Looks like Lieberman has lost the primary

Parent Cafe
41

<p>

</p>

<p>Is this a different center than, say, the actual center? :slight_smile: 60% disagree with the war on Iraq.</p>

<p>Lieberman is (was?) an out-of-touch senator whose primary job was to represent his constituency, not his delusions of grandeur. At home, people were starting to wonder whether Joe was working for anyone besides himself. Lieberman probably ran one of the worst campaigns imaginable, and the decision to hedge his bets certainly cost him the primary and perhaps his seat in the future. “Me first, or screw you!” was not really a great message for Lieberman to run on. Surprise, surprise.</p>

42

<p>TD, I’m heading for bed, but as a parting shot, do pass on Scoop’s Mid-East positions that you think have relevance, and which he was so kind
to share with you when you brought his advisors their morning coffee.</p>

43

<p>"In her words, “it’s good for us if they’re that stupid.”</p>

<p>Too bad the “stupids” end up winning more elections in November while the “smart” ones count their chickens in August. What was Kerry’s predicted margin of victory in August again? How wonderful did the so-called super-energized and ultra-motivated party look in August … and then again in Early December. At least, all the Dom Perignon is getting sweeter in the Blue States MacMansions’ wine cellars. Better open a few in the summer! </p>

<p>How does it feel to be defeated by Dumb and Dumber, not once but twice? Imagine what would happen with a good candidate from the despised right? Actually, doesn’t finding electable candidates from the left represent a much harder exercise than expected. Rejecting the current administration does not necessarily mean citizens want to put the “others” back in the White House. </p>

<p>We’ve got the “stupidest” on our side, but whom have you got?</p>

<p>And who is supposed to help you pull off that wonderful charade outlined below:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>First, let’s see if you win the White House back, and then let’s see how long you can keep it when decisions are needed to be made. Here’s a message from the canasta crowd: “La critique est aisée, mais l’art est difficile.”</p>

44

<p>Xiggi, let’s chat on November 8. If you’re sober.</p>

45

<p>[The Internet killed Joe Lieberman](<a href=“http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=191900931”>http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=191900931&lt;/a&gt;)</p>

<p>Now that we know it can be done, where should we aim next?</p>

46

<p>“Xiggi, let’s chat on November 8.”</p>

<p>TheDad, I am ALWAYS available for a good chat.</p>

<p>“If you’re sober.”</p>

<p>At this time, I’ll drop that into the “attempt at humor” category. I really hope you did not intimate that I wrote the post TUI (typing under the influence) and that my words were more or less the expression of a drunkard. Obviously, another assumption is that I would have to find solace in the attractive arms of Miss Six-Packs or Joe Keg, and drown my sorrow by drinking myseff into torpor. I’d hope that by now you knew enough about me that I might find drinking a nice addition to a celebration, but a poor antidote for setbacks. </p>

<p>And speaking about this November, let me set the record straight: I am only interested in the results of one election. To your surprise, and relative consternation, you should note that I hope the winning candidate is a democrat, and that I really hope that the Crawford district of President Bush remains in the hands of your cherished Leftist Party. In a small this expresses my dismay about the abject redistricting that took place in Texas. </p>

<p>Some of us CAN look past simplistic and partisan ideology and recognize the merits of individuals. </p>

<p>Now, I’ll lift my glass of Iced Tea to you, TheDad! Cheers! Cheers!</p>

47

<p>{quote]While MoveOn.org can take some credit for helping Lamont get early traction, the organization maintained there was much more to the challenger’s campaign than Internet supporters. “We won last night in Connecticut,” Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org executive director said in an e-mail statement. “Ned Lamont’s victory is proof that people-powered politics works. In an election decided by 10,119 votes, MoveOn members made 77,000 calls to Connecticut voters. Now we need to make enough calls to win back Congress.”

[/quote]
</p>

<p>A victory for whom? Baloney, Lies, and Organized Garbage aka BLOGs. I frefer calling it a testament to the collective stupidity and gullibility of herd-like nitwits.</p>

48

<p>“I hope you enjoy the same degree of bi-partisanship that the current administration has practiced. Personally, I’m inclined to do to the Republican structures what Rome did to Carthage.”</p>

<p>Healthy attitude. I think thats the same one the old defeated confederates in the south took once Reconstruction pulled out. Its crap like that, from both Republicans and Democrats, that keeps this country divided. If democrats want to be in power for, say, a generation, they are going to have to concede on a few points.</p>

<p>The Republicans have huge radial evangelical congregations who hate muslims and gays as their base, and on the other extreme, the Democrats have you as their base.</p>

49

<p>No, Xiggi, I was suggesting that the results might indeed cause you to hit the “In Case of Emergency, Break Glass” compartment surrounding a bottle of cognac.</p>

<p>But, upon reflection, some data elements, not <em>just</em> polls:</p>

<p>– Turnout. Dem turnout was ahead of the GOP by 15 points in the CA-50. Dem turnout in the CT-Sen was extraordinary for a mid-term primary (in August yet), contested or not, setting a record. This evidence supports polling data that suggests that Dem voters are more highly motivated than their GOP counterparts.</p>

<p>–Money: Correlating with turnout, the DSCC and DCCC are far ahead of their GOP counterparts. The RNC maintains its historical advantage over the DNC but the aggregate GOP advantage is pretty paltry. Side note: the most recent FEC filings show that some of the numbers ballyhooed in the press about Bush-appearing GOP fundraisers was considerably less than reported at the time…I suspect that there’s a more than a little Potemkin-villaging going on here by the GOP. </p>

<p>Of the top 50 challengers with the most money who are going after House incumbents, 40 are Democrats…it’s never been skewed anywhere remotely near this towards the Democrats.</p>

<p>Third-Party assessments: as of July 12…for all I know, this has been superseded by a later report even more favorable to the Democrats, the non-partisan Cook Report lists 14 toss-up seats: all currently held by Republicans, none by Democrats. In the “Lean” categories, there are only 10 seats currently held by Democrats, 21 by Republicans. There, more or less, are your 45 most competitive House seats. Moreover, the constant trend over the past six months has been in the Democratic direction, GOP seats moving from Safe to Likely, Likely to Lean, Lean to Toss-Up. I’m not aware of <em>any</em> Democratic seats that have gone in the opposite direction.</p>

<p>–Polling: Voter intensity was near even in 2004. The polls say that now the Democrats have the decided edge. Looking at the individual Senate races, I now can’t see a worst case than +3 for the Dems, +4 being more likely, a reasonable shot at +5. Unfortunately, I can’t see a clear way to +6 but reducing the Gang of 14 to the Gang of 2 would be helpful. </p>

<p>–Driving issues: the anger over Iraq, about Bush, is not confined to the Looney Left as Cheney, Mehlman, and Driver would have you believe. The GOP still rallies around but Bush has unified the Democrats on the order of 90-10 and is now losing the Independents badly, with support on the order of only 25 percent or so. Cf., 2004 when they were closely split.</p>

<p>Approval of Bush has recovered from his lows of the low-to-mid 30’s, mainly bringing some Republicans back into the fold, but seems permanently stuck at a peak of 40 percent. Poll after poll, week after week. </p>

<p>13 weeks is a long time. But it’s a lot shorter than 26 or 52. There’s about another four weeks for the picture to change significantly and then at that point I don’t think the GOP can do much to win so much as minimizing the disaster and getting a few into the lifeboats.</p>

50

<p>wacked-out republicans need to go, but we don’t need to replace them with a bunch of wacked-out democrats.</p>

<p>And from what i read in the paper this morning (maybe it was yesterday), Liberman has a very good shot of winning in November. Now how great would that be? Abandoned by the wacked-out partisans, but embraced by the electorate as a whole.</p>

51

<p>

Doing his thing, Thedad, as many in his party, gets all warm and fuzzy when recalling the salad days of the revolution. A time when the founding fathers had their way with the institutions they created–you know:</p>

<p>Robespierre, Marat, Danton et al and that grand-daddy of the hit-n-run blogespere, the guillotine…”off with their heads!” </p>

<p>…you didn’t really think I meant the American Revolution and its well reasoned founders, did you? Please. How dull.</p>

<p>As for the Democrats in November, let them eat cake.</p>

52

<p>In theory, blogs are a good idea, but we must remember that blogs are not held up to the same journalistic standard as the mainstream media, just like talk radio</p>

<p>Then again, i just heard a story of Reuters miscaptioning and photoshopping pictures from Lebanon. Maybe no media holds up to journalistic standards anymore</p>

53

<p>TheDad, please do not assume that, were this newly-found tidal wave of intelligent voters cause an overhaul in Congress, young Xiggi would cry or … run for the bottle. If the Dems have so many great ideas and know how to govern, why not let them have the Congress. My theory has always been that the best way to expose their eternal and glaring shortcomings is to give them the platform to rule from. If the current fabric of Congress does not work well, let’s get another one. If that is what the people want, I am thrilled about tossing more than a few fossils out. My only hope is that the people recognize correctly who has put abject partisanship on top of his of her agenda and who has had a negative contribution for the past years.</p>

54

<p>^the only problem with that is, Democrats don’t have a platform, and havent had one for years. I don’t like republicans, but at least they have a platform</p>

55

<p>

It does seem to have been a record high turnout, which makes the closeness of the race even stranger, unless the anti-war message lacks the potency within the Democratic party that some seem to think and hope it does. My estimate, based on some back-of-napkin algebra and a little extrapolation is that it was somewhere in the mid-forties. </p>

<p>The last time CT had such an energized primary was in 1970 (38% turnout). A neophyte peace candidate was put up to run against conservative Senator Thomas Dodd (father of current Sen. Chris Dodd). Dodd had lots of problems (health, corruption charges, “voting 60% of the time with Republicans”), and dropped out, only to come back and run as an Independent in the fall. Despite all of his problems and an energized Democratic opposition, he ended up splitting the Democratic vote and giving the seat to a Republican, Lowell Weicker. Just something fun to throw into the prognostication pot, for those of us who enjoy that kind of stew.
<a href=“http://connecticutlocalpolitics.blogspot.com/2006/03/senate-1970-threading-needle.html[/url]”>http://connecticutlocalpolitics.blogspot.com/2006/03/senate-1970-threading-needle.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

56

<p>^Yeah. Democrats united against liberman and a record turnout should equal landslide</p>

57

<p>^the only problem with that is, Democrats don’t have a platform, and havent had one for years. I don’t like republicans, but at least they have a platform</p>

<p>I read George Lakoffs book and it explained to me how the republicians stay focused by using language
<a href=“http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/10/02/lakoff/index.html[/url]”>http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/10/02/lakoff/index.html&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“rockridgeinstitute.org - rockridgeinstitute Resources and Information.”>rockridgeinstitute.org - rockridgeinstitute Resources and Information.;

</p>

58

<p>Definitly a democratic biased, but every book is biased.</p>

<p>I love social security. It’s a great thing, but if i want to invest it privatly, why can’t I? Government employees, including the congressman who oppose the practice, have had it for years. Check this out.</p>

<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrift_Savings_Plan[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrift_Savings_Plan&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Why can’t i put some of my social security money in that?</p>

<p>And free health care is out there for people who qualify. I had it until I turned 19</p>

<p>And if I want to put a monora in my front yard, why can’t I? It’s my front yard</p>

59

<p>And if I want to put a monora in my front yard, why can’t I? It’s my front yard</p>

<p>I think some people do
<a href=“http://www.sptimes.com/2002/12/01/Pasco/A_symbol_of_unity.shtml[/url]”>http://www.sptimes.com/2002/12/01/Pasco/A_symbol_of_unity.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Although some disagree to the proper placement</p>

<p>

</p>

60

<p>“the only problem with that is, Democrats don’t have a platform, and havent had one for years.”</p>

<p>Well, they can always borrow the one Gary Coleman stepped on to reach the microphone.</p>