Just in case you were worried…
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Joe Lieberman, who won re-election as an independent, has a message for his Senate colleagues in the next Congress: Call me a Democrat.
The three-term Connecticut lawmaker defied party leaders when he launched his independent bid after losing to Democrat Ned Lamont in the August primary. During the campaign, he vowed to be an “independent-minded Democrat” if he were re-elected. In Tuesday’s election, Lieberman won strong GOP support and given the closely divided Senate, Republicans are expected to court him.
So will he count as a Democrat or an independent who caucuses with the majority Democrats? In an e-mail message late Thursday, Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein said the senator will begin his new term as a Democrat.
With the Democratic takeover of the Senate, Lieberman is in line to become chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
In a post-election news conference, Lieberman said he was reassured by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid that he would retain his seniority when the new Senate convenes.
I was hoping that the Dems would have a majority in the Senate without Lieberman and then they could put him in the dog house for his betrayal of his Conn. Democratic constituents. It looks like we need this turncoat but I would imagine that,aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent. He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I was hoping that the Dems would have a majority in the Senate without Lieberman and then they could put him in the dog house for his betrayal of his Conn. Democratic constituents. It looks like we need this turncoat but I would imagine that,aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent. He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I was hoping that the Dems would have a majority in the Senate without Lieberman and then they could put him in the dog house for his betrayal of his Conn. Democratic constituents. It looks like we need this turncoat but I would imagine that,aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent. He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I was hoping that the Dems would have a majority in the Senate without Lieberman and then they could put him in the dog house for his betrayal of his Conn. Democratic constituents. It looks like we need this turncoat but I would imagine that,aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent. He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
“It looks like we need this turncoat…”
Is it accurate to call Lieberman a turncoat? Isn’t a turncoat someone — such as Jeffords of Vermont or any number of Democrats in the South who switched parties after 1994 — who abandons his party? It seems to me that the Democratic primary voters in Connecticut abandoned Lieberman, rather than the reverse.
“… but I would imagine that, aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent.”
There are two ways to look at this: for one, Lieberman will have little influence in terms of guiding policy, as he is too conservative on a number of issues, separating him from many of his Democratic colleagues; but going the other way, Lieberman has a lot of seniority. And in the United States Senate, seniority is very influential.
On top of that, Lieberman is a congenial man. He has a lot of friends inside the Senate. While some may be bitter for a short while that he ran against and ultimately defeated Ned Lamont, those wounds will heal quickly. No one currently in the U.S. Senate had anything invested in Mr. Lamont as a human being.
Even more, I suspect the Lamont phenomenon will change Lieberman. Unless he wants to make this his last term, he is going to have to court Connecticut Democrats. And to do that, he will have to consider their policy preferences going forward. Though elected as an “independent,” Lieberman will have to be less independent for some time.
Lieberman is a liberal in some respects and a moderate or conservative in others. He will have to focus more of his energies from here on out on the things where he is a liberal.
“He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I doubt that. Time will tell.
“It looks like we need this turncoat…”
Is it accurate to call Lieberman a turncoat? Isn’t a turncoat someone — such as Jeffords of Vermont or any number of Democrats in the South who switched parties after 1994 — who abandons his party? It seems to me that the Democratic primary voters in Connecticut abandoned Lieberman, rather than the reverse.
“… but I would imagine that, aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent.”
There are two ways to look at this: for one, Lieberman will have little influence in terms of guiding policy, as he is too conservative on a number of issues, separating him from many of his Democratic colleagues; but going the other way, Lieberman has a lot of seniority. And in the United States Senate, seniority is very influential.
On top of that, Lieberman is a congenial man. He has a lot of friends inside the Senate. While some may be bitter for a short while that he ran against and ultimately defeated Ned Lamont, those wounds will heal quickly. No one currently in the U.S. Senate had anything invested in Mr. Lamont as a human being.
Even more, I suspect the Lamont phenomenon will change Lieberman. Unless he wants to make this his last term, he is going to have to court Connecticut Democrats. And to do that, he will have to consider their policy preferences going forward. Though elected as an “independent,” Lieberman will have to be less independent for some time.
Lieberman is a liberal in some respects and a moderate or conservative in others. He will have to focus more of his energies from here on out on the things where he is a liberal.
“He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I doubt that. Time will tell.
“It looks like we need this turncoat…”
Is it accurate to call Lieberman a turncoat? Isn’t a turncoat someone — such as Jeffords of Vermont or any number of Democrats in the South who switched parties after 1994 — who abandons his party? It seems to me that the Democratic primary voters in Connecticut abandoned Lieberman, rather than the reverse.
“… but I would imagine that, aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent.”
There are two ways to look at this: for one, Lieberman will have little influence in terms of guiding policy, as he is too conservative on a number of issues, separating him from many of his Democratic colleagues; but going the other way, Lieberman has a lot of seniority. And in the United States Senate, seniority is very influential.
On top of that, Lieberman is a congenial man. He has a lot of friends inside the Senate. While some may be bitter for a short while that he ran against and ultimately defeated Ned Lamont, those wounds will heal quickly. No one currently in the U.S. Senate had anything invested in Mr. Lamont as a human being.
Even more, I suspect the Lamont phenomenon will change Lieberman. Unless he wants to make this his last term, he is going to have to court Connecticut Democrats. And to do that, he will have to consider their policy preferences going forward. Though elected as an “independent,” Lieberman will have to be less independent for some time.
Lieberman is a liberal in some respects and a moderate or conservative in others. He will have to focus more of his energies from here on out on the things where he is a liberal.
“He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I doubt that. Time will tell.
“It looks like we need this turncoat…”
Is it accurate to call Lieberman a turncoat? Isn’t a turncoat someone — such as Jeffords of Vermont or any number of Democrats in the South who switched parties after 1994 — who abandons his party? It seems to me that the Democratic primary voters in Connecticut abandoned Lieberman, rather than the reverse.
“… but I would imagine that, aside from his chair of Homeland Security, his influence in the Democratic Senate caucus will be non-existent.”
There are two ways to look at this: for one, Lieberman will have little influence in terms of guiding policy, as he is too conservative on a number of issues, separating him from many of his Democratic colleagues; but going the other way, Lieberman has a lot of seniority. And in the United States Senate, seniority is very influential.
On top of that, Lieberman is a congenial man. He has a lot of friends inside the Senate. While some may be bitter for a short while that he ran against and ultimately defeated Ned Lamont, those wounds will heal quickly. No one currently in the U.S. Senate had anything invested in Mr. Lamont as a human being.
Even more, I suspect the Lamont phenomenon will change Lieberman. Unless he wants to make this his last term, he is going to have to court Connecticut Democrats. And to do that, he will have to consider their policy preferences going forward. Though elected as an “independent,” Lieberman will have to be less independent for some time.
Lieberman is a liberal in some respects and a moderate or conservative in others. He will have to focus more of his energies from here on out on the things where he is a liberal.
“He is tainted goods and it will rub off on any Democratic senator who embraces him.
I doubt that. Time will tell.
Rich: I think a lot of Democrats considered Lieberman coming out last December and speaking of the great progress in Iraq (wrongly I might add) as giving aid and comfort to Bush. So in that sense, they see him as a turncoat.
Rich: I think a lot of Democrats considered Lieberman coming out last December and speaking of the great progress in Iraq (wrongly I might add) as giving aid and comfort to Bush. So in that sense, they see him as a turncoat.
Rich: I think a lot of Democrats considered Lieberman coming out last December and speaking of the great progress in Iraq (wrongly I might add) as giving aid and comfort to Bush. So in that sense, they see him as a turncoat.
Rich: I think a lot of Democrats considered Lieberman coming out last December and speaking of the great progress in Iraq (wrongly I might add) as giving aid and comfort to Bush. So in that sense, they see him as a turncoat.
Lieberman ran as an Independent and he is the swing vote. Both parties will try to embrace him and therefore he will have tremendous power, at least for the next couple of years. He may not be liked by everyone, but he will get almost everything he wants. I would love to be in his position.SAH
Lieberman ran as an Independent and he is the swing vote. Both parties will try to embrace him and therefore he will have tremendous power, at least for the next couple of years. He may not be liked by everyone, but he will get almost everything he wants. I would love to be in his position.SAH
Lieberman ran as an Independent and he is the swing vote. Both parties will try to embrace him and therefore he will have tremendous power, at least for the next couple of years. He may not be liked by everyone, but he will get almost everything he wants. I would love to be in his position.SAH
Lieberman ran as an Independent and he is the swing vote. Both parties will try to embrace him and therefore he will have tremendous power, at least for the next couple of years. He may not be liked by everyone, but he will get almost everything he wants. I would love to be in his position.SAH
Lieberman left the Democratic party to form his own Independant Party for Lieberman..he gave the finger to the Conn. Democratic voters who sent him to the Senate all those years. His campaign tactics with its hordes of paid provocateurs(Lieberkids) and the $850,000 in “petty cash” that was used to gather signatures and pay the Lieberman “soldiers” who physically harrassed and obstructed Lamaont’s campaign expose the lie of Joe Lieberman, the conscience of the Senate. It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power. Both will be accepted into the”ruling party” as an undesirable but unavoidable necessity.
Lieberman left the Democratic party to form his own Independant Party for Lieberman..he gave the finger to the Conn. Democratic voters who sent him to the Senate all those years. His campaign tactics with its hordes of paid provocateurs(Lieberkids) and the $850,000 in “petty cash” that was used to gather signatures and pay the Lieberman “soldiers” who physically harrassed and obstructed Lamaont’s campaign expose the lie of Joe Lieberman, the conscience of the Senate. It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power. Both will be accepted into the”ruling party” as an undesirable but unavoidable necessity.
Lieberman left the Democratic party to form his own Independant Party for Lieberman..he gave the finger to the Conn. Democratic voters who sent him to the Senate all those years. His campaign tactics with its hordes of paid provocateurs(Lieberkids) and the $850,000 in “petty cash” that was used to gather signatures and pay the Lieberman “soldiers” who physically harrassed and obstructed Lamaont’s campaign expose the lie of Joe Lieberman, the conscience of the Senate. It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power. Both will be accepted into the”ruling party” as an undesirable but unavoidable necessity.
Lieberman left the Democratic party to form his own Independant Party for Lieberman..he gave the finger to the Conn. Democratic voters who sent him to the Senate all those years. His campaign tactics with its hordes of paid provocateurs(Lieberkids) and the $850,000 in “petty cash” that was used to gather signatures and pay the Lieberman “soldiers” who physically harrassed and obstructed Lamaont’s campaign expose the lie of Joe Lieberman, the conscience of the Senate. It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power. Both will be accepted into the”ruling party” as an undesirable but unavoidable necessity.
“It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power.”
What does that mean?
“It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power.”
What does that mean?
“It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power.”
What does that mean?
“It is a strange phenonmenon to have two Liebermans one in the US Senate and one in the Israeli Knesset, both with a similar road to power.”
What does that mean?
US Senator Joe Lieberman and MK Israeli Knesset Lieberman both have been accepted into their respective
“ruling parties” in order to assure that party’s power. Israeli MK Lieberman brings his votes to Kadima that is in danger of imploding after its recent Lebanon
War debacle and Joe Lieberman gives the Democrats a Senate majority. Each has espoused views that are not publicly supported by the voters of their country or the
policies of the governing group that they are joining. They will both be reluctantly tolerated.
US Senator Joe Lieberman and MK Israeli Knesset Lieberman both have been accepted into their respective
“ruling parties” in order to assure that party’s power. Israeli MK Lieberman brings his votes to Kadima that is in danger of imploding after its recent Lebanon
War debacle and Joe Lieberman gives the Democrats a Senate majority. Each has espoused views that are not publicly supported by the voters of their country or the
policies of the governing group that they are joining. They will both be reluctantly tolerated.
US Senator Joe Lieberman and MK Israeli Knesset Lieberman both have been accepted into their respective
“ruling parties” in order to assure that party’s power. Israeli MK Lieberman brings his votes to Kadima that is in danger of imploding after its recent Lebanon
War debacle and Joe Lieberman gives the Democrats a Senate majority. Each has espoused views that are not publicly supported by the voters of their country or the
policies of the governing group that they are joining. They will both be reluctantly tolerated.
US Senator Joe Lieberman and MK Israeli Knesset Lieberman both have been accepted into their respective
“ruling parties” in order to assure that party’s power. Israeli MK Lieberman brings his votes to Kadima that is in danger of imploding after its recent Lebanon
War debacle and Joe Lieberman gives the Democrats a Senate majority. Each has espoused views that are not publicly supported by the voters of their country or the
policies of the governing group that they are joining. They will both be reluctantly tolerated.
lieberman is a turncoat because he stood for election in the democratic primary, lost it fairly, and then refused to abide by the will of the voters, and then ran as an independent, anmd is now claiming to be a democrat again, despite the fact that the democratic voters rejected him. while it may be worth accepting him for the committees as a tactical move, it does not negate the fact that lieberman refused to accept the results of an election, something contrary to the very essence of the democratic party.
he should have had to choose from the beginning which party to run in, not get to run twice after losing. it reveals a contempt for democratic principles.
lieberman is a turncoat because he stood for election in the democratic primary, lost it fairly, and then refused to abide by the will of the voters, and then ran as an independent, anmd is now claiming to be a democrat again, despite the fact that the democratic voters rejected him. while it may be worth accepting him for the committees as a tactical move, it does not negate the fact that lieberman refused to accept the results of an election, something contrary to the very essence of the democratic party.
he should have had to choose from the beginning which party to run in, not get to run twice after losing. it reveals a contempt for democratic principles.
lieberman is a turncoat because he stood for election in the democratic primary, lost it fairly, and then refused to abide by the will of the voters, and then ran as an independent, anmd is now claiming to be a democrat again, despite the fact that the democratic voters rejected him. while it may be worth accepting him for the committees as a tactical move, it does not negate the fact that lieberman refused to accept the results of an election, something contrary to the very essence of the democratic party.
he should have had to choose from the beginning which party to run in, not get to run twice after losing. it reveals a contempt for democratic principles.
lieberman is a turncoat because he stood for election in the democratic primary, lost it fairly, and then refused to abide by the will of the voters, and then ran as an independent, anmd is now claiming to be a democrat again, despite the fact that the democratic voters rejected him. while it may be worth accepting him for the committees as a tactical move, it does not negate the fact that lieberman refused to accept the results of an election, something contrary to the very essence of the democratic party.
he should have had to choose from the beginning which party to run in, not get to run twice after losing. it reveals a contempt for democratic principles.
Lieberman’s comments today:
On Tuesday, Democrats picked up six seats in the Senate and at least 29 seats in the House, taking control of both chambers for the first time in 12 years. Not a single Democratic incumbent lost. Today on Meet the Press, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said this was “not a major realignment election” and “both major political parties…[are] in a kind of probation.”
Man I am sorry that we need this guy for a majority, I wish Ford would have won, so we could have told him exactly where he could go.
Lieberman’s comments today:
On Tuesday, Democrats picked up six seats in the Senate and at least 29 seats in the House, taking control of both chambers for the first time in 12 years. Not a single Democratic incumbent lost. Today on Meet the Press, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said this was “not a major realignment election” and “both major political parties…[are] in a kind of probation.”
Man I am sorry that we need this guy for a majority, I wish Ford would have won, so we could have told him exactly where he could go.
Lieberman’s comments today:
On Tuesday, Democrats picked up six seats in the Senate and at least 29 seats in the House, taking control of both chambers for the first time in 12 years. Not a single Democratic incumbent lost. Today on Meet the Press, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said this was “not a major realignment election” and “both major political parties…[are] in a kind of probation.”
Man I am sorry that we need this guy for a majority, I wish Ford would have won, so we could have told him exactly where he could go.
Lieberman’s comments today:
On Tuesday, Democrats picked up six seats in the Senate and at least 29 seats in the House, taking control of both chambers for the first time in 12 years. Not a single Democratic incumbent lost. Today on Meet the Press, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said this was “not a major realignment election” and “both major political parties…[are] in a kind of probation.”
Man I am sorry that we need this guy for a majority, I wish Ford would have won, so we could have told him exactly where he could go.