portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

imperialism & war

Pro-War Democrat Lieberman is Losing!

Connecticut's incumbent Senator is losing in what many see as a referendum on the war.
If Lieberman does lose, watch for the Democratic party to spout more anti-war rhetoric.

This from the AP a few minutes ago:

Sen. Joe Lieberman struggled in his bid for a fourth term Tuesday, battling to overcome a tough primary challenge and escape payback from his own party for supporting the Iraq war.

Six years after Democrats backed him for vice president, Lieberman lagged with 47 percent, or 56,891 votes, to political novice Ned Lamont's 53 percent, or 64,383 votes, with 44 percent of precincts reporting.
Looks Like Lieberman Is Toast 08.Aug.2006 19:11

marco

funniest moment so far here in konetiuklandia, was when Lieberman
contacted the state Attorney General to demand that hackers be
brought to justice for taking his website down twice earlier today.

He threw press conferences and everything, announcing that he
thought Lamont's people were hacking him.

Chris Mathews and Fox TV might even still (10pm) be reporting
on that in heavy rotation.

One problem with that. It is turning out that Lieberman only
paid ahead for a certain amount of bandwidth on his website
and normal day to day hits the hours leading up to election
day may have been what took it down.

Might go down as his most embarrassing moment, unless of course
you count the full mouth kiss he returned to his boyfriend,
Mr. George (I like em young and bald) W Bush.

Or something like that.

marco

 link to nedlamont.com

 http://nedlamont.com/blog

Down Loserman, Down! 08.Aug.2006 19:33

@

Occasionally a ray of light breaks through the dark shroud of fascism!

Blue states getting bluer, Red states getting redder. 08.Aug.2006 19:50

yume

Lieberman lost because he has voted to conservative over the past decade. He is after all a conservative Jew, so naturally, it would be hard for him to throw away his religion and embrace views he doesn't believe in.

McKinney is lost to a more conservative democrat in the big Red state of Georgia.

I'm not sure these results mean much other than both sides are becoming more polarized based on geography.

I spoke with a man I've known for a long time who is involved in state politics and is a Republican. He believes the republicans are going to get creamed this fall, but also believes it's big loss will help the republicans win in 2008. I'm not sure if I agree with the later.

I just know that Lieberman's toast 08.Aug.2006 19:59

marco

I just know that Lieberman's toast and I'm breathing just a little
bit more steadily for a while. I don't think for a moment this is
a major revolution or something. But something really good has
happened in rejecting Lieberman for being TOO conservative.

Somehow it feels like "all of america" has spoken or something.

Call me the eternal optimist, eh?

marco

toast, I tell ya:  http://mke.indymedia.org/en/2006/08/205901.shtml

Big Tent Thinking Is Gone 08.Aug.2006 20:06

Ben Douglass bendouglass@cheerful.com

This whole Lieberman thing is just another symptom of both major parties losing their "Big Tent" agenda. In years past liberal, pro-choice conservatives were welcome in the Republican party, but not anymore. Years ago conservative dixiecrats were welcome in the Democratic party, but not anymore.

Just a thought about the radical polarization of American society in the past 25-years. That's all.


lie-berman just announced he is splitting the ticket. 08.Aug.2006 20:07

yume

So now that he is going to run as an independent, will he put a republican in office?

my prediction 08.Aug.2006 20:40

lived for a time in ct

>> So now that he is going to run as an independent, will he put a republican in office?

No, Lieberman will pull some republican votes, but there just aren't that many of them. The democrats will vote for, get this, *the democratic candidate* who is now officially Ned Lamont. Lieberman might do well for a 3rd party candidate. I'd say he might get 10% of the vote or so. And, of course, that's assuming he doesn't drop out of the race when pressure is put on him to do so which I'd predict as more likely than not. But Lamont is going to get the Senate seat; at least I'd wager large sums of money on it tonight (there are always unpredictable events that could alter that).

one down many more to go 08.Aug.2006 20:42

adios joe

Does voting work? Hope joe's replacement is not another wolf in sheeps atire.

This is a hopeful sign, but there is a lot of replacing yet to do. Just here at home any democrat is better than our current crop of mass murderers and lovers thereof.

3rd party screw 08.Aug.2006 20:50

jc

The last conservative to jeopardize an election was George Wallace, in the '72 campaign against Nixon.

Wonder if Wallace was shot by the same guy as Larry Flynt? The shots severed lumbar vertebrae.

Now we have Diebold and ES&L voting machines. Much less messy.

anyone 08.Aug.2006 21:04

can get absentee ballot

and by doing so, not participate in the Diebold debacle of electronic voting.
I don't trust the return of mine via the U.S. mail but deliver it in person to my precinct on voting day. It's legal and its one way to circumvent this crap.

Throw the bums OUT! 08.Aug.2006 21:23

Marleen

In the past 26 years, only three other incumbent
U.S. senators have lost primary elections.

Time to get rid of the rest of the DEAD WOOD
in BOTH our NATIONAL and LOCAL legislatures.

NO MORE CAREER POLITICIANS !!!!

adios joe says 08.Aug.2006 21:26

Robert

"Does voting work? Hope joe's replacement is not another wolf in sheeps atire."

Lamont is the lesser of two evils. Both major parties are necessary participants in the Middle East oil wars and supporters of Israel at all costs. This is a given. And this is the problem that 'we the people' need to deal with!

THE OCCUPIERS: OUR ONE-PARTY (stolen-election system) -- DOMINATED BY ISRAEL AND CORPORATE AMERICA!

What the fuck are we going to do about it?

toasting lieberman 08.Aug.2006 21:41

marco


McKinney lost to Hank Johnson; Lieberman loses 08.Aug.2006 21:43

Robert

My overall score: 'we the people' lose again.

"Three-term Sen. Joe Lieberman fell to anti-war challenger Ned Lamont in Connecticut's Democratic primary Tuesday, a race seen as a harbinger of sentiment over a conflict that has claimed the lives of more than 2,500 U.S. troops.

Unbowed, Lieberman immediately announced he would enter the fall campaign as an independent. Only six years ago, Lieberman was the Democrats' choice for vice president.

"As I see it, in this campaign we just finished the first half and the Lamont team is ahead. But, in the second half, our team, Team Connecticut, is going to surge forward to victory in November," Lieberman said after congratulating Lamont.

Lamont, a millionaire with virtually no political experience, ran on his opposition to the Iraq war.
He led with 52 percent of the vote, or 144,005, to 48 percent for Lieberman, with 134,026, with 98 percent of precincts reporting.

"They call Connecticut the land of steady habits," a jubilant Lamont told cheering reporters. "Tonight we voted for a big change."

Lieberman's loss made him only the fourth incumbent senator to lose a primary since 1980.
Turnout was projected at twice the norm for a primary.

In Georgia, Rep. Cynthia McKinney, the fiery congresswoman known for her conspiracy theories about the Sept. 11 attacks and a scuffle this year with a U.S. Capitol police officer, lost a runoff for the Democratic nomination.

And in Michigan, moderate Republican Rep. Joe Schwarz trailed a conservative in a GOP primary.

Elsewhere, voters in Colorado and Missouri also chose candidates for the fall elections.

The anti-war sentiment

The Connecticut Senate race dominated the political landscape in recent weeks, as Lamont demonstrated the power of anti-war sentiment among Democrats with his campaign. Lamont is the millionaire owner of a cable television company, but his political career is limited to serving as a town selectman and member of the town tax board.

It was a race watched closely by the liberal, Internet-savvy Democrats who lead the party's emerging "netroots" movement, groups such as Moveon.org that played a big role in pushing Lamont's candidacy.

Officials said turnout was up to 50 percent when primaries usually only draw 25 percent of voters. And vote totals showed roughly 16,000 more ballots cast for the Democratic Senate primary than the party primary for governor, reflecting the extra attention to the Lieberman-Lamont battle.

Jubilant Lamont supporters predicted victory.

"People are going to look back and say the Bush years started to end in Connecticut," said Avi Green, a volunteer from Boston. "The Republicans are going to look at tonight and realize there's blood in the water."

A hack accussation

On the final day of the race, Lieberman accused his opponent's supporters of hacking his campaign Web site and e-mail system. Campaign manager Sean Smith said the site began having problems Monday night and crashed for good at 7 a.m., denying voters information about the candidate.

"It is a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise voters," Smith said.

Lamont, campaigning early Tuesday afternoon in Bridgeport, said he knew nothing about the accusations. "It's just another scurrilous charge," he said.

A week ago, polls showed Lieberman trailing Lamont by 13 percentage points. The latest polls showed the race tightening, with Lamont holding a slight lead of 51 percent to 45 percent over Lieberman among likely Democratic voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday.

The telephone poll of 784 likely Democratic primary voters, conducted from July 31 to Aug. 6, has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Democratic critics targeted Lieberman for his strong support of the Iraq war and for his close ties to President Bush. They played and replayed video of the kiss President Bush planted on Lieberman's cheek after the 2005 State of the Union address.

An independent run

Lieberman has said he will run as an independent in the fall if defeated in the primary. His falling poll numbers spurred some Democratic colleagues to make last-minute campaign appearances, including former President Clinton, Sen. Barbara Boxer of California and others.

In the lead up to Tuesday's primary, 14,000 new Connecticut voters registered as Democrats, while another 14,000 state voters switched their registration from unaffiliated to Democrat to vote in the primary.

Other primaries

In Georgia, McKinney, her state's first black congresswoman, lost to Hank Johnson, the black former commissioner of DeKalb County, 58 percent to 41 percent.

In the heavily Democratic district, the runoff winner is likely to win in the fall.

McKinney has long been controversial, once suggesting the Bush administration had advance knowledge of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. Her comments helped galvanize opposition and she lost her seat in 2002, but won it again two years ago.

In her latest brouhaha in March, she struck a Capitol Police officer who did not recognize her and tried to stop her from entering a House office building.

A grand jury in Washington declined to indict her, but she was forced to apologize before the House. She drew less than 50 percent of the vote in last month's primary.

In other primaries Tuesday:

In Michigan, Republican Rep. Joe Schwarz, a moderate who supports abortion rights, lagged conservative Tim Walberg, a former state lawmaker. The race has drawn more than $1 million from outside groups; Schwarz has received support from President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

In Michigan, Republican Rep. Joe Schwarz, a moderate who supports abortion rights, lagged conservative Tim Walberg, a former state lawmaker. The race has drawn more than $1 million from outside groups; Schwarz has received support from President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

In Colorado, two open congressional seats have drawn crowds of candidates.

Missouri Republican Sen. Jim Talent and Democratic challenger Claire McCaskill, the state auditor, won their party's primaries."

 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14228351/

the tide is turning 08.Aug.2006 22:40

max

lets please not get our hopes up. One leaves, another one replaces him.

The problem is not with individual Senators, its the Democratic party.

Deeper issues surrounding the defeat of Joseph Lieberman 08.Aug.2006 23:12

World Socialist Web Site

The defeat of Connecticut senator Joseph Lieberman in Tuesday's Democratic Party primary has sent shock waves through the American political establishment. Less than six years after serving as the Democratic vice-presidential candidate, on the ticket which won the most votes in the 2000 election, Lieberman was repudiated in a record primary turnout fueled by massive antiwar sentiment among Connecticut voters.

FOR THE FULL TEXT OF THIS ARTICLE, GO TO:
 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/aug2006/lieb-a09.shtml


another outcome 09.Aug.2006 00:24

the anti-joe

I cannot remember where, but I recently read that one survery indicated Joe would win if he ran as an Indipendent today. A lot can change in a few months. We'll see. And hope for Lamont.

Michael Moore's response 09.Aug.2006 06:45

..

Let the resounding defeat of Senator Joe Lieberman send a cold shiver down the spine of every Democrat who supported the invasion of Iraq and who continues to support, in any way, this senseless, immoral, unwinnable war. Make no mistake about it: We, the majority of Americans, want this war ended -- and we will actively work to defeat each and every one of you who does not support an immediate end to this war.

Nearly every Democrat set to run for president in 2008 is responsible for this war. They voted for it or they supported it. That single, stupid decision has cost us 2,592 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Lieberman and Company made a colossal mistake -- and we are going to make sure they pay for that mistake. Payback time started last night.

I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war. Perhaps that switch will be enough for some to support them. For others, like me -- while I'm glad they've seen the light -- their massive error in judgment is, sadly, proof that they are not fit for the job. They sided with Bush, and for that, they may never enter the promised land.

To Hillary, our first best hope for a woman to become president, I cannot for the life of me figure out why you continue to support Bush and his war. I'm sure someone has advised you that a woman can't be elected unless she proves she can kick ass just as crazy as any man. I'm here to tell you that you will never make it through the Democratic primaries unless you start now by strongly opposing the war. It is your only hope. You and Joe have been Bush's biggest Democratic supporters of the war. Last night's voter revolt took place just a few miles from your home in Chappaqua. Did you hear the noise? Can you read the writing on the wall?

To every Democratic Senator and Congressman who continues to back Bush's War, allow me to inform you that your days in elective office are now numbered. Myself and tens of millions of citizens are going to work hard to actively remove you from any position of power.

If you don't believe us, give Joe a call.

Yours,
Michael Moore
 mmflint@aol.com
www.michaelmoore.com

P.S. Republicans -- sorry to leave you out of this letter. It's just that our side has a little housecleaning to do. We'll take care of you this November.

RE: Lamont from the WSWS article referenced above ^ 09.Aug.2006 11:29

Patrick Martin

"Lamont is a multimillionaire, great-grandson of one of the founding partners of J. P. Morgan, and himself the proprietor of a cable television company worth hundreds of millions of dollars. His wife is a venture capitalist with a personal fortune equal to her husband's. His candidacy is the byproduct of sharp divisions within the US ruling elite over the disastrous outcome of the adventure in Iraq, but should he win election to the Senate in November, he would be quickly and smoothly incorporated into the Democratic caucusor into a new Democratic congressional majority that would continue to fund and support the war in Iraq and further wars on behalf of imperialist interests."


Ned Lamont - A "True" Democrat 09.Aug.2006 15:58

Minerva's Owl

Here's the little rich boy's views on Israel. PS: There is no hope to be found in the Democratic Party.

...........................................................................

News
Antiwar Challengers Split Over Israel
By Jennifer Siegel
July 14, 2006

The anti-Iraq war challengers battling Senator Joseph Lieberman and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in upcoming Democratic primaries are staking out divergent positions on the current crisis in Lebanon.

Ned Lamont, who is mounting an increasingly competitive challenge against Lieberman, told the Forward that he supports Israel's current operations in Gaza and Lebanon. Lamont, who is drawing support from anti-war activists nationwide who are upset with Lieberman's hawkish views on Iraq, said that he disagreed with the European Union's declaration that criticized Israel's actions as a "disproportionate" response.

"When we're dealing with Hezbollah and Hamas, who are both dedicated to the elimination of Israel, it's a little presumptuous of us to say what's proportionate and what's not from over here on this side of the Atlantic," Lamont said. "I don't think it's for the United States to dictate how Israel tactically defends itself."

He added: "I think first and foremost, return the kidnapped soldiers, Hamas and Hezbollah. And I think that would be sort of a prerequisite for everything that goes on beyond."
In addition to blasting Israel's enemies, Lamont also blamed the current escalation on the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq and failure to be more engaged in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Meanwhile, in New York today, Jonathan Tasini, who is battling Clinton in the Democratic primary, issued a statement critical of Israel.

"Raining rockets and missiles on unarmed people in Gaza and Beirut is no more acceptable than launching rockets on unarmed people in Haifa," Tasini said.

"I understand the concern Israel has for the return of its kidnapped soldiers and shouldn't we also understand the passion felt by Palestinians about the thousands of Palestinians sitting in Israeli jails?" Tasini said. "However, the question is whether Beirut must be destroyed and more civilians killed in Gaza to gain the release of the soldiers? To the Israeli and Palestinian governments, and to Hezbollah, we must say: willfully killing civilians is a grave breach in the

Fourth Geneva Convention and constitutes war crimes that are unjustifiable under any circumstances."

Both Lieberman and Clinton have spoken out in defense of Israel's recent military actions.

 http://www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=8124