Lieberman goes back on his word, hurts Democrats again

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

What other race is getting more coverage and/or concern?

And for someone who seems to think that everyone cares so little, you sure do post a lot in this thread with opinions on how the Lamont side is so terribly wrong and full of fallacies

I'm posting because it is funny that people think he will be actively campaigning for democrats when 1) they just disowned him and 2) he's fighting tooth and nail for his job

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I like how no one gives a fuck of him breaking his word, flip-flopping on the issue that supposedly was the sole cause for his primary defeat, but wants to jump from one attack to another about how Democrats are trying to stop the november elections and take away everyones civil rights with no evidence whatosever

He's running as a solid democrat, yet he's clearly not...JaJae and thomez are actually arguing against each other and they don't even know it...thomez is arguing that Lieberman shouldnt/doesnt need to be a solid democrat because of the primary, and Ja is saying no one should care because Lieberman is a solid democrat and the election will change nothing

Once you guys settle what exactly the facts are, then I could respond without watching you dodge issue after issue

No, I quoted you as saying Lieberman is a solid Democrat and used your argument against you.

However, I find it humorous that you think we would be shocked a Democrat changed his stance on an issue.

When Lieberman made the decision to run he had the majority support of the state.. BY FAR. Yet Dems were calling for him to stand down. How is that not an injustice to the people of CT? Lieberman has served them for years and they wanted him. He had no reason to stand down just because the Democrats wanted an anti-Iraq politician in power. Just because he lost the primaries doesn't mean he shouldn't continue to run if he has the majority support of his state. Lieberman is a Senator of CT. His party affiliation is Democrat, but he serves his people... not his party. You can keep trying to paint him as dishonorable all you wish. But, he's doing the right thing for the people has has served for a long time, regardless if you think this campaign could turn MA, NY or PA conservative.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

What other race is getting more coverage and/or concern?

Most of the coverage I've seen was that Lieberman was running Independent and then the VAST majority of it has been Democrats publically shunning him. Perhaps if the Dems weren't constantly bringing it to the forefront it wouldn't have so much coverage? They made this story, not Lieberman.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

I'm posting because it is funny that people think he will be actively campaigning for democrats when 1) they just disowned him and 2) he's fighting tooth and nail for his job

How can Lieberman claim to be a solid democrat yet not support them?

How does not actively campaigning mean you have to yank your endorsements...who here has said Lieberman promised to actively campaign for those Democrats?

You guys make no sense

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

[Lieberman] was asked whether he still endorses Diane Farrell, Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy, three Democrats looking to unseat endangered Republican incumbents Chris Shays, Rob Simmons and Nancy Johnson.

“I’m a non-combatant,” Lieberman declared. “I am not going to be involved in other campaigns. I think it’s better if I just focus on my own race.”

looks like he did not pull his endorsement, but said he had more important things to handle, like keeping his job

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

No, I quoted you as saying Lieberman is a solid Democrat and used your argument against you.

However, I find it humorous that you think we would be shocked a Democrat changed his stance on an issue.

When Lieberman made the decision to run he had the majority support of the state.. BY FAR. Yet Dems were calling for him to stand down. How is that not an injustice to the people of CT? Lieberman has served them for years and they wanted him. He had no reason to stand down just because the Democrats wanted an anti-Iraq politician in power. Just because he lost the primaries doesn't mean he shouldn't continue to run if he has the majority support of his state. Lieberman is a Senator of CT. His party affiliation is Democrat, but he serves his people... not his party. You can keep trying to paint him as dishonorable all you wish. But, he's doing the right thing for the people has has served for a long time, regardless if you think this campaign could turn MA, NY or PA conservative.

No, you misread the quote which is in plain english "he is running as...a solid democrat" Not "He is a solid democrat."

I find it humorous that everyone here was so convinced the war was the only issue, and he was so principled for not flip-flopping, yet now he's flip flopping

Dems were calling him to stand down FOR THE SAKE OF HIS PARTY, which he CLAIMS TO SUPPORT, after all he's taken for granted that he is going to get all these nice democrat positions in the Senate next year

BTW the majority does not support him, the first poll out after the primary had him with a minority of the vote, and the latest poll has him with a minority of the vote

And he's going to be useless in the Senate to CT if he's more of a national figure than a CT figure...why would a Senator who supported Lamont and asked him to step down help him with a CT project? Why would republicans help a guy who will possibly tip the balance to give Democrats control?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

looks like he did not pull his endorsement, but said he had more important things to handle, like keeping his job

Saying you endorse someone, then refusing to comment on whether you still endorse them, and saying you are not going to get involved anymore with the issue = taking back an endorsement

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Saying you endorse someone, then refusing to comment on whether you still endorse them, and saying you are not going to get involved anymore with the issue = taking back an endorsement

oh my god my fucking panties just wadded up reading that

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

No, you misread the quote which is in plain english "he is running as...a solid democrat" Not "He is a solid democrat."

Nice use of the ellipsis.

Your entire quote was:
"I guess you can't grasp the fact that he is running as an "indepedent democrat" and that he's solid democrat"

It sounds as if you're opinion is that he is an independent Demcrat and that he's a solid Democrat.

I find it humorous that everyone here was so convinced the war was the only issue, and he was so principled for not flip-flopping, yet now he's flip flopping

Nobody said the war was the only issue. But it was the main issue. If he had been for the war, the Dems would not have treated him like they have. And yes, he's "flip-flopping". He agreed to campaign for other Democrats. Now that they're attacking him politically he's saying he doesn't have time, he's too busy with his own campaign and rebutting their crap. I'm sorry if he can't find time in his agenda to stand behind them. He hasn't really flip-flopped so much as things have changed. Kerry was a flipflopper who would say two different things on the same day to two different organizations to suit their agendas.

Dems were calling him to stand down FOR THE SAKE OF HIS PARTY, which he CLAIMS TO SUPPORT, after all he's taken for granted that he is going to get all these nice democrat positions in the Senate next year

BTW the majority does not support him, the first poll out after the primary had him with a minority of the vote, and the latest poll has him with a minority of the vote

I didn't say currently. I said when he decided to run he had majority support. Why should he have stopped? The Dems have done a wonderful smear campaign and he's now reduced in the polls.

And he's going to be useless in the Senate to CT if he's more of a national figure than a CT figure...why would a Senator who supported Lamont and asked him to step down help him with a CT project? Why would republicans help a guy who will possibly tip the balance to give Democrats control?

Lieberman has done many things for his state and the Democrats. There's no reason he won't be able to continue to do great things. If the Democrats continue to outcast him and badmouth him, then they're shooting themselves in the foot and it's not his concern. The Dems should welcome a Dem vs Dem election in CT and allow the people to vote for who they feel is best. All of the problems you have listed come from the Democrats promoting a smear campaign against Lieberman. If they would stop and allow this to be a fair election Dem v Dem, they wouldn't have a single problem you've listed. That's the situation Lieberman was expecting/hoping for and it was under that expectation he said he would campaign for other Democrats.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Nice use of the ellipsis.

Your entire quote was:
"I guess you can't grasp the fact that he is running as an "indepedent democrat" and that he's solid democrat

It sounds as if you're opinion is that he is an independent Demcrat and that he's a solid Democrat.

There was no comma, so you shouldn't have thought they were completely seperate ideas, he was running as an indepedent and solid democrat, that seems clear to me reading it

Nobody said the war was the only issue.

Originally Posted by Stylerod

That democrats threw him out of office because of one point. he was pro war.

But it was the main issue. If he had been for the war, the Dems would not have treated him like they have. And yes, he's "flip-flopping". He agreed to campaign for other Democrats. Now that they're attacking him politically he's saying he doesn't have time, he's too busy with his own campaign and rebutting their crap. I'm sorry if he can't find time in his agenda to stand behind them. He hasn't really flip-flopped so much as things have changed. Kerry was a flipflopper who would say two different things on the same day to two different organizations to suit their agendas.

I believe the 2004 election is over, whats next are you going to crack a joke about Mike Dukakis?

I didn't say currently. I said when he decided to run he had majority support. Why should he have stopped? The Dems have done a wonderful smear campaign and he's now reduced in the polls.

He decided to run for the Democratic nomination and that he was going to win it, he didn't formally announce his indepedent run until after the Primary, and like I said, the polls show he does not have majority support

Lieberman has done many things for his state and the Democrats. There's no reason he won't be able to continue to do great things. If the Democrats continue to outcast him and badmouth him, then they're shooting themselves in the foot and it's not his concern. The Dems should welcome a Dem vs Dem election in CT and allow the people to vote for who they feel is best. All of the problems you have listed come from the Democrats promoting a smear campaign against Lieberman. If they would stop and allow this to be a fair election Dem v Dem, they wouldn't have a single problem you've listed. That's the situation Lieberman was expecting/hoping for and it was under that expectation he said he would campaign for other Democrats.

Wrong, he endorsed the candidates AFTER he lost the Primary and the CT-D & DNC had backed Lamont

There is nothing for the democrats to "stop" to allow a "fair" election, you guys keep throwing that around, what are you suggesting...Lamont, who I guess you think is the Al Qaeda candidate, is hiring them to bomb polling stations that went heavily for Lieberman?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Wrong, he endorsed the candidates AFTER he lost the Primary and the CT-D & DNC had backed Lamont

There is nothing for the democrats to "stop" to allow a "fair" election, you guys keep throwing that around, what are you suggesting...Lamont, who I guess you think is the Al Qaeda candidate, is hiring them to bomb polling stations that went heavily for Lieberman?

Lieberman lost on the EIGHTH. That article was WRITTEN on the TENTH!

Odds are he made the statement on the Ninth. Long before the Democrat smear campaign. Let's get our facts straight here.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Lieberman lost on the EIGHTH. That article was WRITTEN on the TENTH!

Odds are he made the statement on the Ninth. Long before the Democrat smear campaign. Let's get our facts straight here.

Show me where those three democrats were nice to him on the 9th and smeared him viciously afterwards

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Show me where those three democrats were nice to him on the 9th and smeared him viciously afterwards

"Long before the Democratic smear campaign" were my exact words.

The fact is, Lieberman said he would help support the Democrats right after he lost the primaries. Now he's been smeared and attacked by the Democrats and he's taking a nuetral position.. "I'm a non-combatant." He is doing what he can stay nuetral in all this now. And that's a smart move. If the Dems REALLY wanted his support they wouldn't be smearing him.

I honestly can not believe you of all people who has been crapping on Lieberman all this time saying how horrible he and his ideals are for the Democrats is now complaining he isn't campaigning for them. Get over it. They HAD his support. They didn't want it, and kicked him out. Now he's staying nuetral. The only people in the world complaining about his is you and the dailykos crew. I'm sure these people would prefer Lamont's support anyway, no?

[Thorgrim]

You keep saying campaigning, any other words no one else is using you'd like to interject into the conversation? Perhaps some more on how CTs are losing their civil rights again?

He gave an endorsement, all he had to say was "Ofcourse I'm not retracting my endorsement" no one was going to ask him for his time and he knows it

He hasn't been "smeared" by those 3 democrats...and if you are talking about "any democrat" well then why is he putting himself as a "solid democrat"? It's like a black man joining the KKK

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

You keep saying campaigning, any other words no one else is using you'd like to interject into the conversation? Perhaps some more on how CTs are losing their civil rights again?

He gave an endorsement, all he had to say was "Ofcourse I'm not retracting my endorsement" no one was going to ask him for his time and he knows it

He hasn't been "smeared" by those 3 democrats...and if you are talking about "any democrat" well then why is he putting himself as a "solid democrat"? It's like a black man joining the KKK

He would have to defend himself over any statement he makes regarding the Democrats now. To somebody, he's going to be held responsible. He's taking a nuetral position. The Dems don't want his support. Why do you of all people care?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

He would have to defend himself over any statement he makes regarding the Democrats now. To somebody, he's going to be held responsible. He's taking a nuetral position. The Dems don't want his support. Why do you of all people care?

Because it hurts Democrats...they can't say on the stump "Hey, not only does Lamont support me, but so does Lieberman, so the question is are you with them or Alan Gold?"

Also, he is put up for his "character" yet he continually show he has none, yet the media is not covering how pathetic his character is...

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Because it hurts Democrats...they can't say on the stump "Hey, not only does Lamont support me, but so does Lieberman, so the question is are you with them or Alan Gold?"

Also, he is put up for his "character" yet he continually show he has none, yet the media is not covering how pathetic his character is...

Joe Lieberman lacks character?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Joe Lieberman lacks character?

He defended John Kerry through all the crap he went through regarding his character and all his flip-flops. Yet here he's stringing Lieberman out to dry for something that is so minute, it's almost pointless to discuss.

Lieberman said he'd support Democratic Congressmen during their election. Democrats relentlessly attack Lieberman for two weeks. At the end of the two weeks Lieberman says he's a non-combatant and just wants to focus on his campaign. Now he's satan reincarnate.

This all coming from someone who has made countless threads over things like defending Saddam for torturing and genocide.