A Lieberman win means ......

[wisteria]

Our party ultimately looses in the long term. It looses its chance to take a new direction and present a new clarity on policies and ideals.

Lieberman winning means our party continues to muddle every message we try to relay and we remain the party of nothing new.

If Lieberman wins, the Democrats continue to be the second place party, afraid to stand for something and have the courage to stick to our convictions.

And, for the Republicans a Lieberman win means they can continue to claim we have no plans and no real direction and they can use Lieberman as an example of our divisions to drive home their claims that we are indecisive and weak on safety and defense issues.

And sadly, the people lose because their voice will be lost as the Clinton's the DLC and Corporate America tighten their grip on control over our party and the once grand "Party of the People" becomes the Party that ignores the people.


I don't dislike Lieberman, he seems to be a real nice honest guy, but he is a symptom of what ails our party. He is really a victim in the struggle to reclaim the Democrat party for the people and for the sake of our party, I don't want to see him win.

[endarkenment]

1. Oh I dislike him.

I disliked him when he ran with Gore. I voted for Gore despite Joementum, and despite the sort of smarmy nannystate democrat that Joementum (and Gore at times( represented. I continue to dislike him and we need to get rid of the smarmy moralizers along with the warhawks.

[savemefromdumbya]

2. The move is to the right wing of the Democratic Party

Everything is shifting right in the Democratic Party. The Labour Party, UK, did the same thing to get the Conservative vote and have been in power for a long time.

We are pulling to the left. What does that mean?

[Stinky The Clown]

9. The European sense of 'left' is far more 'left' than our sense of 'left'

For them to drift right a bit could still leave them to the left of our Dem 'baseline'

[ChairmanAgnostic]

24. that the pendulum (stuck on insanity) is heading back to sanity.

we haven't hit the center yet, actually.

[loyalsister]

72. A bloodless coup

The RW corporatist totalitarian agenda will be given credibility it never had before.
Since that plan to federalize the Nat'l Guard more easily passed the House, it is all the more important to defeat Liebermann.
We are deep in theocratic corporatism, but those are the very first rumblings of hard core stateside militerism that we have had.

[kurth]

3. If Democrats want to restore and maintain their identity, they need to

purge "collaborators and traitors" among their midst. Sorry to use a nasty sounding cliche, but it is a necessary task.

[LynneSin]

6. If the people of Connecticut ultimately elect Lieberman

then who are we to criticize (unless of course we are from Connecticut).

Ultimately it is their choice, not ours (again, for all of us not from Connecticut).

However, from what I'm reading, I don't think he's going to pull this one off.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

59. If, on the other hand, they want to win elections

Then purges and internal feuding are the last thing they need.

[Nederland]

70. The phrase "purge collaborators and traitors"

...has a nice Stalinist ring to it.

[satireV]

4. I am suspicious of this post. why?

The use of this phrase "reclaim the Democrat party"...

"Democrat Party" is the new phrasing the right wing uses to denigrate the DemocraTIC Party.

I am not sure who wisteria ultimately supports, but to use that phrase puts their sincerity into doubt.

[TheVirginian]

7. So the new litmus test is pure semantics?

[Clark2008]

50. No. It means that we shouldn't stoop to the right-wing's

mispronunciation of words so that they, in this case, can take the "Democrat" out of "Democratic." They do this on purpose when they call it the Democrat Party. They're trying to make the sheeple separate the two.

Besides, it's incorrect grammar. It's the DemocraTIC Party, not the Democrat Party.

[TheVirginian]

100. You're paranoid.

I know just as many educated and uneducated conservatives and liberals who call it the Democrat Party as I do educated and uneducated conservatives and liberals who call it the Democratic Party. Most of the time, its the same people and they use it interchangibly. Why? Because both are commonly accepted labels for the party. Its not a right-wing term, its not a massive conspiracy, and its not a mispronunciation.

[wisteria]

8. I support the grass roots and the peoples party.

And, I do not like the grip the DLC has over our party.

[satireV]

21. Then why do you use the denigrating phrase...

"Democrat Party" It is straight out of the Rove playbook.

[wisteria]

30. Oh, I thought it was the proper term for the party.

If it should be Democratic Party, I apologize. I am in no way shape or form a Republican. My post is meant to express my concerns for our party if the grassroots fails to win this Tuesday's election. I fear we will all be put on ignore and the DLC will totally call the shots from now on. Personally, I feel we all need to come to a consensus at some point, but the DLC still wants to control it all. A Lieberman win will help them and hurt us, giving them an excuse to ignore us and continue with business as usually.

[kath]

38. It's the DEMOCRATIC party, and always has been. For everyone here who

hasn't picked up on this yet, the usage of "Democrat party" is Freeper-speak.

Democratic Party, Democratic Party, Democratic Party -- repeat after me, everyone.

[wisteria]

43. Gotcha! n/t

[Iowa]

81. It would be difficult to read your post and suspect your motives...

Furthermore, I suspect that only hard core political junkies (like most of us) would even notice the semantics. I'm a "Democrat" (with no "IC" on the end). If someone leaves off the "IC" when referring to the party, I will take it within the context of the totality of their message. I get the difference, but it doesn't amount to much, and sometimes it's better to just let it go... and this would have been one of those times.

Good post, wisteria.

[TankLV]

91. You claim you are a Democrat, but don't know the proper name of the party.

Riiiiight...

[JanusAscending]

90. It's a matter of "tense"

One person is a Democrat, 2 people are Democrats, the entire party is Democratic. It's an easy grammer mistake. The Republicans have no excuse, except they use it to mock us. On the other hand, one republican is a republican, to are republicans, and the whole party is republican. See, they "dumbed it up" so that it's easier for pResidents like gwb to understand it. As for me I don't understand the language of "STUPID"!!:toast: edited for grammer and spelling:rofl:

[tsuki]

46. Right. It would be like calling them the Republi Party. nt

[JanusAscending]

53. GET REAL!!

We on DU, know who she supports! Why don't you try to figure it out, instead of making "suspicious" claims!!! I've never read such tripe!!

[Catchawave]

5. Win or Lose, it's still a wake-up call to

the Democratic Party. And hopefully the cajones to "beat Republicans" this fall !

I finally "met" Lamont on The Colbert Report last week. I was very impressed and one of those who wished they lived in CT so I could vote for him :D

[LSK]

13. I think a win for Lamont is needed

A loss will make the established Dems breath a sigh of relief and give them confidence to continue to shit all their base.

[wisteria]

31. My thoughts exactly.

I also think a lamont win would be a wake up call to our media pundits.

[KaptBunnyPants]

39. No, its not.

If we fail to take out Lieberman now, expect him and his cohorts to be even more stridently pro-Bush in the future. If we lose now, every thing we will have built will disappear as quickly as you can say Dean's scream. There is no upside to losing, it may well be the death toll of the Party.

[union_maid]

83. I think you're right

It wouldn't be THE wake-up call. Things don't work that way. But, this has already surprised and shaken a lot of people.

[Totally Committed]

10. I dislike his disingenuous, colluding, DINO A** for both of us....

He needs to go down, and go down, bigtime!

If he wins, I am going to take it as a sign, and not wait to see who our 2008 nominee is, before I ive up on this Party and go away forever. I used to think people like George Carlin and Richard Belzer, who claim they never bother to vote because the system is so rigged, it's an exercize in futility to cast a vote were NUTS. I did. I grew up thinking and believing my vote counted, and was my civic duty as a good citizen. I worked hard for my Party every election, and never missed voting once... not even for the smallest city-wides. If Joe wins tomorrow, the system IS rigged. And, it is rigged against those on the side of the angels, my friends, and that is a system I will no longer participate in.

So, voters of CT: Godspeed to you. Restore my faith!

TC

[sendero]

54. Believe me..

... I've been having the same thoughts. If we can't even get this goddamned Republican out of our party, what CAN we do?

And folks around here are WAY TOO OPTIMISTIC about the congressional elections themselves. The leads, and the number of Dems ahead, is not enough.

This is our last chance.

[fuzzyball]

11. It means Ned Lamont peaked too soon...

if Lamont loses, which seems unlikely at this point.

[LSK]

12. a win for Joementum means the grassroots has no power

It will symbolize that once more, we no longer control our country and democracy continues to die in America.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

14. THAT IS the answer.

Between Dieboldica machinations, out and out fraud, and other crimes we haven't figured out yet.

[TrueFunkSoldier]

20. Last minute tactics

It ain't over yet, people. Lamont neither has the experience nor the deceitful nature that Zell LIEberman's corporate cronies do. AND...he seems to have the Repugs on his side. They are campaigning left and right. And now that the polling gap has narrowed with no movement upwards for Lamont, I'm afraid that there is a chance that LIEberman will squeak by with a win unless something drastic happens. The media has been cheerleading for LIEberman all weekend. That may have helped him to narrow Lamont's lead. Also, I have a feeling that LIEberman and the Repugs that support him are up to something really dirty. They are going to pull last-minute tricks against Lamont supporters. I don't know what yet, but LIEberman doesn't appear to be too nervous at this point. I wonder why...

I'm glued to this race. If Lamont loses, I will be devastated, particularly for the Democratic party. The DLC'ers want him to win. I was also shocked and quite disappointed that Del Eleanor Holmes Norton stomped for LIEberman yesterday. I'm just so disheartened about what I'm seeing happen to this country.

[Clark2008]

51. What is the latest poll?

The last one I saw had Lamont at 54 and Leiberman at 41.

[JanusAscending]

55. That still seems to be holding!

But they are calling a 6 point lead "a dead heat" here in CT. One thing I found out this AM that concerns me is.........there has been a RUSH by Independants today to switch to Dem. so they can vote in the Primary!!! Seems kinda sneaky to me, however, for some they were to late to make the change. I guess it depends on what town or city you're living in. This is making me extremely nervous, but it could be a GOOD sign????:shrug: This is going to be one to WATCH CAREFULLY !!

[Clark2008]

58. You never know - some of those Indies might WANT

to oust a curmudgeonly old senator who hasn't done jack for the state in a decade.

:shrug:

[JanusAscending]

63. Here's hoping!!

We'll find out soon enough!

[calico1]

16. Lamont has done amazingly, incredibly well

considering he is not only going up against Lieberman but also against the Democratic establishment and the MSM and the fact that up until a few months ago nobody even in CT knew who he was. And at this point he is still ahead. I think the grassroots movement has done very well.

[LSK]

17. but the Grassroots has to finally break throught with a win

This is a huge test.

[SaveElmer]

18. I t hought the Grassroots...

Considered Jon Tester a win!

[LSK]

19. I live in the Cegalis/Duckworth district

I have just seen a grassroots effort fail.

[KaptBunnyPants]

35. Not high profile enough.

Voting out Lieberman would force accountability in Democratic officials to their constituents back home. As long as they don't have to answer to us, expect to see more liberal positions "triangulated" away in our never ending quest to never take a principled stand on any issue. Not that you would have a problem with that.

[femmedem]

52. No! Don't give up! Even if Lieberman squeaks by in CT

Lamont and his grassroots supporters have made it clear that anyone who doesn't stand up to Bush is vulnerable. Regardless of tomorrow's results, this has already happened.

[SaveElmer]

15. It means Connecticut Democrats...

Prefer Lieberman...

Means Lieberman is the Democratic nominee...

Means Lieberman will be in the Senate 6 more years...

Means a guaranteed vote for Harry Reid as majority leader...

Means nothing more than that!

[TrueFunkSoldier]

23. Means that...

Zell LIEberman will continue to vote along with the corporate establishment and power elites without question...

Means that LIEberman and his friends will REFUSE to question anything that the evil, corrupt Bush administration does...

Means that LIEberman will continue to support this illegal, quagmire that we've created over in Iraq, and now again in Afghanistan with the reemergence of the Taliban, a possible conflict with Iran and/or Syria, and mounting challenges in N. Korea.

Means that LIEberman will continue to kiss the ass of Lil' Dumbya without question, without rebuke, without disdain.

LIEberman disgusts me! He must go!!!

[SaveElmer]

27. Means that mature Democrats...like Ned Lamont...

Will accept the results and do what's best for the party...supporting the nominee!

[TrueFunkSoldier]

29. If LIEberman loses, then MATURE Democrats

need to accept those results and not cry like a baby and run as an Independent as if he's *entitled* to a Senate seat.

LIEberman has demonstrated anything BUT maturity. We don't need to be lectured on what the right way is.

Of course whoever is the Dem nominee will be accepted. Many of us may not like it, but we'll accept it. Can Zell LIEberman do the same???

I don't like Joe at all. Never did. But if he wins, then he wins and it's a victory for democracy...I guess...

[SaveElmer]

32. Exactly right...

Which is why I have repeatedly said that I would support Lamont over Lieberman because of his determination to go Indie should he lose...

It would be hypocritical to not support Lieberman's election should he win the nomination on the same grounds however...

As Ned Lamont clearly sees.

[wisteria]

40. Are you suggesting that those who do not support Lieberman

are immature? Because, I consider myself to be very mature. I will have to live with another disappointing outcome if Lieberman wins. I will support him, reluctantly in the general election because above all else, Lieberman is still a Democrat. However,a win for Lieberman risks further separation and disillusionment within the party as a whole and resentment against those the party consider leaders.
To be honest, I think we need a new direction as a party and as long as those in the DLC still seem to want all the power and control our party will remain stagnant and will only benefit a few.

[SaveElmer]

44. Read the post I was responding too..

And you will see the source of my comments!

[wisteria]

34. Oh, I disagree, There is a lot more at stake. It determines the

path our party will follow for the near future. If you are happy and content with this path them I suppose you are happy one way or another. personally, I feel our party has become stale and comfortable not having to answer to the people. I think the DLC needs to not be the only voice or power in our party. I think we need to take firm stands on positions and not hide behind polls and choose no sides, but ride the middle in the hopes no one will notice that we stand for nothing. I think we need real leaders in the party- not just ones that like to pretend they are leaders. And we need to work as a team-supporting Democratic positions. We need to show the American public that we really want to take America forward.

[citizen snips]

22. If Lieberman wins

then that means that Lamont was a bad candidate. He is not the most charismatic politician on the block. But with that being said I think he is going to win.

[TrueFunkSoldier]

25. It wouldn't mean that Lamont was a bad candidate...

It just meant that the CT voters preferred LIEberman. Or, that LIEberman was able to galvanize his supporters and those of some Repugs who are campaigning for him. Look, the fact that LIEberman appeared on Fox with Sean Insanity instead of trying to capture the hearts and minds of more Dems is quite telling to me. If LIEberman does pull it off tomorrow--which is still highly possible--it just means that, as an incumbent, he had more going for him. The fact that Lamont made him work this hard means that he can't be that bad of a candidate...

[depakid]

26. it means almost certain losses for the Dems in the years to come

On the other hand, if he loses, it sends a signal to the American people abd the tihe DINO's who consistently sell them out- that it's no longer business as usual with the Democratic party.

[TrueFunkSoldier]

28. Yes, and the MSM is working HARD...

to campaign for Joe. I mean, most every news commentary show painted LIEberman in a positive light and coopted the script that Lamont is a "one-issue liberal." No wonder Joe has gained on Lamont's lead and it's broadcasted all over the news this morning, as if they are happy that Joe is doing better.

It is in the MSM's best interest that LIEberman win this race. They have been championing this war since Day 1. Imagine if LIEberman loses to an anti-war candidate? Wouldn't look to good for their propaganda machine...

[KaptBunnyPants]

33. If he wins, which is still the more likely scenario

it will mean our worst fears are true. That even Liberal Democrats hate us so much that they fear us having any power within the Party more than they oppose the Bush administration. That they still believe whats coming out of their TV over what they see with their own eyes. That would be the most soul crushing aspect of this, that even with all of our fancy arguments and facts we still can't beat the corporate machine which dictates national opinion.

Lieberman has no constituency support in the state he abondoned so long ago. The only issues which seperate him from Lamont are issues which the electorate as a whole overwhelmingly support Lamont's position. It seems the only reason left to vote for Lieberman is to spite us, the internet communists that Bill Orielly & pals loathe so much.

There's no Diebold here, and the electorate in a primary must be considered reasonably informed. We may as well give up on politics if we can't win this one decisively, as it proves that even if we succeed in getting Democrats elected we will never succeed in getting Democrats to respect us. And then after another 2/4/6/8 years of band-aid corporate solutions to their problems, Americans will dump the Democratic Party for its bigger brother, again. And this will continue until our lack of responsible leadership causes the total collapse of the country, which we may already be too late to stop.

[TrueFunkSoldier]

36. Very well put...

...and very sad indeed!

[Guaranteed]

41. Great post. nt

[warrens]

37. Martin Peretz and AIPAC commit suicide

Peretz is calling Ned Lamont's grandfather (and by extension, Ned too) a Stalinist in the WSJ editorial page today. His entire blather is that Lieberman is the best of the Dems and Lamont a nothing, and probably a communist nothing. When people like Peretz start allying themselves with the WSJ opinion page, which is as right wing as anything this side of Aryan Nation, you know the neocons are getting desperate.

They're panicked that we might pull out of the Middle East, and leave Israel on its own. Well, if you thugs hadn't started with this "Israel right or wrong" crap, we might be in a tenable situation in the Middle East. But we no longer are, unless we can impeach the Bushies and their neocon puppet masters.

[high density]

42. I'm sure the talking heads...

...will say it's another slam to the left, blah blah blah, but what day don't they say that?

[AtomicKitten]

45. A Lieberman win means election fraud, plain and simple.

eom

[JanusAscending]

60. And how did you arrive at that conclusion????

n/t

[AtomicKitten]

62. because as of today

Lamont has a decent lead and turnout for him is expected to be HUGE. All the signals point to a Lamont win.

And, as a Californian, I am anxiously watching the Busby election debacle unfold, and it is clear the Republicans are not just going to stop perpetrating election fraud.

You are familiar with the data, right?

[JanusAscending]

64. That I am, but WE DON"T USE DIEBOLD IN CT !!

We are still using the old lever machines, at least until Nov., when the new "Scanning" machines, with a paper trail, will be slowly introduced. I guess you weren't familiar with this data! Don't mess with me today anyone, because I'm on pins and needles waiting to be a Gramma tomorrow morning!! So I'm "double trouble" today!!! :evilgrin:

[AtomicKitten]

75. Congratulations, to-be grammy!!!!

Tomorrow indeed could be a wonderful day for you!!

I posted this today on doing some research on CT voting machines.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2761959&mesg_id=2761996

Diebold isn't the only culprit, ES&S and Sequioa have had "issues." The problem is that the trust has been breeched with regard to elections and may never be recovered.

and don't forget:
'It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes'

Best wishes on a great day tomorrow for you!

[JanusAscending]

94. Thank you, yes it is is shaping up to be a very good day!

Ct. has a good track record on honest polling, and it had better stay that way! I'll cast my vote for Lamont with all DUers in mind, how's that!!:toast:

[midnight]

77. Thar's what I was thinking.

Are their attorney's standing by to offer advice.

[pstans]

47. I disagree...look at the big picture

You can't just look at this the Lamont-Lieberman race as one single race. You need to see the big picture. Howard Dean didn't win the nomination, but he started the trend towards progressive, grassroots politics. It took the DLC years to build their influence and it took the Republicans even longer to grow after Goldwater was defeated. I sure hope Lamont wins, but if he doesn't, remember the big picture. Each race that is close puts a step closer to regaining the heart of the Democratic party.

[wisteria]

49. I hope it will be seen that way by those who matter in the party.

It seems this is being played out as a one time shot for recognition and a say in our parties direction.

[pstans]

85. The parties insiders want to keep the status quo

It will be the people who will make the difference. After people keep hearing about candidates like Lamont, who speaks about the issues they care about, and get out there and vote, then we will win.

I wrote more about this on my blog...
http://commoniowan.blogspot.com/2006/08/lieberman-dlc-and-democratic-values.html

[4_TN_TITANS]

48. 30 years is long enough...

I hope the people of CT are ready for some new blood.

[Clark2008]

57. I know I'm ready for something other than a Republican

senator in Tennessee - aren't you!

:hi:

[Czolgosz]

56. A Lieberman win means Diebold has gone bipartisan.

[JanusAscending]

61. Not so...............

Ct. still uses the old lever machines! Try again !

[Czolgosz]

65. Than obviously Lieberman will lose. Enough said.

[JanusAscending]

66. OK!

but back up a few posts and see what I reported about the MANY Ind.'s switching over to Dem. today in Ct. This is not...a sure thing. I am hoping for the best, but preparing myself for the worst.This could be a good thing, but we'll see.

[Czolgosz]

68. Me too: hope for the best, prepare for the worst. We'll know in 28 hours

[Wiley50]

89. The Lever machines have been rigged forever

just ask Taminy Hall

[MissWaverly]

67. A Lieberman win means they STOLE it again

I have been hearing rumors that Jim Baker is very concerned about the possibility of a huge
democratic win in November. Think how damaging that would be for them. I hope that the
people of Connecticut demand a recount if Lieberman wins.

[calico1]

76. Not likely.

We use lever machines in Ct.

[MissWaverly]

78. well, hooray for that

you mean you don't have the touchscreen where you push the button for Kerry like I did and
saw the machine default to Bush 5 times.

What a relief!

:-)

[calico1]

79. Nope. Not yet anyway.

Another CT DU poster has experience working at the polls:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2762120&mesg_id=2762506

[MissWaverly]

80. Take my advice, keep them out.

[Nederland]

69. It means being anti-war is an electoral loser

Really, if the pro-war candidate wins in a blue state primary, what hope do anti-war candidates have of winning in general elections across the country and in red states?

[eridani]

96. You mean the red states where majorities oppose the war?

THOSE red states?

[Nederland]

99. I mean what I said

If an anti-war candidate can't win among a group that is 80%+ against the war, where can you win?

IOW, what people tell pollsters about the war and how they vote are two disconnected events.

[MrBenchley]

71. What a pantload....

"And sadly, the people lose"
Yes, what fools the people will be, not letting the far left do all their thinking for them.

Mainly, a Lieberman win means that months of character assassination by the far left will have been wasted.

[boolean]

84. Why does being anti-war = "The far left" to you?

Lieberman is a part of the far right.

[MrBenchley]

98. Why does the porridge bird lay its eggs in the air?

You wanting to hide from the label doesn't make it any less accurate or descriptive.

[TankLV]

101. And so is MrBenchley - it gets boring.

The repeated slurs from MrBenchley

[wisteria]

88. Far left? Explain what you mean by "far left".

That is a phrase coined by the MSM and the Republicans. Wanting our party to represent the people of America is not "far left".
None of us want to control anyones thinking. We are not out to suppress anyones voice. However,when that voice differs from majority thinking those who choose another path should expect to be challenged.

[TankLV]

93. It's his favorite phrase for anybody that doesn't support repuke-lite

right wing policies.

Anything to the "left" of bush and the repukes.

[MrBenchley]

97. This "I have no idea what you mean" gambit has gotten tired

long ago.

"None of us want to control anyones thinking."
She says, in a thread in which we are assured that "the people will have been betrayed" if they dare to vote the wrong way.

"those who choose another path should expect to be challenged."
The racist caricature was a nice touch, too....demonstratingthe Lamont Campaign's "progressive values" so well....

[fujiyama]

73. If Lieberman wins

it shows once again the power of incumbency.

I hope CTians (or whatever CT residents prefer to be called) don't fall for Lieberman's bullshit "aw shucks" charm and faux moral values pandering and religious sanctimony.

[ronnykmarshall]

74. We're doomed!! Doomed I tells ya!

[w4rma]

82. REMEMBER, THE PRIMARY IS TOMORROW, TUESDAY the 8TH.

Let's take this lying, flip-flopping, endorsed by DeLay, Cokie, Coutler and Hannity, warmongering, neo-liberal (neo-con?), out with the TRASH!

The GET OUT THE VOTE campaign really starts **tomorrow**, bright and early!! Drive folks to the polls and volunteer!

Goooo Connecticut Dems!!!

[Wiley50]

86. ......Diebold takes bribes from "some" democrats n/t

[LowerManhattanite]

87. Hold on here...are you trying to say...

...that Lieberman's...a Democrat? WTF? :)

[Vidar]

92. It means the corporations win, the DINOs relax & change grinds to a halt.

[wiley]

95. A Lieberman win would be similar to the Taliban win

in Afghanistan. Old ideas.None working. Lots of people getting maimed and killed. Same old oppression. I heard a really nasty Lieberman ad in a supermarket in NYC today. He has to lose. The US commanders and soldiers in Iraq must be tweaking on Provigil or something.