Tuesday, August 08, 2006

So Lieberman lost in CT.


Looks like he went down about 52 to 48.

Joe gave a speech, of course, but can someone explain what the hell this is supposed to mean:

"The old politics of partisan polarization won today. For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot, I will not let this result stand."

WTF??

You lost to a democrat, Joe. You lost to someone in your own party because the majority of your voters are not happy with your stance on Iraq, Social Security, the bankruptcy bill, etc...

Now he says that he will run as an independent.
Does that mean that he'll lose his committee seats?

10 comments:

Tom Harper said...

Good riddance. He lost partially because of his political stands, and partially because voters of both parties are tired of incumbents who have lost touch with their constituents. Too many politicians live in a world of limousines, lobbyists and VIPs. We need some new blood.

Jay said...

Way to go, Joe. Let's hope you stay gone.

Landcomm1 said...

Let's hope this is a sign of people waking up, paying attention and voting for change. We need to keep the pressure on, big-time!

Diane said...

I got a fund raising call last night from the Friends of John Kerry - I told the guy on the phone that while I had contributed to Kerry in 2004, why would I give him money now, given the piss-poor campaign he had run? The guy assured me that Kerry wasn't running for any office, but this way, he can support other candidates . . . I told the guy I could donate the money directly to candidates I support . . .

Ricardo said...

POW! What an affair it was over here Mike V. People just got sick of politics as usual so he got knocked out. Yes he has a liberal voting record but in the clutch he broke ranks when we really could have used him. It's not an obvious thing but it caught up with him. I worry that his independant run for senate will take away votes for Lamont and open the doors for that "other" party to sneak in. The madness has just begun here Mike V. I expect this to get even more intense.

RevJim said...

Bipartisan politics means congress accomplishes nothing and continues to waste taxpayers' money. Glad I'm a libertarian and can stay neutral on this. But just to observe--Lamont's type of campaign didn't fly in Ga, Mckinney lost even with the support of the New Black Panther Party, Danny Glover, Al Sharpton, Hugo Chavez, and Rev Jesse.
Lamont's win in the primary may spell death for the Democrat party in Connecticut, however, because Lieberman will get the votes from Democrats--remember 49% voted for him in the primary--Independents, and moderate republicans. I don't think a republican will win the seat, but it looks as if Leiberman will retain it. Unless, of course, there are more angry democrats in Conn than voted in the primary.

Mike V. said...

Neither McKinney's or Lieberman's losses were partisan politics.
It boiled down to people at the state level in their own party saying that they did not like who these people had become and they wanted them out. For now.
We'll see what happens with Joe.

If he runs as an independent THAT's partisan politics..

Ricardo said...

revjim, trust me, there were many, many angry dems in CT yesterday. Turnout was pretty high. I suspect that many of the moderate Dems or Republicans may follow Lieberman over to his independant run. We did elect Lowell Wiecker as govener when he ran independantly. I really think it's going to be tight. Hard core conservative politics don't really play well here and it wouldn't shock me if Republicans kind of adopt him as their unoffcial candidate since the guy they have up there now is dead weight.

A final note, World Wrestling Entertainment's main headquarters are here, I drive by it every day to work. And it's fiting because I'd say that this is shaping up to be an election day Smackdown. We just need a ring and steele cage.

This story isn't over.

Diane said...

Gore picked Lieberman - who had been very critical of Clinton - as a running mate to seperate himself from Clinton, underestimating Clinton's continuing popularity. Four years later, Lieberman's campaign for president in 2004 wasn't even supported by his former running mate. While people may support the idea of reaching across the aisle, some politicians do it better than others, and getting a kiss from the politician that personifies all that is wrong in America today, was a poor choice.

Landcomm1 said...

Well stated, diane. The vote may be close in November but I lean toward the voters having already stated their position, which will be repeated. Lieberman's been kissing Dubya's ass for entirely too long and the folks in CT are wrinkling their collective noses at the stench.