- Joined
- Feb 2, 2006
- Messages
- 17,343
- Reaction score
- 2,876
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Preview of Friday's 'Time' Magazine: Lieberman and Hagel Speak OutLieberman calls jumping to the Republican side, and tilting the Senate, "a remote possibility," which means there's at least a chance of that. Time seems to push Lieberman in this direction, as the article concludes: "Lieberman's GOP flirtation has its risks--and a time limit....The longer he waits to capitalize on his moment, the greater the danger that he'll be tagged as one of those politicians for whom having power is more important than using it."
Last month, after Lieberman told Democratic chief Sen. Harry Reid that he had "stopped attending the weekly Democratic lunch because he didn't feel comfortable discussing Iraq there, Reid offered to hold those discussions at another time," Time's Massimo Calabresi reveals. "Lieberman has started attending again." But Lieberman also keeps in touch with Bush aide Stephen Hadley "every week or two."
I have really come to dislike Lieberman. I hope he switches. He will be voted out of office at his next election. Connecticut would not stand for that.
CT elected him as an independant over the endorsed Democrat.His next election isn't until 2012. What makes you think Connecticut cares?
CT elected him as an independant over the endorsed Democrat.
Clearly, they were interested in HIM not his party.
His next election isn't until 2012. What makes you think Connecticut cares?
Because it's a blue state. The only reason Lieberman won was because the republicans knew that their candidate had NO chance of winning whatsoever.
And if he runs as a Republican in 2012, why wouldn't the same people vote for him against the Democrat again? Plus the small fraction who voted for the Republican candidate this time around.
Just because it's a blue state doesn't mean it won't elect a Republican senator. Maine has two Republican senators, and North Dakota has two Democrat senators.
Because they're partisans?And if he runs as a Republican in 2012, why wouldn't the same people vote for him against the Democrat again? Plus the small fraction who voted for the Republican candidate this time around.
Why does it matter if Leiberman calls himself a Democrat or a Republcan? He's shown he's willing to vote independently regardless of the party he's labeled with. If he calls himself a Republican but still holds the same Democratic leaning positions he has on the majority of issues, why does it make a difference?
I guess my understanding of how the committees, etc. are chaired is not that clear. Leiberman is not a democrat now, correct? I thought he was one of 2 independents with the Republicans and Democrats each having 49 seats. I thought the committee chairs went to the Dems because the 2 independents typically vote Democratic and therefore when it comes time to naming chairs, the Democrats get the chairs. Unless Leiberman switches the way he votes in about 80% of the cases, he'll still vote more Democratic than Republican. So why would his party label suddenly give control to the GOP? If he does switch the majority of his votes, I don't see how he could hold his office in 2012.If Lieberman goes to the GOP, then the GOP will control the Senate.
I guess my understanding of how the committees, etc. are chaired is not that clear. Leiberman is not a democrat now, correct? I thought he was one of 2 independents with the Republicans and Democrats each having 49 seats. I thought the committee chairs went to the Democrats because the 2 independents typically vote Democratic and therefore when it comes time to naming chairs, the Democrats get the chairs. Unless Leiberman switches the way he votes in about 80% of the cases, he'll still vote more Democratic than Republican. So why would his party label suddenly give control to the GOP? If he does switch the majority of his votes, I don't see how he could hold his office in 2012.
I guess my understanding of how the committees, etc. are chaired is not that clear. Leiberman is not a democrat now, correct? I thought he was one of 2 independents with the Republicans and Democrats each having 49 seats. I thought the committee chairs went to the Democrats because the 2 independents typically vote Democratic and therefore when it comes time to naming chairs, the Democrats get the chairs. Unless Leiberman switches the way he votes in about 80% of the cases, he'll still vote more Democratic than Republican. So why would his party label suddenly give control to the GOP? If he does switch the majority of his votes, I don't see how he could hold his office in 2012.
If Lieberman goes to the GOP, then the GOP will control the Senate.
No its not. If someone changes party and this changes the party in the majority, the leadership changes right away.The leadership of the Senate is fixed until Jan 2009. Let him do whatever the hell he wants.
No its not. If someone changes party and this changes the party in the majority, the leadership changes right away.
See: Jim Jeffords, May/June 2001
It's a debateable topic honestly, it would all boil down to how he feels personally about the way he is adressed between the two parties and how his concerns are handled within the dialogue. If he feels shunned by Democrats but Republicans will at least hear him out and give him the approptiate attention to his ideals, it could be a very attractive party for him. I guess time will have to be the decider though.I really don't see Lieberman switching sides though. Every politician asks themselves "What's in it for me?" There's not much reason for Lieberman to switch sides.
I don't see Lieberman catching too much flak about being a RINO only because he typically votes his ideology, most of the RINOS conservatives are concerned about are the "finger to the wind" types that vote based on current polling and current electoral trends, these are the worst types of politicians for the simple fact that you can't vote for them based on their principles, rather, what you hope they will do if elected. While I disagree with much of the principles that Lieberman holds, he has shown alot of spine and I actually trust that he is voting the way he feels will help the country. I respect him regardless of his party affiliation.The leadership of the Senate is fixed until Jan 2009. Let him do whatever the hell he wants.
I personally hope he does switch, since he votes with democrats more than republicans. Then the republicans can whine, bitch, and moan how he is a RINO.
“I have no desire or intention to leave the Democratic Party or the Democratic caucus,” Lieberman said Friday while in Hartford to host an education forum. “I hope and believe we’ll never get to that point, so I believe this latest flurry is much ado about nothing.”
I would love to see Joe switch parties.....That would give the Republicans control of the senate.......I am so tired of hearing "Dingy Harry" Reid whine...........
Well, it's unlikely that it's going to happen. Regardless, I agree with you about Harry Reid. The man puts me to sleep whenever he talks.
I would never say never aps........I listened to Leiberman being interviewd on the radio the other day and he did not rule it out............
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?