan body and with members more beholden to narrower constituencies in much shorter time frames. Keeping it friendly in the Senate is his best strategy. It’s the house that he needs to have brass knuckle ready for, and not just to fight against Conservative Republicans but against members of his own party with narrow interest voters to report to in real time … which is why he’s taken on Rahmbo I guess. They want to do something to him but they do not want to come off as excessively severe or disproportionately retributional. He’ll lose his gavel but that’s it. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2008, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433/80 "2008-11-10T21:13:02Z")
> [@Syntropy](#): > > > [@Steve\_MB](#): > > > > As noted in my earlier message, it would send the message that the Democrats actually have spines. > > Because Jim Jeffords retired. Anyone remember what the Republicans did to him when he decided to run as an Independent? Just think what they would have done if he had gone out and stumped for Kerry in '04. Jeffords was in the Senate, not the house. There are still several NE GOP senators. And I’m not aware of the GOP doing anything to Jeffords when he switched to being independent, he left the GOP caucus of his own accord. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-the-dems-boot-lieberman/471433.md?page=5)