We need to stop questioning why Dem mainstreen support Joe in the primary

[LynneSin]

Everytime someone bitches about a specific democrat there is that little comment at the end saying "Yeah and so-n-so also supported Lieberman in the primary so they must be evil".

Of course they were supporting Lieberman. Joe has served in the senate for for what 2-3 terms and he knows some of those senators very well as friends. And as an incumbant you bet I would be sweating bullets and supporting my fellow incumbant too. Plus there was a strong possiblity that Joe could have won that primary (48% isn't anything to shrug over) which pretty much would have meant he was a shoo-in for the general election. (and could very well win as an independant if we don't get him to step down). Democratic senators know that if Joe Lieberman comes back and wins they they DON'T want him aligning with republicans. At least if we are stuck with Joe, the democrats have justication as to why they still need him aligning with democrats because they all supported him in the primary but as democrats they are obligated to support democrats (and most of them are)

We SHOULD however, be concerned with who the democrats are supporting NOW. Any one who endorses Lieberman, AN INDEPENDANT, should be put on notice that they are next! I'm still waiting to hear back from Tom Carper. I'm pissed when I read he might be supporting an independant Joe run and I'm putting him on notice (although unfortunately it's too late for this election cycle :cry: )

[Lasher]

1. Time to make up when the primary's over

I can understand why some would have supported Lieberman, just like I hope they understand why I didn't.

[cleveramerican]

2. next week when they begin to write....

the sore loserman editorials Joe will quietly drop his independent run.(I hope)

[monarch]

3. I hope that he will drop out

but I think that it will be the comedians and not the Democratic heavy hitters or the editorialists that will convince him. I still say that somebody should make him watch a DVD of all of the devastating comedy bits. Nobody could endure that kind of humiliation and even though Joe is completely delusional, he is very thin skinned.

[oldboy101]

4. Joe could well win in November

We progressives here at DU need to realize that we do not speak for all Democrats. There are a lot of older folks particularly who may not be computer literate and many of them like Joe much as one may like a comfortable pair of old shoes.

I only hope that we do not wind up splitting the Democratic vote between Lamont and Lieberman in the fall election, allowing the Republican Schlesinger to slip in as the next Senator from Connecticut. That would truly be a tragedy for all of us.

[Zynx]

5. Lamont's positions line up with not only most Democrats but most Americans

in general.

[monarch]

6. Joe will NOT win in November.

No way no how. His heavy hitter supporters have started to have doubts (one is particularly concerned about Joe's refusal to meet with Chris Dodd)and Joe is starting to look completely delusional. I repeat my offer to someone to do a video of him morphing into Katherine Harris. I do not see how he can stay in this race.

[cmkramer]

34. Excuse me?

It's a little snobbish and elitist to assume that anyone who would support Lieberman is ignorant and doesn't know any better.

The reason why most of the Democratic establishment supported Joe in the primaries is easy: he's been a good, effective loyal Democratic Senator and he's built good relationships with people both within and outside his party. Right now, party loyalty is kicking in, so Lamont is now getting their support.

[Major Hogwash]

7. That's not quite how I see it.

The only reason those fake Dems are switching over to feign support of Lamont now is because they thought Lamont was a joke! They thought Joe was a shoo-in.

And the reason those fake Dems supported Joe in the first place is because THEY don't want to lose their own jobs in Congress!!

If given the choice between a fake Republican and a real Republican, Republican voters will vote for the real one every time.

Democrats are the same way - we can smell a fake.

And Joe was a fake Democrat.
Just like Tom Daschle.

When Democrats don't act like Democrats, then they are no longer called Democrats - they are called DINOS!

And DINO was a dinosaur and we need to get those dinosaurs out of Congress!!

When people say there is a politically moderate stance during a war - what they are really saying is: "continue the killing, but just don't make me do it or shoot at me."

There are no fence-sitters this time around!

You're either FOR the Iraq War.
OR
You're AGAINST the Iraq War.

That's the frickin' litmus test this go-round.

To rip off James Carville -

It's the war, stupid.

[fishwax]

8. fake dems?

like barbara boxer?

If you want the iraq war as a litmus test, I can understand that. But joe lieberman's primary effort as a litmus test seems a little over the top.

They supported an incumbent, colleague, and friend in the primary process. Now that the primary is over, all that really matters is that they support the democratic nominee.

[Major Hogwash]

9. You can either stay asleep or wake up to reality.

If you think Joe's loss was NOT over the Iraq War, then you can go back to sleep.

Or else, you can tell fake Dems like Hillary to wake up.

[fishwax]

11. huh?

If you think Joe's loss was NOT over the Iraq War, then you can go back to sleep.
I said otherwise? :shrug:

I'm wide awake to reality, and the reality is that having supported lieberman in the primary doesn't make one a fake dem.

[Major Hogwash]

14. Yeah, but supporting the lie war, the Iraq War, does have implications

for all fake Dems.

Whether it is Boxer, Feinstein, or anyone else for that matter.

[fishwax]

22. boxer is a fake dem? boxer supports the war?

Hey, why let the facts interfere wtih a good rant? :shrug:

I agree with you that supporting the iraq war, and particularly continuing to support it now, will have political ramifications. But having supported Lieberman in the primary ought have none.

[Major Hogwash]

26. Is Boxer a fake Dem?

Don't you think the people will decide whether she is or isn't in California?

[fishwax]

35. one can only hope they have a better sense of true dems than you do

[Major Hogwash]

38. I'm not from California.

But they tell me it's a nice place to live.

[LynneSin]

41. The only fake dem I see is someone who doesn't know Boxer's stance on war

I mean she's been pretty clear since the beginning about how she felt. Personally anyone who knows just even an eensy-teensy bit about the democrats know that Babs is as real as they get

[Major Hogwash]

58. I know what Boxer's stance on the Iraq War was.

But, she has some explaining to do when it comes to her support for Joe last week.

She's for Joe on Monday - who is FOR the Iraq War.
I think anyone with a brain knew that.

On Tuesday there was an election.

She's for Ned on Wednesday - who is AGAINST the Iraq War.

Yeah, that's consistent, that's not hypocritical at all - in a time of war.

That's not fake at all. Sure, sure.

Let me ask you something - how's this going to play out in California?

2600 Dead American soldiers and Boxer doesn't have a problem telling who her friends are?

It was Joe on Monday.
Then it's Ned on Wednesday.

At least I don't wait until an election has passed to decide who I'm going to support!
Especially not a primary!
This was a no-brainer, as far as I'm concerned.
You don't have to worry about me though, I can't vote against Boxer - I'm not in California.

[LynneSin]

59. Oh jeez, pul-lease

I'm grateful to know that 99.9% of the folks here at DU realize that your argument is just plan stupid.

If only you put that much energy in REAL issues, not this Rovian tactice of dividing our party over dumbass issues of who supported who.

Please, don't help us with gaining our democratic majority. We can do it way better without you

[MrBenchley]

12. This is the sort of post that sums up our far left...

Former President Bill Clinton, Senator Barbara Boxer and Congressman John Lewis are not "true Democrats", but an obscure candidate with no actual track record who squeaked out a primary win is....

[Major Hogwash]

13. Bill Clinton? Who's Bill Clinton?

That just goes to show ya how far out of touch with reality you are - Lieberman imported Bubba a week before his primary and still lost.

Bubba doesn't carry much political weight anymore.
He's been out of office for 6 years now.
And he's been "pal"ing around with Bush's daddy quite a bit these last 2 years.

Ever wonder why?
Don't think that has anything to do with 2008, do ya?

Another political opportunist - Bubba.

[MrBenchley]

16. LOL...yeah, that's our far left....

"Another political opportunist - Bubba."
Yeah, heaven forbid anybody on our side actually knows how politics works. It's much more important to thump one's chest and make empty, idiotic speeches about "purity". </sarcasm>

[LoZoccolo]

18. My right-wing grandfather calls him "Bubba".

He said he'll have to shred his picture of Clinton as "Il Duce" if the "jack-booted thugs" pay a visit.

[MrBenchley]

20. Did you see the post on here the other day from the far left

that claimed "the only reason" Bill Clinton got elected was because the right wing loved him so much....It was a hoot!

[fishwax]

30. i missed that one

sounds funny though. Seriously, though, I think there are those on the far left who post some silly stuff, and there are also moderates who post silly stuff. The far left stuff, of course, is usually much more entertaining ;) But that doesn't make the silliness representative of all others who share that space on the political spectrum.

In our current conversation, for instance, one poster appears to be advancing the notion that barbara boxer--along with anyone else who supported lieberman in the primary--is a fake dem. I think that's silly. But I don't think it sums up the far left because I don't think said poster is in any genuine way more to the left than I am. :)

[MrBenchley]

31. It was hilarious

I'll take exception to your post though.

"In our current conversation, for instance, one poster appears to be advancing the notion that barbara boxer--along with anyone else who supported lieberman in the primary--is a fake dem"
A notion which crops up on here far too often to dismiss as one lone opinion...

"there are also moderates who post silly stuff"
I'd love to see an example. Certainly when you see those "I'm never giving a dime to the Democrats again" or "I'm leaving the party in a huff" or "This Democrat ought to be purged from the party" threads, they're NEVER from moderates.

[fishwax]

39. I didn't say that it was one lone opinion

or dismiss the reality that there several other posters might echo similar sentiments. I simply said that those sentiments aren't representative of the far left. When I see the occasional posts about how we ought not forgive this pol or that pol for supporting lieberman in the primary, I don't think "wow, that poster is very far to the left." I think "wow, that is not a particularly rational stance."

When evaluating one's position on the political spectrum, I find it more useful to use stances on the issues as an indicator, rather than a demonstrated lack of logic. And, again, I have no reason to believe that any of those posters are any further to the left than I am when it comes to issues.

I agree those on the left are much more likely to go on purification brigades, and offhand I'd probably agree that they are more likely to post about leaving the party, etc., though there are also plenty of posts from moderates about how "maybe I just don't belong here if I can't conservative opinion x" or "that just drives away moderates like me and that's why we don't win election" or "no wonder people don't like liberals" posts. Sometimes, of course, there is some logical underpinning to such a post, but often they are simply an intellectual retreat from lively debate. (I find this to be particularly true on threads about race and women's issues.)

Of course, one can make silly comments about things other than who ought or ought not be considered a democrat. Case in point: lieberman's suggestion that lamont's victory would encourage al quaeda types. That is, in my view, an irrational argument offered by a moderate, but it doesn't sum up moderates or lieberman supporters or war supporters.

[MrBenchley]

52. Those sure as shit seem representative of the far left....

And we never see any of our far leftists remonstrate even slightly.

[fishwax]

54. meh, whatever

Perhaps when anyone does raise challenges to such comments, you assume they aren't leftists. Or perhaps your definition of far leftists is simply "one who says stupid shit like that." But I've certainly seen remonstrations from people who may well be pretty far left. I've done it myself. In this thread even.

[LynneSin]

42. The far left, the far right & everyone in between in the democratic party

needs to unite together and get that democratic majority. That primary is just the 7th inning stretch. We have plenty of time to either bring this one home or really blow our lead!

[LoZoccolo]

17. "Bubba doesn't carry much political weight anymore."

Major Hogwash and his litmus test, however...

:toast:

[MrBenchley]

19. LOL!

He's just the boyo to tell us who is and isn't in touch with reality, isn't he?

[LoZoccolo]

21. Q: "Senator, are you concerned about the Major Hogwash litmus test?"

A: "Major Hogwash...what? Are you some Colbert wanna-be?"

[MrBenchley]

23. LOL!

[Major Hogwash]

24. I don't vote for anyone who supports this lie war.

Now, laugh about it.

2600 American soldiers are dead.
And you want this war to continue?

[LoZoccolo]

25. There goes the Bush*-esque false choice. n/t

[Major Hogwash]

27. No - that's reality, bud.

And the Democrats on this board had better wake up to it.

You can go back to sleep now if you want.

[LoZoccolo]

29. Are you with Lieberman or with the communists?

http://www.rwor.org/s/iraq.htm

_{NOTE: This post is sarcastic.}

[MrBenchley]

32. Ah, the honesty of the far left....

Maybe I should update my count as to how many vicious anti-Lieberman posts were put up, compared to those criticizing, say, Rick Santorum.

For that matter, who was that last week trying to spin away the news that Dog Sex Ricky had bankrolled the Green party? Didn't seem to be moderates, did it?

[Major Hogwash]

37. You keep saying 'far left' - like that's a bad thing.

But, if you think I'm far left you'd be wrong.

I don't own a single pair of Birkenstocks.
I don't smoke funny cigarettes.
I don't protest the rain.

[MrBenchley]

47. I keep saying "honesty" and meaning it sarcastically, too

[fishwax]

15. I don't agree that it sums up our far left at all

There are plenty of people on the far left who are perfectly capable of dealing with and recognizing reality.

But to make joe's primary candidacy the litmus test for a true democrat is pretty silly. :)

[LoZoccolo]

My litmus test is marijuana!

If everyone got high, there would be no more war because there wouldn't even be as much fighting amongst people about smaller things.

But I can smell a fake amongst all of the weed smoke.

Kuchinich is a fake Democrat.
Cynthia McKinney is a fake Democrat.
Charles Rangel is a fake Democrat.
Nancy Pelosi is a fake Democrat.
Henry Waxman is a fake Democrat.

When Democrats don't act like Democrats, then they are no longer called Democrats - they are called DINOS!

You're either FOR getting high.
OR
You're AGAINST getting high.

That's the frickin' litmus test this go-round.

To rip off Bob Dylan -

Everybody must get stoned.

[sandnsea]

33. Fake Dems like Barbara Boxer??? n/t

[zulchzulu]

10. We need to starve Lieberman of any attention to him

Lieberwho? Oh, yeah, that whiney guy that lost...

As long as his usual donors back away and we talk about him like most people talk about Wendell Wilkie, Joe will just keep spatting off Repug talking points to not only show his true self and Connecticut voters suspicions, but turn into a very deflated has-been of his former self.

The guy doesn't know when to leave the party, no pun intended...

[mmonk]

28. I'll never stop asking questions or quit questioning.

It's not in my blood. I still have those natural defense mechanisms.

[LynneSin]

43. And you absolutely shouldn't stop

but make sure it's a real issue - like war, taxes, environment, healthcare, etc.

Not "Who did YOU support in the Connecticut Primary". THe election is overwith, connecticut made their choice and MOST democrats are backing Lamont. Anyone who still supports Lamont now better be warned now - you may be Liebermanned next!

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WildEyedLiberal]

44. Is it really necessary to insinuate that LynneSin is a "good German"?

Really?

Just because some people think it's stupid to go on witch-hunts for every Democrat who doesn't agree with them 100% doesn't mean they are being "good Germans." Tone down the rhetoric a little.

[madfloridian]

45. That "good german" crap needs to stop here at DU

I was called that not long ago, and it should not be going here at all.

[Telly Savalas]

50. What the fuck is this "good German" shit supposed to mean?

Is it a reference to the fact that the Germans, unlike the U.S. haven't participated in the invasion of another sovereign country in the last decade?

[madfloridian]

53. It's an insult. Means we stood by and let Bush take over...

It is meant to insult us when they use it against us. You know, like the German people let Hitler take over?

Quite an insult. I will probably never forget or forgive the time I was called that. It is ugly.

I see your point, though, and you are right.

[Telly Savalas]

55. It's a fucking insult to the people of Germany and shouldn't be tolerated

at DU.

On edit: I've been a little slow the last few days. Just noticed that it was deleted...so I guess it isn't tolerated at DU.

[JerseygirlCT]

40. Absolutely right.

Joe has a lot of friends in CT. I cannot grudge him, or them, that. I don't mind that there were Lieberman and Lamont supporters here -- that's how the system is supposed to work.

Now we have ONE Dem candidate, and we should all be lining up behind him.

[Zhade]

46. No one ever tells me to stop questioning.

I'll question what I wish, thank you - and one of those things I question is why someone would support a hawk like Lieberman who lies about things like Iraq and smears his opponents.

I'll just go on questioning, but you're free not to if you so choose.

[izzybeans]

48. The primaries define or reflect the party mainstream.

They need to realize that. The only radicalism that has been mainlined is rightwing radicals. And they demand we move their direction or else. Any progressive with conviction is called a leftist and radical. Someone who appeases the right wing is considered mainstream on their terms. it's time to get back to the election defining the party, and today the democratic mainstream is pro-peace, pro-health, and into loving thy neighbor, neighborhood, community, state, nation, and globe, caring for nature and nurture. That is all. IMHO that is and always has been a mainstream progressive. Mainstream conservatives, the backwash in truthiness-speak, are anti-peace and that extends from the health of their neighbor to the globe. In that sense, a huge majority of Americans are progressives by polling standards. They used to be about a narrow vision of "limited government", "fiscal responsibility", etc. Now that the wolf has stepped out from those sheep's clothing their party has left them behind. Hence all the Republicans jumping ship with the war and ramping up of government spending.

[dolstein]

49. It's a shame the left isn't as enthusiastic about purging Republicans

as they are about purging Democrats.

Thanks for cofirming what I've suspected at all. Joe Lieberman is just the beginning. If the left succeeds in getting rid of him, then they'll go after other moderates like Tom Carper, Ken Salazar and David Pryor (all of whom are supporting Lieberman).

[flaminbats]

56. when did the left become enthusiastic about purging Democrats?

I am a liberal who reluctantly voted for two conservative Democrats, who only switched parties on me after winning those elections. But why should any intelligent, liberty loving primary voter support someone who announces they will run in November regardless of how the majority votes in the primaries?

That isn't purging a Democrat, that is purging a dishonest slime who is only using us! :nopity:

[flaminbats]

51. the mainstream wants liberty and justice for all..

if liberty is no longer mainstream, then elections don't really matter.

Lieberman thinks liberalism is a bad word, and he thinks patriotism is nothing more than obedience to the state. If Lieberman wins re-election, IMO he will only run for President as a Republican. But if he loses this year, nobody will even care if he runs in 2008!

It makes me happy to see Lamont win the primary, that means Democrats can finally support someone who wants this insanity in Iraq ended..without wasting their votes for a third-party nobody!

[LWolf]

57. Ok. n/t