Don't let the door hit ya, Joe.
Lieberman Defiant In Defeat
12:25 AM EDT, August 9, 2006
By MARK PAZNIOKAS, The Hartford Courant
With the nation watching, Connecticut Democrats thronged to the polls in unexpectedly high numbers Tuesday to reject Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman and endorse his anti-war challenger, Ned Lamont.
Unofficial results showed Lamont winning 52 percent of the vote, defeating a three-term incumbent who had come to be defined by his defense of the war in Iraq despite an advertising blitz begging voters to judge him on a progressive labor and environmental record.
Lieberman, 64, a vice presidential nominee in 2000 and a presidential hopeful only two years ago, conceded at 11:03 p.m. in a Hartford ballroom packed with national and international press, then defiantly announced he would press on as a petitioning candidate, forcing a three-way race in November.
"As I see it, in this campaign we just finished the first half and the Lamont team is ahead. But in the second half our team, Team Connecticut, is going to surge forward to victory in November," Lieberman said. Then he shouted, "Will you join me?"
NO!
"Team Connecticut?" What the fuck is that, Joe? Was your primary campaign run by Team Nevada? Might as well've been, since State Connecticut just told you to get bent in no uncertain terms.
If Lieberman had graciously agreed to respect the will of Connecticut Democrats, I wouldn't have another harsh thing to say about him, but he's insisting on running as an independant, and for that he deserves a Box O' Scorn to go with this...
What a tool.
He also deserves to lose the support of Bill (and Hil) Clinton, Schumer and everyone else. Kos thinks Harry Reid should yank his Committee chairs. I don't disagree.
The one thing I want to make clear is this: Lieberman deserved this for many reasons, and, for me, it was not all about the Iraq War and Lamont being anti-war. It was about Lieberman's support for Bush on a whole host of issues besides the War—Alito, Social Security, PATRIOT Act and others...
Say hello to the, hopefully, next Senator from the state of my ancestry, Connecticut.
8 comments:
I was just lamenting the fact that Joe Schwarz lost his primary against a hard-conservative right wing Christian fundamentalist. Total bummer.
Yeah. I don't know a lot about Schwartz, but it seems he was one of the not-so-bad guys. Hopefully the Democrat, Sharon Renier, will have an easier time running against a non-incumbent who is more extreme. But I doubt it.
Funny how no one is making a big deal about the fringes of the Republican Party purging moderate candidates ala Lieberman...
I know I'm gonna catch shit for saying it . . . but I'm glad Walberg beat Schwartz for the same reasons I'm glad Lamont beat Lieberman: the entrenched incumbent lost to the outsider. You know Bush supported Schwartz, right?
I agree, Furious, with two non-incumbents running, here's hoping the non-rightwinger wins.
I'm also glad Johnson beat McKinney. And in that district, winningt he primary means you're going to DC.
All well said about Lieberman.
I can't help but wonder, though, with all the buzz about Lieberman if Lamont isn't feeling a little strange and chagrined today. He won the primary in fine style, yet Lieberman is getting nearly all the attention.
Yup. Yesterday's headlines all ran along the lines of, "Prominant Democrats Pledge Support for Lieberman's Opponent"
No respect for Lamont...
Mike, I will say this about Schwartz: He was a one-term Representative, so he was hardly "entrenched." Also, in Battle Creek/southwestern Michigan, a Republican is going to walk away with that seat. Schwartz was a rare Republican that was pro-choice and voted against gay discrimination legislation. Since the R's will hold the seat, I would have prefered Schwartz to the Dobsonite who won.
Interesting to note, however, both Bush and McCain supported and campained for Schwartz and he lost anyway.
Great point about Lamont getting no media love, SWA. Hadn't occurred to me yet.
Yesterday, a hard-right O'reilly-loving guy I know got so worked up over Lieberman losing that he wrote Joe a letter, plus $30 to get his independent campaign going.
Seems conservatives thought he was bipartisan because he said the same thing about demicrats that they did.
As for Walberg and the christian right, I have a feeling (mostly unsupported by any evidence) the momentum of their pendulum swing is fading. Look at ol' Kansas, where the moderate republicans are finally clawing back after more than a decade of Taliban-like conservative dominance.
Also in Kansas, several politicians have jumped from the Republican to Democratic party. They have an extremely popular Dem governor, and I think some backlash couple with coattail riding explains it...
Post a Comment