It looks like Joe Lieberman could lose his Senate seat after 18 years of comfortable re-election.

His endless support for Bush's policies, right-leaning views and general shitbag-ness have led to a gentleman named Ned Lamont gaining huge ground over the last few months and who now stands in a dead heat with Lieberman in the primary election (set for Aug 8th).

Interestingly, Lieberman has said that if he does not win the primary, he will run for the Senate as an independent, effectively ignoring the democratic party's wishes. That's a dick move, because it will greatly fragment the votes and drastically reduce the chances of Lamont to win the seat in November. An honest move for him would be to run as a goddamn republican, since that's where his policies would be most suited.

The liberal blogs (especially Daily Kos) have been instrumental in Lamont's gaining popularity. It's gonna be an interesting week, and an interesting primary. It may give a taste of what's to come in November.

stewie wrote:Interestingly, Lieberman has said that if he does not win the primary, he will run for the Senate as an independent... because it will greatly fragment the votes...

He's pretty much blackmailing the Dems. What a POS.

This whole thing has really let Lieberman show us how much of a dick he is - beyond just the stuff we knew about.

If you're a Democrat, be a Democrat. Primaries are part of the process. If you lose the primary, it means the Democrats have rejected you. Shut the fuck up, take your ball and bat, and go home.

Having said all that, I'm almost afraid of Lamont winning. I'd rather have a DINO like Lieberman than give a Republican a decent shot at the seat.

Interesting, indeed.

The fact that McCain would probably pick Leiberman as his running mate in 2008 is even more interesting.

Linus Van Pelt wrote:Having said all that, I'm almost afraid of Lamont winning. I'd rather have a DINO like Lieberman than give a Republican a decent shot at the seat.

Is there even a chance of that happening? I thought Connecticut was pretty much solid blue.

Yale is there.

DrAwkward wrote:

Linus Van Pelt wrote:Having said all that, I'm almost afraid of Lamont winning. I'd rather have a DINO like Lieberman than give a Republican a decent shot at the seat.

Is there even a chance of that happening? I thought Connecticut was pretty much solid blue.

Polls suggest there is a chance of it going to a repub. Polls also suggest that Lieberman could still win as an Independent. Know why? Because Repubs would vote for him.

polls


EDIT: tell your friends in CT to vote in the primary on AUG 8

I posted in another thread a couple of weeks ago asking if anyone watched the debate. Nobody responded, so am I the only one that saw it?

Basically the debate consisted of Lamont saying things about Bush Bush Bush, he with Bush, me no like Bush, we need change, change no Bush, Bush Bush no Bush he Bush lover man we need no more blah blah....

To which Lieberman repeatedly responded "CHECK MY FUCKING VOTING RECORD".

So I did. It wouldn't hurt for ya'll to check it yourselves.

He's as much of a Democrat as the others, just differing on the war. Taxes, abortion, civil rights, etc. Pure Democrat. This is an Iraq war issue, not a DINO issue.

And besides, would it kill that much to have a Democrat that didn't vote party line on everything?? I mean, jeez, it would be nice if politicians could be reasonable and think for themselves (and their constituents) sometimes.

sheesh, its like the war is the most important issue or something!

djanes1 wrote:sheesh, its like the war is the most important issue or something!

I'm not sure if this is in response to what I wrote or not.

But are opinions on the war in Iraq the only thing that differentiates Democrats from Republicans?

That's what this thread is talking about. But that was a very nice Bill Maher style sarcasm there.




edited 'cuz I'm not sure what's going on here!