I thought he came off really well in the debate last night: charismatic, confident, well-informed. Why isn’t he more popular? Is the fact that he’s Jewish hurting him a lot? Anything I should know about him?
I didn’t see the debate, but I’ve heard his views are too much on the right for most democractic voters.
He’s (percieved as) way too conservative. He drags religion into politics, more than the norm, and is notorious for bashing the media for explicit material.
So, on the pro side, if he won the primary, center-to-conservative voters might switch to him from Bush. On the con side, why the hell would the Dems want to elect someone who would be indistinguishable from Bush, but for the Judaism? If he took the primary, look for the center-to-left to stay home or vote 3rd party out of apathy fopr both candidates. Bush’s conservative clout is stronger, so the right will mainly stay in his corner.
Democratic primary voiters aren’t extreme leftists (see the continuing fall of Dean and the utter disinterest in Kucinich), but they by and large want someone slightly to the left of Bush.
As Jon Stewart said, “Joe Lieberman—he’s for people who like Bush, but feel he’s just not Jewish enough.”
I wouldn’t vote for him because:
• There is no way a Jew will win, so I’d be throwing my vote away
• He’s too right-wing
• I am sick of hearing how he and God are best pals
He doesn’t look very good on TV;)
He looks too much like Emperor Palpatine 
He, along with Lynne Cheney wanted to blacklist academics who they felt were not patriotic enough.
That alone is reason enough to not want him to lead this country. Land of the Free.
I’ve never found Lieberman an exciting guy myself. But the answer is that he is VERY conservative, and that’s not what most Democrats are looking for. I don’t think the Judaism hurts him, really. I think it helps him because it keeps him from being a stereotypical religious Christian.
I always think of that Harry Truman quote when I see/hear Lieberman: “Give the people a choice between a Republican and a Republican, they’ll choose a Republican every time”
He’s an awful choice in so many ways it’s more reasonable to ask why does he have any popularity. I think it lies with people who want another conservative candidate back-up in case Bush somehow manages to blow the election for himself.
I have the impression that he’s the opposite Democrat from myself: fiscally liberal and socially conservative.
The socially conservative part is the real killer. I don’t actually know that he’s fiscally liberal, but I would hope so, otherwise why be a Democrat?
Lieberman was never anyone’s choice for President, in my opinion.
I believe he was chosen by the Democrats to be Gore’s running mate for two reasons:
-
He was a Conservative Democrat, and would balance out Gore’s more leftist leanings (such as they are), continuing the shift to the center that had brought the Democrats such success with Clinton.
-
He was Jewish, and might solidify support in areas with a high Jewish population, locking up electoral votes in places such as… Florida. And we all know how THAT turned out.
The Dems know, deep in their hearts, that the whole 2000 fiasco might never have occurred if there had been a stronger ticket, and Lieberman is partly to blame for its resulting weakness.
On top of that, he’s completely out of touch with the fact that the Dems now realize that abandoning the left has hurt them, and he’s out in the cold.
In addition, he comes across as mealy-mouthed wuss, whatever his actual views may be. His sheepish smile and half-muffled whine of a voice leave one with the impression that he is about to excuse himself and leave the room out of sheer embarassment.
Some good charm school lessons might get him to the point where Dems (or anyone) could stand to listen to what he had to say, at which point they would realize that his views are not what they want.
Ever since the nominating process changed from party regulars to primaries selecting a candidate, moderates of either party have had a difficult time. We have no middle party and a moderate must have some special circumstance, issue or trait to be selected. Lieberman doesn’t have that.
Lieberman was smart enough and experienced enough to know he needed something special. I have no idea why he had that blind spot.
He was chosen to be Gore’s running mate because his criticism of President Clinton would serve to distance the ticket from Clinton’s morals.
And, unfortunately, Clinton’s popularity.
I still think the biggest mistake the Gore campaign committed, given that there were a heck of a lot of Democrats who would have gladly voted for Clinton again if it were allowed, was distancing himself from Clinton. If Gore hadn’t gotten all puss-mouthed and schoolmarmish about the President in 2000, we might not have had to put up with Fearless Misleader for the last four years.
Well, I think he is a bit more than just socially conservative in that he is also affiliated with the Democratic Leadership Council (like Clinton) which was pretty much designed to be pro-corporate / business enough to attract corporate money.
But, he is sort of a mix on these things…For example, a big difference from Bush is that he is way better on the environment.
Actually, he is a mix on the “socially conservative” part too…e.g., he is pro-choice I believe.
Still, all in all, he’s too conservative for me and I do worry about the question of why voters would vote for Republican in Democratic clothing when they can have the real thing. [That said, I do think a Lieberman Presidency would be way, way, way, way, way, way, way, way better than what we are suffering through now.]
Three years. Sorry. It just feels like so much longer…
Absolutely.
I think Lieberman was intended to counter the bad Clinton stuff while Gore would keep the good stuff, but Gore was too frightened of the bad stuff and tried to distance the ticket further.
I completely agree with you, because I totally disagree with you.
I am fiscally liberal and socially conservative. In the past, I’ve almost always voted Republican, except for our latest gubenatorial race. I voted for both Bushes, but I’m really not looking forward to voting for W. again.
I’d vote for Lieberman in a second – and probably will, in the primaries. He impressed me during the 2000 VP debate and I might have even voted for the Gore/Lieberman ticket if it had been Lieberman/Gore instead.
Unfortunately, he’s too conservative to get the Democratic nomination – he’s like the Democratic version of John McCain, who was too liberal to get the GOP nomination.
So much for the BIG JEWISH CONSIPIRACY that supposedly controls our media. If it wasn’t for the debates – where they have to show him – I would not know Lieberman was running for president.
Second, so much for the US being Israel’s lap dog.
Do I expect those that believe these things to let little things like actual facts dent their tinfoil hat worlds. NO WAY, JOSE!
He’s in a rtaher awkward poltical postion, too conservtive for Demcratic voters and too Democratic for conservative voters.
The feeling I get (though as this is mainly gathered from reading bulletin boards, feel free to question it), is that he has reasonable level of popularity among conservative and traditionally Republican voters (mixing religion and politics certainly would not be issue for them), however this people are likely to vote only for the Republican party, and with GWB offering everything that Lieberman offers to conservtaive voters plus more, JL isn’t going to convert this popularity into votes.
For more liberal and traditionally Democratic voters Lieberman is too conservative and gets a mixed reaction and again does not offer as much to traditionally Democratic voters as other Democratic candidates.
Perhaps the fact that Lieberman is not a serious candidate for the next President shows that American politics is polarized.