Sunday, November 12, 2006

Lieberman Hints at Larger 3rd Party Movement?

Lieberman was on Meet the Press earlier, where he said this (via ThinkProgress):
"The fact is that this was not a major realignment election in my opinion. This was the voters in Connecticut and elsewhere saying we are disappointed with the the Republicans. We want to give the Democrats a chance. But I believe that the American people are considering both major political parties to be in a kind of probation because their understandably angry that Washington is dominated too much by partisan political games and not enough by problem solving and patriotism."

If Americans are angry at both parties, they have a funny way of showing it. How many incumbent Democrats lost?

More commentary from Colin McEnroe
In one of his typically astonishing interviews on "Meet the Press," Lieberman insisted that this was "not a major realignment election" ... despite the fact that ..it was .. a major realignment election. I guess if you can claim you were tied for third in New Hampshire when you finished a distant fifth, you can claim this was not a major realignment.


Update: You can watch the "newscast" here.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Joe is right on. Partisan politics get in the way of progress and problem solving. I wish all of you Lamonsters would go under your rock until your next lunatic fringe candidate emerges.

Matt said...

Remember 1994? The GOP claimed that their victory was a broad mandate to reinvent the government. Now, the Dems are supposed to read a similarly sweeping victory as a call to lay down their ideas and let the already-failed conservatives keep on keepin' on? Good one.

Thanks, Joe... still carrying water for the right wing.

Genghis Conn said...

Independent run for president. He's already starting. Dem leaders need keep an eye on him--if he even so much as looks at New Hampshire, worry.

Aldon Hynes said...

1% More Conscious has a good transcript of Meet the Press. While you're there, you should check out the comments about Nancy Pelosi.

Blue Turned Red said...

This was not a realignment election. Given the current political climate the Dems should have won even more seats, but it appears gerrymandering is reducing the number of competitive districst in Congress.

Democrats won because voters got fed up with Bush and his failures in Iraq and his non-willingness to confront them. Democrats will have to do better than simply wait for the Republicans to screw up to take over the reigns. They need to give voters a reason to vote for them and a moderate message seems to work. Now if only the netroots would understand that.

I'm all for the third party approach. Lumping liberal Democrats and conservative Democrats in the same party seems to make no sense anymore. The "big tent" has too many holes in it.

Anonymous said...

"Remember 1994? The GOP claimed that their victory was a broad mandate to reinvent the government."

Which it was if you bothered to consider it was the first time in 40 years Republicans were in control of the house!

The problem is the current crop of Republicans are closer to being Dems then Repubs, hence they lost thier seats.

The GOP moved from away from where it was in 1994...

cgg said...

Genghis stop giving me nightmares.

Lieberman wouldn't need to hit NH or Iowa. There would be no primary. He would need to get on the ballot in each state though.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 4:52:

Yes because obviously namecalling 40% of Connecticut isn't partisan.

Joe Lieberman is the most partisan person in politics. Yet oddly enough his party has one member: Himself. He isn't out for whats best for Connecticut or America. Just Joe Lieberman.

Anonymous said...

Dubya isn't just 'GOP' he's a neocon with a vision of a new world order, offered by Rove, Perle, Adelman, Frum, Bremner, and Cheney. The 1994 republicans became united in one simple goal -- destroy Clinton. The present crop of republicans are neocons and united in their goal of filling their pockects. Corruption, Incorporated.

Anonymous said...

Lieberman must be carefully watched. Every public statement scrutinized, every vote cast, monitored. Put him under some kind of universal microscope. And keep on him. I don't trust this man. Anyone with an ego this big, has no business representing a state. Let's not forget the rhetoric about him prior to the election. It's too important to the entire state. Sadly, I feel Connecticut needs to be rescued from the likes of Lieberman. There's too much at stake and Connecticut must never turn republican! Remember he had 70% of the republican vote! Lieberman is slippery.

Shadow said...

> Partisan politics get in the way of progress and problem solving. I wish all of you
> Lamonsters would go under your rock until your next lunatic fringe candidate emerges.

Calling people who disagreee with you monsters that support lunatics is an example of progress and problem solving over partisanship?

The Joe Lieberman definition of moderation, everyone, and why no genuine third party or centrist movement will ever be built around him; he has become a microcosm of some of the worst traits on each side of the political spectrum, and mastered using the words bi-partisanship and centrism as a cloak for actions the majority of voters disagree with. To whatever extent he is successful in his political career going forward, the true meanings of those terms will erode, and have less hope of being actualized by a political party.