So, is Lieberman really gonna do it?

[BobLibDem]

@BrainGlutton

Do you really believe Lieberman would rather be DefSec than a very senior senator? Or that he would be willing to do something that would completely burn his bridges WRT to ever again being accepted as a “Democrat”?

Being a senior Senator may not mean a lot when the chamber is going to be nearly evenly split. The next congressional term may be a do-little congress because of what I think will be a nearly perfect split.

It’s hard to say if JoeMo would do it. I think that both sides, Lieberman and the CT Dems, feel betrayed by each other and Joe may already have stopped feeling like a Dem. If his A#1 priority is the Iraq war, then he might well be in the wrong party.

@Marley23

44 percent for Lieberman, 42 percent for Lamont, 3.5 percent for margin of error, and 3 percent for Schlesinger.

That’s pretty bad when you can’t beat the margin of error. Schlesinger’s support could be at -0.5%. They may have to bus people in to vote for him just to get back to zero!

[John_Mace]

@BobLibDem

That’s pretty bad when you can’t beat the margin of error. Schlesinger’s support could be at -0.5%. They may have to bus people in to vote for him just to get back to zero!

It’s not quite as bad as it looks for Joe (but it’s still not good). Lamont’s numbers haven’t risen (they went from 41 to 42%). What appears to have changed is that many Lieberman supporters are now in the “undecided” column (that went from 2% to 11%). Assuming, of course, that it’s kosher to compare the Qunnipiac poll with this one. Joe’s problem will be that he has to win these “undecides” back-- no easy task, I’m sure. And he won’t have the Democratic big guns in there campaigning for him like he did in the primary-- that’s gonna hurt him big time.

Does anyone know when the next Quinnipiac poll comes out? I would have thought they’d do one each week, but maybe we won’t see one until after Labor Day.

[RTFirefly]

@John Mace

Or too smart. What do they gain by doing that, other than a great big “attaboy” from their hardcore base.

They make the point that, once the party has chosen its nominee, you don’t get to go outside the party, form your own party, and run against the Democratic nominee, and still get to consider yourself part of the club.

They make the point that participation in the process means something - that the Insiders’ Club isn’t going to overrule or circumvent what the Dem voters have decided.

Seems like Connecticut isn’t the only place this is happening: in an Alabama primary, the Dem hierarchy was willing to write a check on behalf of the second-place finisher in a primary to challenge the outcome.

I can understand this if we’re talking about a David Duke-level nominee, but the party’s position should be: aside from that sort of extreme situation, once we fight it out in the primary, we unite behind the winner, and that’s that.

The real question here is, does the Democratic Party want activists, or not? Does it want people involved at the grassroots level who are passionate about what the party stands for, or would it rather be a party run by a small clique of D.C. insiders, conducting their campaigns by television?

Condoning the behavior of Lieberman in Connecticut, and that of Joe Reed in Alabama, essentially says to Dem voters that their votes are wanted, but other than that, they should keep their participation, enthusiasm, and opinions to themselves. That’s not the way to build a movement - or to force it to exist outside your party, rather than within it.

I think it’s a good thing when people are enthusiastic about one’s party, and a bad thing when they’re not. The netroots are enthusiastic, and while that seems to turn off the pundits and many party insiders, there’s no evidence that it has the same effect on many actual voters.

The Democratic Party can tell its most enthusiastic boosters that they’re wanted, or they can tell them to drop dead. Sure, the pundits and the GOP will have the usual talking points if they appeal to their actual supporters. But so what? The GOP right now is like a guy pushing over and over again on a broken button, hoping it’ll work this time. Gay marriage! Terror! Fever swamp!

Nah, no sense worrying about them. Time to go do the right thing, because it’s the right thing.

[John_Mace]

It’s still stupid. If Lieberman runs and wins, and the Dems lock him out of their caucus, it’s the Dems that lose. He knows it, so it would be an empty threat.

[RTFirefly]

@John Mace

Does anyone know when the next Quinnipiac poll comes out? I would have thought they’d do one each week, but maybe we won’t see one until after Labor Day.

It’s hard to say. They only did the once-a-week thing for the last 3 weeks before the primary; before that, they had done polls in June, May, February, and January, then none since July 2005.

It’s still stupid. If Lieberman runs and wins, and the Dems lock him out of their caucus, it’s the Dems that lose. He knows it, so it would be an empty threat.

There’d be nothing empty about it if they did so as soon as they got back from the current recess.

Think Lieberman’s got much chance if the Dems disown him? Me either.

[RTFirefly]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Indeed. Already the Republicans are trying to portray this whole thing as an example of how beholden the Dems are to extremists. This is unfair, but it’s their strategy. The best Democratic response, IMO, is to ignore it as the silliness that it is. If they expel Lieberman, it’ll serve no material purpose except to make their enemies cackle with glee as they put together new talking points.

Daniel

I disagree. What I assume is that the Bushies, the GOP, and the right-wing pundits and talk jocks will say outrageous and absurd things about the Dems, no matter what they do, so there’s no use choosing a course simply to avoid those brickbats. We’re talking about a group that was able to turn war heroes like Kerry and Cleland into supposed Osama-symps.

The only refuge in such an environment is to define yourself strongly before the other side does it for you. Do the right thing, the thing you believe in. Be prepared to defend it intelligently if needed, but take a stand and stick with it.

[John_Mace]

@RTFirefly

It’s hard to say. They only did the once-a-week thing for the last 3 weeks before the primary; before that, they had done polls in June, May, February, and January, then none since July 2005.

Well, things will start heating up after Labor Day, so those will be the polls that really matter.

There’d be nothing empty about it if they did so as soon as they got back from the current recess.

Think Lieberman’s got much chance if the Dems disown him? Me either.

They’ve already disowned him by endorsing Lamont. Saying they’ll lock him out of the caucus just sounds vindictive, and it just might generate sympathy votes. People get a little teed off when some outsiders try to force them to vote for someone they may not want to vote for.

[RTFirefly]

@John Mace

They’ve already disowned him by endorsing Lamont.

If they’ve disowned him but still consider him to be a full member of the caucus, you must have a very different definition of ‘disowning’ than I do. If Jeb and GWB had both been ready to run for President the same year, would GHWB have been disowning GWB if he’d said Jeb was the one who should run, while Shrub should step aside for now? Not hardly.

Saying they’ll lock him out of the caucus just sounds vindictive, and it just might generate sympathy votes.

Not that many pundits live in Connecticut. I wouldn’t worry about it.

People get a little teed off when some outsiders try to force them to vote for someone they may not want to vote for.

And people also get teed off when insiders try to make their votes not count.

[RTFirefly]

From the Lamont website:

Where’s Joe2006.com? Well, it’s still only a shell of itself, once again pointing to incompetence as the cause of the “hack.”

But there’s even more interesting information on that front. It seems major Democratic technology groups are turning down Senator Liberman’s (Lieberman-CT) offers to provide technology support in his go-it-alone re-election campaign.

First was Blue State Digital. When approached by the Lieberman campaign, their response was “Thank you for your inquiry about Blue State Digital’s technology services. Unfortunately, we cannot be of service to the Lieberman campaign. We work exclusively with Democratic candidates.”

Sweet.

[John_Mace]

@RTFirefly

If they’ve disowned him but still consider him to be a full member of the caucus, you must have a very different definition of ‘disowning’ than I do.

Well, my definition doesn’t include cutting off my nose despite my face. The Democrats have nothing to lost by allowing JL to caucus with them, and a lot to lose by disallowing him to do so. You call it “chickenshit”, I call it “smart”. I guess we’re going to have to agree to disagree on that. (Except that they’re doing what I suggest, not what you suggest, so there!)

[RTFirefly]

@John Mace

Well, my definition doesn’t include cutting off my nose despite my face. The Democrats have nothing to lost by allowing JL to caucus with them, and a lot to lose by disallowing him to do so. You call it “chickenshit”, I call it “smart”. I guess we’re going to have to agree to disagree on that. (Except that they’re doing what I suggest, not what you suggest, so there!)

I think it’s more like that trapped climber a couple years back who cut off his own hand when it was doing him more harm than good.

But you’re right - we’ll have to agree to disagree.

[Squink]

@John Mace

(Except that they’re doing what I suggest, not what you suggest, so there!)

They don’t need to do anything til the fat lady sings in november. I expect that what they do will depend on whether they’ll be up one seat with Lieberman or up by ten seats.

[John_Mace]

@Squink

They don’t need to do anything til the fat lady sings in november. I expect that what they do will depend on whether they’ll be up one seat with Lieberman or up by ten seats.

Wanna place a little wager on what they’ll do if Lieberman wins? And they aren’t going to be up 10 seats-- that’s laughable.

[rjung]

@BrainGlutton

Do you really believe Lieberman would rather be DefSec than a very senior senator? Or that he would be willing to do something that would completely burn his bridges WRT to ever again being accepted as a “Democrat”?

At this point in the game, I think the only thing Joe Lieberman cares about is Joe Lieberman.

[duffer]

@rjung

At this point in the game, I think the only thing Joe Lieberman cares about is Joe Lieberman.

I’ve skimmed the thread very quickly to try to get caught up, so if it was covered, apologies to all.

Would JL be willing to pull a “Hillary” and just move to a different state to get elected? It’s probably not likely a 30-day (or whatever the minimun required) residency in North Dakota would protect him from “outsider” staus, but a state that consistantly elects Dem Sens and Reps and GOP presidents, he may have a very strong shot at getting elected up here. He’s a longtime Dem that appears to vote the way farmers like, and he’s at core a rather centrist candidate. Seemingly more conservative than Conrad or Dorgan. I would go so far as to say he’d have a better chance of getting elected than any of the GOP candidates up here for the past few decades.

That’s just ND I was thinking of. There must be other parts of the country he’d be a strong candidate in.

Of course, not being accepted by the NDP would be a weakness, but to voters, a campaign of past highlights carries weight. So would he be electable anywhere else?

[Squink]

@John Mace

Wanna place a little wager…

Nah, I’m not a betting man. Besides, what the dems end up doing will depend on not only their margin of control in the senate, but on how badly Lieberman pisses off his collegues during the race. As far as I’m concerned, that later factor is too random to allow a prediction.

[Marley23]

@duffer

Would JL be willing to pull a “Hillary” and just move to a different state to get elected?

Running as an independent may be selfish, but I don’t think he’d abandon all dignity and move to another state just to stay in the Senate. I doubt it would work anyway. If Hillary had moved in August of 2000 with a race already going on, I don’t know what would have happened.

[RTFirefly]

@duffer

Would JL be willing to pull a “Hillary” and just move to a different state to get elected?

Hell, he’s completely out of touch with his own state, and is drawing crowds well into the dozens sometimes at campaign events. Why would voters in any other state want him? Lieberman’s “base” is the pundits and the big donors. If he can’t get re-elected in CT, where he at least has the benefit that voters are in the habit of voting for him, he can’t make it anywhere.

[Squink]

@RTFirefly

Why would voters in any other state want him?

He could always shift his residency to Texas, and run as a republican write-in for Tom DeLay’s spot. The Lieberman name might raise enough interest to keep that seat in republican hands.

[RTFirefly]

@John Mace

And they aren’t going to be up 10 seats-- that’s laughable.

True dat. It would take a tremendous political tidal wave just to put them up 53-47: they’d have to win CT ;), PA, RI, MT, OH, MO, VA, TN, and NV to pull that off, and that’s all the Senate races where they have remotely realistic pickup opportunities. After those, you get to AZ, where the Dem candidate has been 12-20 points behind for months and isn’t going anywhere, and after that, the remaining GOP-held seats are Hatch (UT), Hutchison (TX), Lott (MS), Lugar (IN), Snow (ME), and Craig (WY), none of whom even has a serious challenger.

Getting to 51 or 52 would be amazing; 53 would take absolutely enormous amounts of finite Improbability; 54 would be infinitely improbable, and 55 is just plain impossible.

What I expect is for the Dems to wind up with 48-49 Senate seats, including Bernie Sanders of course. Maybe even 50, which doesn’t really win them anything special since Cheney’s still the tiebreaker. Their chances are much better in the House, where the number of GOP seats in play is much larger than the 15 the Dems need. Which is why I keep harping about the effect of a Lieberman ground game on those three GOP-held but vulnerable House seats in CT.