No leftist purge of Lieberman

Discussion in 'Politics' started by cygonaut, Aug 12, 2006.

  1. cygonaut
    Offline

    cygonaut Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Messages:
    41
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +2
    Lehigh gets it right.

    Boston Globe

    No leftist purge of Lieberman

    By Scot Lehigh, Globe Columnist | August 11, 2006

    DID TUESDAY really mark the rise of the rabid moonbats in our national politics?

    That's the way conservative commentators and bloggers and Republican message-mongers would like to spin Connecticut's Democratic primary results, which saw businessman Ned Lamont beat three-term US Senator Joseph Lieberman…

    But let's look at the actual facts…

    Yes, 62 percent of self-identified liberals chose Lamont, according to a CBS News/New York Times exit poll. But Lamont was also the choice of 39 percent of moderates and 35 percent of conservatives. Further, though Lamont got the support of 60 percent of war opponents, 39 percent of that group stuck with Lieberman.

    That simply doesn't add up to a leftist purge.

    Nor is opposition to the war a minority opinion anymore. According to a new CNN poll, 60 percent of Americans now oppose the war. In that large sample of US adults, 61 percent said at least some US forces should be withdrawn from Iraq by year's end…

    Whether or not Tuesday's defeat spells the ultimate decline of Lieberman, let's be clear about one thing: No matter how much conservatives repeat their mantra, Ned Lamont's victory didn't signal the rise of moonbats -- much less their conquest of Connecticut.

    Source
     
  2. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    One also has to wonder why it's only the far-right who is so het up about Lieberman losing.

    Could it be they know he wouldn't take them on? Otherwise, why give a rat's patoot? And...if he wouldn't take them on, then he isn't a Dem. Bipartisanship is one thing when you're working with people who are bipartisan. This little crop of "republicans", isn't, so giving in and not taking a stqand on anything is just weakness and is out of touch. Interestingly enough, that's how Lieberman beat the prior incumbant who at least had the grace and dignity to go home after he lost instead of trying to screw his own party.

    Let the Republicans choose their own representatives....they don't get to choose ours, too. (And I say this as someone who has mixed feelings about Lieberman losing...nor am I sure how I would have voted in the CT primary).
     
  3. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,817
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,359
    As I stated in another post..
    I don't think Lieberman left the Democrats, they left him....
    That man was a solid Dem, my gosh, all you have to do is look at his voting record..... And because he felt the need to stand with our military, and not accept cut and run, this was his payback....
    You can thank the left wing of your party for that....They we're actually rejoicing, it was pretty pathetic to watch..

    And last I checked, we still live in America and he can run in any party he chooses....

    Go Joe as an independent... I never thought I'd support Joe Lieberman, but right now I just can't help myself....:dance:
    :teeth:
     

Share This Page