TPMDC
Lieberman Says He'll Stump For Republicans in 2010
Evan McMorris-Santoro | October 30, 2009, 9:42AM
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT)
Share
Send to a friend!
Last year, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) broke with his former colleagues in the Democratic party to stump for Republican candidates all across the country, including John McCain. Yesterday, Lieberman said he's planning a repeat performance on the congressional campaign trail in 2010.
Lieberman, from an interview with ABC News:
"I probably will support some Republican candidates for Congress or Senate in the election in 2010. I'm going to call them as I see them."
In addition to McCain, Lieberman hit the trail in 2008 for Republicans Sen. Susan Collins (ME) and Rep. Peter King (NY).
Both are moderates that like Lieberman have been known to support Democratic programs against the wishes of their friends in the GOP. And Collins, like Lieberman, has said she supports sweeping health care reform and also said she is ready to help block any bill that includes a public option.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
PollTracker
Most Popular
- Sarah Palin Goes Rogue With Bill O'Reilly
- Fear Factor: The Four Ways Republicans Say Obama Will Kill You Now
- All About the 60
- 2008 Dukes Winners
- Busting Rhymes In The Name Of Tea Parties
- Stewart Takes Down KSM Trial Fearmongerers
- Is Chuck Schumer Taking Temperature On Carper's Public Option Compromise?
- 'President Or Jihad?' Billboard Replaces Birther Sign In CO
- Senate Switchboards On Fire As Health Care Calls Flood Zone
- Tomorrow's Health Care Vote: A Cheat Sheet
- Fear Factor: The Four Ways Republicans Say Obama Will Kill You Now
- "Government is the problem."
- What a mess!
- Obama, NFL Players Star In Thanksgiving Day PSA
- With Reid's Support Wyden And Baucus To Cosponsor 'Free Choice' Amendment
- Obama's Approval Goes Below 50% In Gallup Poll
- Sarah Palin Goes Rogue With Bill O'Reilly
- Stewart Takes Down KSM Trial Fearmongerers
- Busting Rhymes In The Name Of Tea Parties
- Landrieu, Nelson Win Goodies As Reid Seeks Their Vote On Reform
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
mans_best_friend
October 30, 2009 10:01 AM
I think it's only appropriate for the Democratic caucus in the next Congress to also call it as it sees it. You got a second chance, Joe. Don't push your luck.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
October 30, 2009 10:30 AM in reply to mans_best_friend
Lieberschmuck's just proving the adage that no good deed goes unpunished.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
October 30, 2009 10:41 AM in reply to Moose49
It's as if he's just daring the Democratic caucus to take action. He thinks he's fireproof. Someone needs to sit down with him and assure him he's not.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SharonWraight
October 30, 2009 10:55 AM in reply to mans_best_friend
Won't Democrats be better off if Lieberman is kicked out of the Party and loses his Chairmanship(s), and either becomes a Republican or remains Independent? I don't mean that in the sense of spite, or revente, or anger, or some party-loyalty litmus test (though there's those, too). I mean it as a rational political calculation: if Lieberman joins the Republicans, at the very worst he will shift the center-of-gravity in their party toward a more liberal stance. (He's bad, but his voting record is better than the average Republican -- which isn't saying much.) He'll still be trying to play off his swing vote, but this time it'll be within the Republican Party. Perhaps that will open up more space for other Republicans (Hagel, Snowe, etc.) to vote across party lines. It will help build discipline and cohesion among real Democrats.
Enough bending over for Joe. Time for him to bend, and take if if that's what he wants.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
October 30, 2009 11:06 AM in reply to SharonWraight
It's the old adage: Would you rather have him inside the tent pissing out or outside pissing in? The problem is that he's inside and pissing in. If you take everything away you have no leverage on him, which is probably why the caucus let him keep his committee chair. But leverage doesn't do any good if you don't use it.
Remember, though, that any use of leverage is going to be done in private, so don't assume that because you don't see it it's not happening. But the continued provocative behavior suggests that whatever they're saying to him isn't getting through. Time to bring out the 2x4.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
October 30, 2009 11:09 AM in reply to SharonWraight
The best outcome is Lieberschmuck has a "come to Jesus moment" (sorry, poor metaphor, I know) and votes with the Democratic caucus for cloture. But if he doesn't, yes, it would be best to kick him out. What's the point of having a 60-vote "filibuster proof" margin if it's not actually filibuster proof?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mjshep
October 30, 2009 1:29 PM in reply to Moose49
The only reason Obama and Reid let Joe keep his seniority and his chairmanship is to have some leverage over him at moments like this.
If Joe doesn't vote for cloture that reason will be gone. He knows it.
After this, if he campaigns for R's again, we'll see what happens, especially if the the Dems either lose or gain a Senate seat. If they get 61 Joe won't matter, and if they only have 59 then he doesn't really matter either. It's his being the 60th vote that gives him all this power, and that won't last for ever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Kenneth Thomas
October 30, 2009 5:07 PM in reply to Moose49
I don't think Reid can count on Lieberman to come to Jesus. He should just go for reconciliation and kick Lieberman out of the caucus. Working for Republicans in 2010 is beyond ridiculous.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
taikan
October 30, 2009 1:56 PM in reply to SharonWraight
FYI, Chuck Hagel is no longer in the Senate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Frex
October 30, 2009 4:26 PM in reply to SharonWraight
If the party decides to stick to Lieberman, the time to do it is now, or after the Repugs have made their committee assignments in 2011. If they wait till the caucus after the 2010 election but before the Congress starts then he can negotiate a decent assignment with the Repugs and walk across the aisle. Since he may do that anyway, I favor the Dems sending him to the back bench now. There's no reason to think he'll be loyal and without that fealty 60 members of the caucus doesn't matter.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tosh
October 30, 2009 1:19 PM in reply to mans_best_friend
This will only happen if they get to 60 *without* Lieberman.
They actually looked like they had a rather strong chance to do that back in late 2008, early 2009. There were many retiring GOP'ers, and more that looked at risk than Dems.
That doesn't look to be the case now. I think the Admin looked too far forward to 2012 rather than agressively looking to set up 2010 to be a slam dunk. That they would be facing a Party of No in opposition was obvious to most of us, but the Obama Admin was oblvious to it and obsessed with "reaching across the aisle" to govern rather that argue effectively that the 2006 and 2008 elections were a clear mandate against GOP Policies. Swift, bold...
Not what they did. And now a year away from the mid-terms, they are likely to get dragged down by the economy. The ConservaDems and even more the Blue Dogs are putting themselves at risk by not supporting agressive attacking of it. Which in turn will give us more Party of No action in 2011-2012, but a harder time of overcoming their filibuster (unless the Dems grow some gonads and change the rules at the start of the 2011 Congress). They may think this will lead to a wave in 2012, but the "oppotunities" for pick ups in 2012 probably won't be as strong as they looked in 2010.
I'll never know what benefit the Administration got from removing these people from the mix:
CO: Sen Ken Salazar (incumbent)
IA: Tom Vilsack to challenge Chuck Grassley
KA: Kathleen Sebelius to run for Brownback's open seat
AZ: Janet Napolitano to challenge John McCain
My guess was that Vilsack and Napolitano were done in the hopes of Grassley and McCain playing nice with the Admin. Clear the field of their potential challengers and they'll be nice to us. If that was in fact their thinking, they were delusional. Granted, Sebelius was a patch for someone else they wanted in the role who blew up. But I really don't know what she brings to the table that is of greater value than grabbing that open Senate seat.
It's possible that Napolitano will run for Kyl's seat in 2012. For Sebelius , she'll be sitting out until 2014 when Roberts's seat will be up, and he'll be 78. Perhaps that's the one she wants, but it's a waste of a chance at an open seat in 2010.
Vilsack is out untl 2016 when this seat comes due again. And Colorado is now in play, whereas it didn't look like it would be in play if Salazar had it.
Really frustrating.
John
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
El Puerco
October 30, 2009 1:37 PM in reply to tosh
You nailed it. You just forgot to add that by taking Hilary out of the NY Senate seat, we now have to fight for that seat as well. Gillibrand will probably win, given the Democratic lean of NY, but with Hilary there, we would not have had to think about it twice.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
October 30, 2009 3:11 PM in reply to El Puerco
Yeah, I wondered at the time, too, why he was taking so many Democrats out of the Senate. Tosh's reasoning makes more sense of it than anything else I have seen since January 20th.
Lost opportunities, indeed. Well--nobody can ever say that Obama didn't try to make nice with the rats in the GOP. I just hope enough people open their eyes to the fact that the Repubicans are not dealing in good faith, and that they have put partisan interests over the interests of the country as a whole. Not that they haven't been doing that all along, but it didn't keep them from presenting themselves as the superpatriot party last August.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
October 30, 2009 10:03 AM
Somebody should remind Joementum that no matter how much he kisses up to the Repubes, he's still WAAAAAY too liberal for them to accept him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
holyhandgrenaid
October 30, 2009 10:05 AM in reply to Matt Jones
None of the centrist Dems get that. Paging Ben Nelson and Evan Bayh!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tonigo
October 30, 2009 10:41 AM in reply to Matt Jones
No, he's a perfect Republican candidate for the northeast. I bet he switches party affiliations in 2012 and runs as the Republican candidate for the CT Senate race.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
loria
October 30, 2009 11:39 AM in reply to tonigo
Hopefully the people of CT will remember well how he did what was best for him and ignored them. Considering the Public Option is highly supported there it is clear Lieberman isn't representing the people of VT when it comes to healthcare reform.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KarenJG
October 30, 2009 12:28 PM in reply to loria
Well, there's a reason he called his party "Connecticut for Lieberman" and not "Lieberman for Connecticut." All of the state's citizen's support is supposed to flow "up" to him, not from him "down" to them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Reform MD
October 30, 2009 1:31 PM in reply to loria
As a CT Democrat who thankfully did not vote for the turncoat, I can tell you that many of my fellow Democrats DID vote for him, because they thought he could be more effective in the Senate. Now every one of them rues their decision!
The only problem is that we are stuck with him for another 4 years and people like Dodd and Larson (the Chief of Democratic Caucus and a CT House member) seem to keep supporting him, even when he says some outrageous lies (like the Public Option will raise taxes).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Decider
October 30, 2009 10:06 AM
Joe the Lieberman is my favorite democrat Senator. I could just kiss him!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
October 30, 2009 10:07 AM
At this point, you have to assume Lieberman has decided not to run again in 2012. He'll probably leave the Senate and get a gazillion dollar job on the board of one of the insurance companies in Ct to whom he has sold his soul. There's really no other rational explanation.
I also don't think it's necessary to wait for the next Congress. Joe can spend his time as the ranking member of Homeland Security, and spend his days talking to Tom Coburn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lousgirl84
October 30, 2009 10:15 AM in reply to George C
I don't think we can assume that at all. This guy has a huge ego. I hope the dems make him suffer the consequences of his actions. This guy has real Chutzpah
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
October 30, 2009 10:22 AM in reply to lousgirl84
He hopes that cuddling up to the Republicans will allow him to win as an independent with Republican votes the same way he did last time. What I don't understand is why he should be given the advantages of being a Democratic caucus member at the same time he is stabbing us in the back.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Decider
October 30, 2009 10:50 AM in reply to AJM
Cause democrats are wusses, that's why.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
October 30, 2009 1:45 PM in reply to The Decider
I'm afraid that you are correct. (P.S: you did look fetching in your flightsuit!)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
October 30, 2009 10:45 AM in reply to George C
Applying a rational actor model to Lieberman is always a mistake. The man has a personality disorder. The cycle he's in now is sickeningly familiar.
1. Lieberman's stabs Democrats in the back at the precise moment when his support is most needed. Invariably doing so is not in his political interest and he his stated reasons for doing so make no sense, are either obviously false statements or illogical. Only discernable reason for stab is huge amount of attention he gets.
2. Democrats are furious. Party rank and file demand consequences. Colleagues suggest (in public or private) liklihood of consequences.
3. Lieberman responds to threat of consequences by escalating provacative behavior. Speaks of supporting Republicans in elections, disparages leaders of his own party, hints of possibility of crossing the aisle. Gets even more attention from MSM.
4. Democrats' fury boils over.
5. Lieberman escalates provacation still further by doing thing most damaging to party that it is within his power to do at that time.
6. Lieberman suffers no consequences/is rewarded by Democrats for bad behavior.
It's step 6 that keeps the cycle going.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
October 30, 2009 11:15 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Makes him sound like Kim Jong-Il. Has he got nukes, too?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mans_best_friend
October 30, 2009 11:17 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I wouldn't say it's not rational. He's puffing up his own importance by being difficult. He thinks they can't do without his 60th vote and his continued provocative behavior is just advertising that. Every new incident without a response just pushes the boundary that much farther.
What he needs is for someone to call his bluff. The caucus needs to call him on the carpet and make explicitly clear that if he continues they will strip him of his chairmanship. Then they have to follow through. He can stay in the caucus if he behaves, but if he continues after that, he's out altogether. He's fundamentally a coward, so I expect he'll behave himself after that. It's not as if McConnell has anything to offer him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
loria
October 30, 2009 11:49 AM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I doubt the cycle will continue if he votes against cloture. I would imagine they didn't punish him last winter because they wanted to do all they could to keep him on their side during these important votes. Once they know he can't be trusted, he will no longer have any bargaining power.
BTW, if Lieberman were from a red state that didn't support healthcare reform, I wouldn't have as much of a problem with his vote. At least he could say he was representing the people of his state. But, it is clear the people of CT want hcr, and he is just ignoring them. Hopefully, they are on the phone letting him know that they elected him to represent their interests, not his own.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
October 30, 2009 1:41 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Right. That's why I think the best way to do it is to do it quietly. I notice that Harkin and Conrad made a very quiet statement the other day, not naming names, just noting that the Dem caucus takes loyalty into account when making committee assignments. The more public the threats and recriminations, the more it gives Joe the opportunity to show how he's standing up to the caucus on principle.
Just let him know quietly the ball's in his court, and then take the action when he makes his vote.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
o224hsday
October 30, 2009 12:48 PM in reply to George C
Sorry, but he is raising $$ already for 2012. I can not see him running as a D, if anything he would be an R or not run. 64% of CT wants a Public Option. Joe just listens to Joe (and his phama ind. lobbist wife).
Lieberman's Identity Crisis Continues
Connecticut's independent senator's unsure what party he'll run for in 2012
By JOE PIRANEO and LEANNE GENDREAU
Updated 11:15 AM EDT, Tue, Sep 22, 2009
The senator told Politico that he might run as a Democrat, or an independent, then again --“Or a Republican,” Lieberman added, jokingly. “I have all sorts of options.”....
Whatever party he runs for, Lieberman has made it clear he's in it by raising cash. As of June 30, he had $1.4 million, Politico reports....SNIP
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mateo123
October 30, 2009 10:14 AM
Bounce. Bounce. Bounce.
Once health care reform passes, that's it for this guy. Send him packing. Take away his chairmanship. Take away his attitude. Make him completely irrelevant.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
soupson52
October 30, 2009 11:07 AM in reply to Mateo123
Why wait?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
October 30, 2009 1:43 PM in reply to soupson52
Well they cannot until after the 2010 elections, and the new Congress is seated. Expect it then. And this will be leading up to his 2012 re-election campaign (assuming he runs). It's gonna be hell for him to be re-elected, no matter what party he will claim as his own, when he has no clout, no chairmanships.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
KingElvis
October 30, 2009 10:20 AM
Funny. If NY23 is any indication, the GOP base is moving to the right of Newt Gingrich - so that means moderate GOP is the place to be for Joe?
Good luck with that Judas. Have a fine time with the GOP moderates.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dorn76
October 30, 2009 10:20 AM
What good can Joe Lieberman do for a GOP candidate?
Sure they're happy when he fucks up the Dems' plans, but they don't like or trust the guy any more than we do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kalimuzo
October 30, 2009 10:21 AM
Which republicans is he talking about? Does he think the candidates in the south want anything to do with him? He is just vying for attention at this point. He does not really have a good track record of supporting winning candidates, he went out for republicans last year and they got crushed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Obama1st
October 30, 2009 10:21 AM
One again Joe LIEberman puts in the face of the dems in the Senate. I hope they realize he makes all of them look weak and unable to drive the agenda of the democratic party platform. To do nothing about his betrayals continue the meme that they are weak! kick him to the gutter of shame!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Ragin
October 30, 2009 10:48 AM in reply to Obama1st
I'm sure Harry Reid will get right on that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rbe1
October 30, 2009 10:21 AM
Do you think we could agree to not have any further discussions about this Whiny little piece of dogshit ?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
topeka
October 30, 2009 10:26 AM
It seems clear by now that Joe Lieberman's mission in life is to be sure that Obama does not succeed -- so that he can justify his support for McCain. And if he helps some insurance companies along the way, so much the better. (At least Rush Limbaugh is open about it.)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
soupson52
October 30, 2009 11:10 AM in reply to topeka
Rush honest, you say? What's his advantage for telling the truth?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rich in NJ
October 30, 2009 10:27 AM
The man who was called the conscience of the Senate during the shameful impeachment of Bill Clinton now has no conscience.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
synchronicity
October 30, 2009 10:27 AM
If he tries to prevent health care reform, kick him out of the caucus completely. He's already demonstrated where his loyalties lie. He says he's going to call them as he sees them. In truth once he is left to caucus with republicans, he will appear a much more loyal republican voter in the senate.
If there is no other way than reconiliation, then Reid and Durbin need to hear from all of us. Reid is asking for our help because he will need our support to be encouraged to move a bill to the reconciliation process if he feels he can't move it forward through regular procedure.
I have written to them that it would be better to pass a robust public option through reconciliation, risking what might get removed, than to go through an ugly fight over this weak bill that may never get an up or down vote.
Now is the time to put the pressure on as they are asking us to!
Here is Senator Durbin's poll, open to all Americans, asking what type of public option we want:
http://ga3.org/dickdurbin/po_poll.html?member_key=esiuu3599j3e56wk&source=popoll
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RhodaA
October 30, 2009 10:42 AM
I posted this yesterday to another article, but I'm posting again becaused I'm convinced it would work if somebody could implement it.
The Best Way to Deal With Lieberman:
Since he's impervious to political pressure, the best way to counter him is to get him where he's most sensitive. If progressive Jewish organizations were to get involved, the job would be done. Here is the letter I faxed to Lieberman.
______________________________________
Senator Joseph Lieberman
Fax: (202) 224-9750
You will be remembered as an embarrassment to the Jewish People and a betrayer of American Democracy.
”Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?” – Army head counsel Joseph Welch to Senator Joseph McCarthy, 1954 Senate hearing
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JAY LAPIDUS
October 30, 2009 10:57 AM
The Republicans in the Congress for whom he campaigned the last time were in safe seats. If he sticks to relatively moderate Republicans in safe seats in 2010, then I wouldn't get too upset.
But if does anything more, like pulling another McCain act, then Joe's gotta go from his chairmanship.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
henk
October 30, 2009 11:12 AM
He's believing the wing-nut hype about the Republicans taking control in 2010. He's betting on it. Democrats will look like fools if they don't call him out. I wouldn't bet on that happening though.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
soupson52
October 30, 2009 11:14 AM
I am curious why Connecticutt isn't recalling him. I can't believe they don't feel betrayed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
VictorLH
October 30, 2009 11:47 AM in reply to soupson52
We can't recall any elected official in CT. The credo here is: "Buyer Beware"!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
October 30, 2009 11:19 AM
He's pushing buttons. I think he wants to be given reason to vote against cloture. All of his excuses have been debunked, so he's looking to be threatened or reprimanded so he can make a big stand saying "I was threatened with the stripping of my chairmanship if I voted against cloture and I cannot stand for that..." or "The Democratic Party is trying to tell me what I can and cannot think or do...".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AdAbsurdum
October 30, 2009 4:07 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
This is consistent with his patently false criticisms of the legislation. He is grasping for any excuse whatsoever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
VictorLH
October 30, 2009 11:22 AM
Go ahead Joe and campaign for the Republicans - all those you did so for last time did so well.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Andreams
October 30, 2009 11:22 AM
If we push him across the aisle, we won't have to hear all about how dems can pass anything all by themselves. We can't pass anything that really matters so use him for the only worth he has. He belongs with the rest of the garbage.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JAY LAPIDUS
October 30, 2009 11:26 AM
You've got to catch the opening of The Colbert Report from Wednesday, 10/28 about Joe Lieberman!
http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=253942
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sbv
October 30, 2009 11:27 AM
i am making a statement loud and clear; to the white house, to the governors assoc., to the dncc: do not expect me to give one red cent as long as joe lieberman keeps his committee chairmanship and is allowed to caucus with the democrats!
I VOTE!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TheRealFish
October 30, 2009 1:38 PM in reply to sbv
That's Right. Let's make sure that, to punish the "weak" Dem leadership (which was dealt a weak sort of "strong" hand in the Senate through the mandate elections), we ensure the control of the Senate falls right back into the hands of the anti-democractic (intentional small "d") Neos. That'll show 'em.
Quite a conundrum, ain't it?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnmccsf
October 30, 2009 11:36 AM
Who cares who he stumps for just so she isn't a Democrat
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texar
October 30, 2009 11:37 AM
Kick that republiCON piece of shit to the curb, and send Harry Reid to keep him company.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
hologram5
October 30, 2009 11:49 AM
Ah, the old coot'll be dying off soon anyways. Let'em die off and then we can get some new blood in office that'll listen when we threaten to vote them out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
October 30, 2009 11:53 AM
He purposefully is irking the Dems, pushing buttons- especially the progressives.He is hardly as relevant as we think, but he enjoys the fact we make him relevant.
While I'm not a fan of Reid, I agree with him as of now. LIEb is too much of diversion right now. They can, and should, settle scores once we pass HC.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Juble
October 30, 2009 12:49 PM
HaHaHaha!This is so funny.I think Lieberman realizes the Dems have no backbone & thus the flip off.This shows what poor leadership on the Dems particularly Obama.Folks this is not the first time since Obama has been the POTUS that those he brushed up against b..tch-slapped the Dem leadership.Try remembering what Grassley did after Obama was out touting Grassley as reasonable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TheRealFish
October 30, 2009 2:04 PM in reply to Juble
Hey, Jubie: There's sort of a trendline going here. The 06 elections aimed at rubbing out the anti-republic, anti-constitution Neo garbage from choking freedoms out of our country.
The results of that election were felt, but didn't go quite far enough. So the effort to eliminate the ememies of the country from power escalated a bit more in 08.
The results of that election are being felt (we WILL end up with some form of HCR, for example) but it's just not quite good enough yet. There are still too many anti-democracy pro-corporate-overlord types in there now.
When anger over those sticking thumbs in the eye of the majority of the electorate settles just a bit, I predict the new-found resolve will settle in again. The sweeping losses for Democrats of 2010 may not actually happen as predicted. The opposite may just happen. It needs to.
See, that's the thing with threatening the majority with promises of maybe bringing the ammunition the next time the fringe minority folks rally. Some of us take that seriously, realizing it's an actual physical threat, and an actual promise to commit anti-government revolt. Actual sedition. And there are those of us who will do everything we can to motivate and organize that majority to remove the last remnants of anti-American zealots from any position of power. NEVER again.
Those are the trends to watch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Winston Smith
October 30, 2009 1:13 PM
Who does Joe Lie think actually cares about what he thinks? Fuck you, Joe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
falafelboy
October 30, 2009 1:30 PM
Lieberman is done and he knows it. his only chance is to run as a Republican. if the republicans field a strong enough candidate, Joe runs as an Independent (The Joe for Joe party), then the Democratic candidate walks away with it. I wish Blumenthal would run. He would clean his clock.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
NH Bob
October 30, 2009 2:17 PM
Joe, "the rat!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John Crandell
October 30, 2009 3:08 PM
Well, let's just say it this way: even the ebola virus is too good for him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calgarr
October 30, 2009 3:13 PM
I can't get a grip on what his strategy is here. Does he believe that any publicity is good publicity, because it generates name recognition? Is he just an attention whore? If so, what good does that do him, in political terms? Is he courting republican votes so he can run on their platform? Would that work? Is he just trying to leverage as much influence as he can by keeping his loyalties up in the air? If so, how long will that work? It seems like, no matter what his strategy is, he's counting on everyone forgiving/forgetting what he's doing now when it comes time to vote later. Will that work? I want to say 'no', but people have surprised me before...
Thoughts?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?