New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R) is helping out friend Joe Lieberman by lending him staff to help prepare for a massive GOTV effort:
In his battle for re-election to the United States Senate without the backing of the Democratic Party, Joseph I. Lieberman is deploying a secret weapon in the race’s closing days: a sophisticated operation to identify and turn out voters, courtesy of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York City.
The Bloomberg group includes several top-level operatives who played key roles in the mayor’s decisive re-election last year or who are in the administration, and have taken leaves from their jobs to work on Mr. Lieberman’s campaign.
Since Mr. Lieberman lost the Democratic primary in Connecticut to Ned Lamont, they have helped open campaign offices, devised a strategy to reach voters and are corralling enough volunteers to cover 2,800 shifts at more than 700 polling sites on Election Day, Nov. 7.
Given that Mr. Lieberman does not have a party apparatus to help build his field operation, the efforts of the Bloomberg team could prove critical in one of the most closely watched races in the nation. (Cardwell)
That's putting it mildly. Bloomberg's efforts will probably win Joe Lieberman the election.
But to what end? Bloomberg is a Republican, at least on paper, who runs a city in another state. Why buy the loyalty of a Senate Democrat (or independent)? The article suggests that it may be a first step in creating a national network of support for moderate independent candidates--or possibly the groundwork for a national campaign by Bloomberg himself.
The idea of a national network to support independent candidates sounds strongly like an effort at a centrist third party. Republican and Democratic leaders should keep an eye on this developing situation, especially if Lieberman should win.
Source
Cardwell, Diane. "Bloomberg Sends Troops to Help Lieberman." The New York Times 28 October, 2006.
24 comments:
The idea is great in theory, but people in Connecticut are sick of Lieberman.
Joe for Joe is done! This will backfire because it only shows the lack of grassroots support that Lieberman does not have in his own state.
It doesn't say much about yourself when the billionaire mayor is lending his support to LIEberme. People are starting to see through the bullshit just in time for election day. Lamont is going to pull this upset.
30,000 new voters for the primary for Lamont. 42,000 new voters mostly for Lamont. People will already know who they are voting for before they get into thier cars once they start heading to the polls.
Last night (10/27) I was phoned by Quinnipiac for a poll. My unlisted number was computer generated. I'm 60 years old and this is the first time I've ever been phoned for an opinion. I'm a registered 'unaffiliated' voter. I was told to check it's site for the poll results and the newspapers next week. I affirmed my choices of DeStefano and Lamont.
A new centrist party... you've GOT to be kidding me. Lieberman and Bloomberg are both foreign policy neo-cons, and neo-cons are NOT the center of American politics; in fact, neo-conservatism only hijacked US policy in the first place based on post-9/11 fear and propaganda. If you recall, Bush ran in 2000 as an anti-neo con, saying all through the debates that we can't be the world's policemen, and framed himself as a traditional center-right conservative; this is because if he had run on neo-con policies in 2000, he never would have won enough votes, partially due to the fact most Republicans would have abandoned him as well.
What happens in the 2006 elections is FAR more important than whether the left or right wins, or whether Republicans or Democrats win; what matters is whether moderation can defeat neo-conservatism, and save our country from its daily hemorrhaging. Even hard right social conservative Pat Buchanan agrees that this election is ultimately a referendum on the failed neo-con idealogy.
If a candidate is a neo-con on foriegn policy but progressive/moderate on some domestic issues, they get no leniency from me just because I'm a progressive moderate, and they deserve to be dumped out of office; on the same token, if a candidate is a neo-con on foriegn policy but conservative on domestic issues, they should get no leniency from conservatives, and deserve to be dumped out of office. Any ideaology that denies its policies are creating more terrorists for three years, even after every intelligence agency in the country disagrees with them, MUST be removed from power in order to protect our basic securities; let's all stand together and do this for the safety of our country. This is the kind of real centrism that will put America back on track.
The Bloomberg organization is not designed to aid third party candidates. Neither Bloomberg nor Lieberman are third party candidates, properly so called. The organization is designed to aid major party candidates that have been displaced by extreme elements in the parties. It’s one more indication, among many, that parties have been weakened by an inability to raise money, tutor and bring along promising candidates, and defend themselves from reformers and special interest groups.
I wonder which party affiliation they will target to turn out... hmmmm...
I suspect the heavy unaffiliated registration is pro-Joe. Lamont's decision to run as a highly partisan Democrat in the general election was a blunder that cannot be undone.
Mayor Bloomberg is extremely popular, especially in Fairfield County. He is doing great radio and tv spots for Shays. His support of Shays and Lieberman will help a little.
Is this the start of a national centrist party?
No, Bloomberg is a lifelong Democrat who became a Republican so that he could be Mayor of the Big Apple. His association with the GOP is a matter of conveience. And like Lieberman, Bloomberg is a big supporter of the neo-con foreign policy agenda in Iraq and elsewhere. All of that said, he is a great mayor.
If it is a national centrist party built around the likes of people like Lieberman... I doubt it would win ANYWHERE else. I mean, his whole campaign is based on deceit and lies. This is more likely another play to get Lieberman to become a Republican. Gerstein and Tammy are both fairly slimey. Lieberman himself isn't showing himself in a good light, considering his constant lies as to what he has said, what his opponents have said.
If you want a national centrist party, support moving your state to IRV, Condorcet method, or acceptance voting. That will actually allow for more than 2 parties.
The only reason this run of Lieberman's is working in CT is because the Republican candidate is weak(well, more so because Lieberman has been deemed the Republican candidate) and Lieberman is the incumbent. In a normal election, with three strong candidates, generally the candidate furthest from the other two will win. Even in CT, if Schlessinger gets stronger, it could hurt Lieberman. It hasn't happened yet.
It figures another republican help a sore loser not only in the primary but all three debates, and the republican some of the republican party is still afraid of Lamont so thay think for voting for Liberman but the deal is Alan Schlesinger he is the real deal, so my opinion all republicans are going to feel sorry when Mr. Schlesinger wins this election, and they try to jump on the ban wagon. Bottom line Libermen it is time for a real senator in Connecticut and that is Schlesinger.
Hoah
If you are a republican and in Fairfield county you should really stop and think of the problem in you party before back a person who's agenda does not include you the republican he will vote against what you have fought so hard to defend as republicans and Alan Schlesinger is that answer to that possiblity not happening watch him read his ads find the three debate watch them go to his web site find something you believe in maybe it his views or just that you both of you are republicans and you are as loyal as Alan Schlesinger is to the republican party to me a vote for Schlesinger is a vote people who want to perserve the American way of life. Voting for liberman will cost the people of CT to much Liberman says he is for CT but votes different.
Thank you
HOAHA
Protecting the center of what -- the powerful? Meanwhile, should Joe get elected, the ordinary person will continue to struggle to make ends meet because all those “special interest” that gave to Joe’s campaign will be able to cash in and keep their big profits in their pockets! It's a sad day when the voice of the ordinary person is trumped by the powers of greed outside their state! Wake up CT people, the mighty rich are coming after your vote!!!!! Yeah, yeah, Lamont is mighty rich, but think about it. It’s only been his money and the grass roots efforts that have been funding his campaign, so that means his only constituency is YOU!!!
I wonder how much the Bloomberg supplied 'volunteers' will be paid this time. Let's see 2,800 volunteer shifts, at $100 per day, Joe should be able to have an even larger slush fund for the general than he did for the primary.
The organization is designed to aid major party candidates that have been displaced by extreme elements in the parties.
Don - It stops being extreme elements when you have a primary, the primary turnout is the largest in history even though its in August, and the upstart wins...
you know what you call it then? The majority.
Bloomberg = RINO.
I think it would be just fine if Joe started another party that attracted moderates.
The Democrat party has been taken over by lunatics and another party would be just what we need IMHO.
Intresting- For the most part, this (and other threads) tend to degenerate into nothing but IRAQ! IRAQ! IRAQ! which would pretty much sum up the whole Democrat party platform.
Bloomberg's efforts will probably win Joe Lieberman the election.
I don't agree- Neds run for office is already pretty much in the grave unless something unexpected comes up.
Bloombergs assitance will just be more dirt in the hole.
Perhaps Ned would have better luck running against Dodd, the man hasn't done much of anything for 25 years except run off his fathers name.
Bloomberg's efforts will probably win Joe Lieberman the election.
I don't agree- Neds run for office is already pretty much in the grave unless something unexpected comes up.
Bloombergs assitance will just be more dirt in the hole.
Perhaps Ned would have better luck running against Dodd, the man hasn't done much of anything for 25 years except run off his fathers name.
I hope to see Chris Murphy campaigning against Dodd next time he is up for election, considering he was in DC for 8 years before Nancy Johnson was elected.
I also think seeing Chris Dodd endorsing Lamont in a TV ad after seeing him endorsing Lieberman is proof positive the man just doesn;t care about what he stands for ...just whatever the party wants.
It will be amusing to see his presidential campaign implode on the pad like some defective 1950's era rocket. ...hey Chris, go home to East Haddam...Grace needs you
the longer this race goes on and the more money that pours into it, the more I want to sit down with the voting records and identify the basic theme of the coalitions he has, and look at key donor lists for the people supporting Joe and crosstab it with who funds and supports his friends.
On the critical issues of the day and indeed of the generation, we're looking at a Lieberman/Bloomberg/Cheney et al neoconservative agenda, and in Lieberman's case, running under the cover of a drizzle of sweet liberal icing on top.
If the war in Iraq doesn't end, our feet are nailed to the floor on every other social issue because of its cost, and because it is preoccupying our military.
Michael Bloomberg, key Bush and Lieberman fundraiser Mel Sembler, Joe Lieberman -- they are not merely pro Israel (as is Ned Lamont), but support an extreme right version of being pro Israel. And I would say a counterproductive version because the Iraq War has destabilized the Middle East and in fact weakens the United States in the process - and if we're weak, we cannot do much to defend Israel or anyone else.
I think the coalition you are seeing may better be called the AIPAC party. The notion of New York's mayor sending thousands of people up to help with the election day work is weird and troubling, but I'm also wondering if the long arm of Israeli foreign intervention in our state election is what we're seeing, and that's disturbing to me.
See what I mean?
Iraq with neo-cons and a touch of anti-Israel negativity for good measure.
Funny, there are those who claim things in Iraq would be better under Saddam.... but support an actual DEMOCRACY that is under siege by suicidal militants... nah can't do that.
If trying to create democracy is creating twice as many suicidal militants according to all our intelligence agencies, why would you want to create more terrorists?
If our foreign policy is seen as so unfairly biased towards Israel by the majority of the civilized world, and that fact makes Islamoterrorism seem like the lesser of two evils to young Muslims, increasing their chances of being recruited as terrorists against Israel and the West, you STILL don't think we should change our policies to better protect Israel and ourselves?
Sounds like the only person that's anti-Israel here is you.
No, it's not a start of a national third party, centrist or otherwise. "Third parties" that have any sort of success are personality cults that shrivel up after the candidate disappears -- like Teddy Roosevelt, Ross Perot and Weicker (whose ACP Dick Foley dubbed "A Cult of Personality").
Same with Lieberman.
Third parties without the strong personality are miserable failures that have little impact on anything at all (see "Party, The Green").
And I doubt Bloomberg's "troops" will make all that much of a difference. It's true that Joey has no field operation and Lamont has a good one, but I doubt Bloomberg can give enough troops to have much of a statewide impact.
If Ned loses, as is likely, it will be the fault of his lousy campaign and Lieberman's ability to define him as negative (even as Mr. Sanctimony spread blatant lies about Lamont's business practices).
It won't have jack to do with Bloomberg and his mercenaries.
"If Ned loses, as is likely, it will be the fault of his lousy campaign and Lieberman's ability to define him as negative"
*INSERT CHUCKLE HERE*
Ned "I'm everything Joe isn't" Lamont has defined himself as a negative, no help required from Joe.
Post a Comment