Lieberman to switch parties.

[johncoby2]

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to realize that Lieberman is going to jump to the republican party if re-elected to the Senate.

As an independent, he would have little if any pull in the Senate, but as a Republican he would get rewarded with a position in a Committee of his choice.

Look for Joe to announce switching to the republican party at his victory speech.

[triguy46]

1. Good call. n/t

[Fredda Weinberg]

2. So why doesn't he jump now while the GOP is in power

Sorry, but your theory makes no sense. We've already had one senator switch ... Lieberman stayed.

What makes you so irrational on the subject?

[W_HAMILTON]

9. Well, for starters

If he announced that he is going to jump to the Republican party now, he would lose most, if not all, of the Democratic support he has now. And Republican support alone (or even coupled with some Independent support) won't be enough to win the election.

The only way Lieberman can win in November is if he pulls a pretty sizable portion of the Democratic vote as well, and that's unlikely to happen if he declares that he will switch to the Republican party.

[Fredda Weinberg]

25. Remember who was senator before Lieberman?

A moderate republican ... a maverick within his own party. Lieberman could have taken that same mantle and probably avoided a primary this year - and won handily if he jumped over principle.

[WI_DEM]

35. Actually Wiecker was a liberal republican and his voting record

was better than many Democrats.

[Fredda Weinberg]

37. And he lost to Lieberman - so why should Lieberman change

parties after November?

[Robbien]

12. He doesn't jump now because he can use both the Dems and GOPers

Why give up the support of the seven Democrats right now (and support from the DSCC and DLC)? He has the full support of the GOP without switching.

[Vidar]

20. Right you are.

[Fredda Weinberg]

26. Exactly, so why speculate on irrational actions? n/t

[Lerkfish]

15. I didn't find the speculation irrational at all.

and further, why the ad hominem?

[Fredda Weinberg]

27. Because the hit on Lieberman wasn't based on anything he did

or said. There seems to be an underlying animosity I'm trying to get at ... it's not simply because he's a politician with personal ambitions.

[Lerkfish]

32. Lieberman is no longer a democratic candidate

and as I understand it, here at democratic underground, that means boostering for someone AGAINST the actual candidate, Ned Lamont, has no place.

What do YOU care if someone doesn't like Lieberman to the point you call them irrational?

no need to make it personal, no need for the ad hominem.

[bryant69]

3. Not that he might not

but he has pledged that if elected he will vote for Harry Reid for majority leader - and vote with the Democrats.

I have to say also that his value to the Republicans is his status as a Democrat. A Republican supporting Bush's crazy foreign policy isn't news; a democrat supporting it is. Alternatively, however, they might conclude that his leaving the Democratic party would be a K.O. The Democratic Party is so corrupted that lieberman who supported them for years, can no longer stomach them at all.

He could, but I'd guess he won't.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[madokie]

4. providing the puke party is still in the majority

ain't gonna' happen

[opihimoimoi]

5. How LOW can Joe Go???

Lower than Whale Shit.....and dats LOOOOOWWWWWWW

[Cobalt Violet]

6. That's what I was thinking to.

That doesnt' sound like too irrational of an idea.

[Lerkfish]

7. assuming he wins. Personally, I think the rovian strategy here might not

work. It requires a lot of republicans to back him at the booths, and not all republicans are blind sheep, and many vote straight republican on the ticket.
If the strategy works, then I don't have a lot respect for connecticut voters, of either party.

[Atman]

8. Don't bet on it

According to the paper today, Joe claims Harry Reid promised him that he wouldn't take away his committe positions or seniority. Boo, Harry.

It seems Joes advisers, though, are warning him that should he win, even as a democrat, he'll likely find himself scorned and powerless. Yay, advisers.

The fly in the ointment for Joe? Harry Reid claims to have had "discussions" with Joe, and says to have warned him that the ultimate decision would lie in his colleagues who will have to cast votes for him. The implication was that Harry won't strip Joe of his positions...because he won't have to.

[Teaser]

10. No he won't...

because this is about Joe's Pride. It is about Joe being right, and the voter's being wrong.

He has to show the Democratic party that he will always be there to scold them. And he wouldn't be as effective a scold if he became a Republican.

[mmonk]

11. He has to change.

His support will become more republican as we approach the general election. They will want things in return.

[Lerkfish]

13. so what? the quisling has already given them things in return.

you can't negotiate for what you already have.

[mmonk]

21. True to a certain point but we don't know

what legislation lies ahead that may be in the works, justices that may come up, etc.. They may request something he might otherwise vote with the dems on.

[Lerkfish]

24. right, I'm just saying that can't be a bargaining chip because his

sycophancy to Bush is a foregone conclusion.

Not sure I have a cogent point beyond that, just making the observation that I doubt there is any bargain in the offing since the compact has already been made.
All that's happening now is attempts to shore up the whore they've already purchased.

[izzybeans]

14. If he doesn't than the republicans are really screwing their own pooch.

Like they don't do that anyway...but...Not picking up that seat can't help their cause in the Senate.

[lpbk2713]

16. All the RW talk show hosts seem to know it.

They all have high praise for him. Sounds rather odd, doesn't it? RWers spending hours of air time promoting a Dem?

[Jacobin]

17. Um, he's BEEN a republican for a while

Better to have the enemy on the outside rather than on the inside.

[Ioo]

18. Do you think Liberman Dems would still support him of he did...

In CT, Republicans do not win much... He has got the Republican vote, but it is the hangers on in the Dem party that have him up right now. If he switches, will they vote for him?

[tyedyeto]

19. Who says he will be making a victory speech? n/t

[CanonRay]

22. He can't win as a Repug, but might as an Independent

He'll jump, as he has no moral scruples. I sure hope Connecticut Dems get wise to this fraud and don't vote for him.

[fasttense]

23. Seems to me that this whole issue comes down to the fact that

our political parties do not believe the voters have a right to determine who is on the general election ballot by voting in the primaries. Obviously Lieberman doesn't think the voters should make that choice at the primaries. By not removing Lieberman from his committee seats our democratic party leaders do not believe the voters should choose either. And of course the republic party doesn't want the voters input as exemplified by their efforts to remove DeLay from the general election ballot. It comes down to control. Our political establishment doesn't look kindly on the voters having that control, nor does Lieberman.

[Cyrano]

28. "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer." -- Michael Corleone

It's one of the "truths" that was spoken in "The Godfather" series.

Forcing Lieberman out of the party will not benefit the Democrats. More specifically, if the election produces 51 Democratic senators, (including Lieberman as an Independent), they will control the senate and the agenda.

I consider Lieberman an enemy and I also consider Michael Corleone's advice invaluable.

[mmonk]

29. Not if he sides with republicans and Cheney breaks ties.

Then the executive branch will interpret the rules of the senate. The bastard needs to go.

[cali]

30. Absolutely fucking ridiculous

Look, I'm not a Joe fan, but the demonizing here is out of hand. Do you know what Joe's rated by the ACU? He gets a whopping 8% on key repuke issues. He's solidly for a woman's right to choose, and pro-gay rights. He votes with the dems 90% of the time. He's pledged to vote for Harry Reid for Majority Leader if the dems take the Senate. This is silly.

[mmonk]

34. I wouldn't say silly. He isn't a check on the administration's

bid for extra constitutional power. And what good is a progressive civil rights vote if you allow a justice to take a seat that will overrule that vote in a piece of legislation that justice will help overturn. That's called a "safe" vote and it isn't really a safe vote at all.

[johncoby2]

31. WOW! Lots of discussion on this one.

Really, he cant win as a republican.

And if the voters think he will switch parties, the Democrats will leave him in droves. The republican in the race is pulling 6%.

The repulican party is endorsing Lieberman. Look for the "We value bipartisianship" crap to be spewing from the White House.

If the Democratic voters thought Lieberman would switch parties, he would be sunk. And we would get a true Democrat.

[zbdent]

33. Actually, I don't believe that he would officially jump ...

he's much more useful to the Repukes being the "token Dem" if they stay in charge of the Senate ... trot him out every now and then on Faux to "represent" the Democratic side of the story ... like Colmes ... "woof, woof, yes sir, Mr. Cheney ..."

[mmonk]

36. True, he serves them much more effectively

just the way he is as a propaganda piece and his own propaganda spiels against the democratic party. He'll always call his votes for certain legislation for republican power "bipartisanship". I prefer truth in labeling.