The Final Push

Antiwar Joe supporters:

"Yeah, it gives me pause," says Jean Michaud, a member of a local carpenters' union, which has stuck with Lieberman.  "He is for it, but he's against it, too. He wants to bring the troops home. But it's not his fault; it's the top levels of the government."

Why are the polls so stable for Joe, showing him basically in the high forties and Ned in the high thirties?  Why did this country elect and reelect Richard Nixon?  They are pretty much the same character, both incredibly smart and incredibly narcissistic politicians who manipulate the press and make you feel good about the way they are lying to you.  Rick Green at the Hartford Courant and historian Rick Perlstein both point out that Joe is using what is in effect a really, really good hustle.  The war isn't a small issue in Connecticut.  It's a major issue, but in a sense, the reason Joe is able to sustain his lead is because he's successfully neutralized his extremist position on the war.  The Democratic Party refused to get involved, the Republican Party is backing Joe, and the press is accepting the pat narrative that Lieberman is a moderate.  That means punching through the con is incredibly hard; if Bill Clinton and Harry Reid won't say that Joe is hustling people on the war, then why should anyone else?  

Here's the sad reality, from neoconservative Joshua Muravchik:

Prepare to Bomb Iran. Make no mistake, President Bush will need to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities before leaving office. It is all but inconceivable that Iran will accept any peaceful inducements to abandon its drive for the bomb. Its rulers are religio-ideological fanatics who will not trade what they believe is their birthright to great power status for a mess of pottage. Even if things in Iraq get better, a nuclear-armed Iran will negate any progress there. Nothing will embolden terrorists and jihadists more than a nuclear-armed Iran.

The global thunder against Bush when he pulls the trigger will be deafening, and it will have many echoes at home. It will be an injection of steroids for organizations such as MoveOn.org....

As for vice presidential candidates, how about Condoleezza Rice or even Joe Lieberman? Lieberman says he's still a Democrat. But there is no place for him in that party. Like every one of us, he is a refugee. He's already endured the rigors of running for the White House. In 2008, he deserves another chance--this time with a worthier running mate than Al Gore.

I know it seems crazy, and this is what makes the hustle so good.  Joe Lieberman, if reelected, will push to bomb Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons.  That's why neoconservatives are trying to put him on their slate for VP, because he's one of them (that he's on the board of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies is a key sign.

And the courtship with the Republicans isn't over. Joe continues to threaten Chris Dodd (even as Dodd undercuts Ned with talk of Joe's friendship) and promises to vote 'very independent.'

Republicans peeling off checks for Joe Lieberman at Mayor Bloomberg's house Wednesday night were abuzz with the possibility that the Connecticut senator will join their party if reelected Tuesday....

"His Democratic buddies [Sens.] Chris Dodd and Ted Kennedy screwed him," a Republican guest told us. "People are hoping he'll switch parties. He votes with the Republicans a lot. He's one of the last few statesmen."

One Democrat observed, "It could happen. The Republicans could offer him some big carrots, like chairmanship of the Budget Committee. I think he's up for grabs." President Bush praised Lieberman for his pro-Iraq War stance earlier this week.

Joe Lieberman is going to hold a press conference today on Iraq, in which he'll probably outline some plan or statement discussing how the troops need to be brought home.  Meanwhile, he'll work against doing just that while egging on a conflict with Iran.  The political dialogue in the race though will reflect only what journalists reprint in terms of press releases and poll numbers, so the people of Connecticut will have to see through this hustle on their own.  So far, they haven't.  And I'm not just saying this as a partisan.  If you asked regular voters here whether they think bombing Iran is a good idea, they would say no.  If you asked whether they would vote for Lieberman if they knew he would push aggressively for that course of action, they would say no.  But no one is asking these questions.  And if you want to know why I'm so angry at the party, it's because Bill Clinton and Harry Reid and Barack Obama know that this is what Joe will do, and none of them will lift a finger to stop it. None of them will try to stop the deaths that will result, when it's possible to stop this freight train now, in Connecticut, with a few well positioned statements about Joe's extremism.

There are signs that the people are ignoring this craven universe of political cowards and working through the issues on their own.  For instance, voter registration, which is sky-high.

More than 86,000 residents registered to vote between May 1 and Tuesday, the deadline. Of those new voters, 38 percent are Democrats, 15 percent are Republicans and 47 percent are unaffiliated, state officials said.

Democrats have long outnumbered Republicans in Connecticut, but the new voters are even more skewed in their favor. Democrats traditionally make up about 33 percent of the state's voters, while Republicans account for about 22 percent, officials said.

The new registrations bring the total number of voters in Connecticut to 1.9 million, a record for a statewide election in a non-presidential year, officials said.

In addition, the Lamont campaign volunteers are driving GOTV for Democrats all over Connecticut, and there's a general sense that the field operation for Lamont is much better than that for Lieberman.  As to the polls, there's frustration that Ned went silent after the primary, and that was a mistake.  A big mistake.  And the party has been terrible, just awful.  They haven't provided the necessary outside artillery to point out that Joe wants us to continue the war in Iraq and is basically dishonest about his entire record.  At the end of the day, though, I'm not going to be silent while this country meanders towards another war, and I'm not in politics so Democrats can get better parking spots on Capitol Hill.  And neither are you, which is why you're reading this.  

No one knows who's going to turn out.  If the registration numbers are any indication, energy for Democrat is fairly high, and that for Republians is low to middling.  There are other turnout mind-games that I can play, and everyone expects the race to tighten in the last few days as the war continues to rage front and center.  But politics at the end of the day is a gut call.  On August 8th, progressives forced this election to be front and center about Iraq.  That's the only reason Democrats are in a position to take the House and the Senate.  

Will we beat Joe Lieberman?  I don't know.  We didn't beat Nixon, and in many ways, this is the same fight.  I do know that regardless of what happens on November 7th, it's a fight we're ultimately going to win.

Tags: Alan Schlesinger, Connecticut, CT-Sen, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)

Comments

29 Comments

Re: The Final Push

He's definitely more valuable to the Republicans as a Democrat.

by TG in NY 2006-11-03 08:06AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

Definitely more valuable as a Democrat unless the Republicans need Joe's vote to organize the Senate.  And the House was lost.  Bush has never faced anything but the most supine House in American history.  Oh, no, Mr. Bill, I can't even rig things in conference committees.  I guess Bush will have to sign everything and issue signing statements that are diametrically opposed to the legislation.

by David Kowalski 2006-11-03 08:14AM | 0 recs
and why would the carpenter's union

back Lieberman?

Have you been to Connecticut lately?  Completely overdeveloped.  Condos and gated communities everywhere.

Apparenlty Lieberman does not care about quality of life in Connecticut and cares more about enabling wealthy investors and seedy businessmen.

by goplies 2006-11-03 08:11AM | 0 recs
That "Mr. Lamont goes to Washington Ad"

...was really bad.

I love Bill Hillsman, but that one was a mistake. It made Ned look like a doofus.

For what i';s worth, I gave my advice on how Lamont can salvage (with a slim chance even at that) his campaign.

So far, I don't see it happening.

Lamont might only lose by 5 or 6 points in the end, but he's still going to lose.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2006-11-03 08:19AM | 0 recs
They need more hard hitting ads

Lamont's people should have had negative ads which indicated a long fed up outrage at the way Joe does politics rattling off different incidents. (not to be confused with the typical negative ad tone which takes some small incident, uses an ominious voiceover, and fudges a bit).

THey should have had a series called "we're Fed Up. We want change." and they should have closed each ad with Lieberman's staatement that he wouldn't serve more than 18 years instead of the occasionally dorky "Im Ned Lamont and I approve this message."

Maybe they could have gotten a Dennis Leary guy to rattle them off in one ad and then a blue collar guy in another where he goes "how much more of this are we willing to take?"

by Pravin 2006-11-03 08:34AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

On August 8th, progressives forced this election to be front and center about Iraq.  That's the only reason Democrats are in a position to take the House and the Senate.  

I say this all the time to Democrats who can't understand why the Lamont primary win was so important. Good to see the sentiments echoed here.

by andy k 2006-11-03 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

The sad thing is the Iran situation will probably have to be dealt with in a martial manner.  I'm a supporter of preemptive action against Iran.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-03 08:23AM | 0 recs
Preemptive War - We can do better than that

Then I assume you'd agree that we'd better handle China, North Korea, Syria, Pakistan, and Venezuela in "a martial manner" also.

You are talking about preemptive WAR right?

Count me out.

by Curt Matlock 2006-11-03 08:35AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

That would be a crazy ass thing to do.

Iran is of no threat to the U.S. We stay out of their business, they stay out of theirs. Historically, relations have gotten terrible because of the meddling we did in their country. THey do not have global jihad goals like Al Queda or other Saudi based extremist outfits.  Look up history. Many Iranians do not want war with the U.S. What their head of state is doing is his way of scoring points with his base. He is an extremist, but he is not a suicidal type of extremist.

by Pravin 2006-11-03 08:37AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I think Iran presents a much greater threat than Iraq ever did.  Iran has actually offered consistent support to international terrorist organizations such as Hammas and Hizzbolah.  The threat isn't that Iranian missiles can hit the United States or American interests, but that it could export WMD materials to international terrorists.

Unlike Iraq, Iran is on track to quickly develop WMD.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-03 08:50AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I hope you're willing to be drafted and serve in the military, and in all likelihood die in the Middle East.  Because that's what the policies you are pushing lead to.

by Matt Stoller 2006-11-03 10:27AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I wouldn't support a war I wouldn't volunteer to fight in.

Iran will be a huge problem in the futre.  It's a minor one right now.  I'd rather deal with them before they go nuclear than after.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-03 10:59AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

Yea, sure.

Cheap talk about killing!!! Bring em on.

Heard that one...from the little soldier man who rules us now.

Nother chickenhawk no show.

by Maxfield 2006-11-03 01:48PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

How many civilian deaths occur from the conventional bombing of nuclear weapons facilities?

I'm not advocating a nuclear attack on Iran, but I do think we can't just sit by and wait for them to sell nuclear materials to terrorists.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-03 03:20PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

You bomb their facilities, and all the moderates in Iran will be marginalised because most people will start hating the US again. Right now you got an underground movement in iran where people flout all the nutty religious laws in Iran. You just gotta give them time to do their own silent revolution. If we did not support the Shah so blindly, the dastardly US Embassy hostage takings probably doesn't take place. Why the hell do we want to make terrorists of another nation, I do not understand. You play into the iranian islamic religious nuts hands by bombing those facilities. The only way I would even consider this is if we have great intelligence, the support of at least 2 or 3 major countries in Europe, at least one country in Iran's neighborhood and we KNOW FOR SURE we can strike those facilities accurately, and then we have confidence the people in charge can handle this diplomatically, then and maybe then only I might be on board for this. BUt knowing how this administration has show incompetence in many areas, do you think they can even satisfy all these conditions?

You know, the US is past that cycle of history where we are this emerging country engaged in a lot of wars. We should be positioned in such a way where the US is inevitably resented at times for our success but not for our being a proxy of  anybody in that region. Money should be spent domestically and for productive purposes. We should be advanced to such a degree that cheap labor and products in other countries become a non factor because of our technological superiority that they can't even compete on the same level to give us the inevitable price savings in outsourcing.

I do find it interesting that the Lamont naysayers tend to be neocon democrats. (I know you said you said you would rather see Lamont , but most of your posts seem to be bashing Lamont's campaign than Lieberman's).

by Pravin 2006-11-04 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I can see your point.  But how long do we wait them out?  The moderates in Iran may be more popular than the conservatives, but it's the conservatives, not the moderates, who are gaining influence in the government.  There are few indications, especially after the Iraq war, that the Iranians are going to move to greater engagement with the West.

I'm not really all that much of a neocon.  I would rather see Lamont in the Senate than Lieberman, but mostly because Lieberman has grown out of touch.  As I've said before, Lamont did a great job telling us what's wrong with Lieberman, but hasn't "sold" himself as the better replacement other than the War.

People here have made Lieberman seem like Satan incarnate, but the fact is he votes the Democratic line most of the time on most of the issues.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-04 04:40PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

Well, Lamont has shown through his personal history that he is capable of executing any good ideas. And he has shown a vision that is superior to Joe's. It's not like he is in tune with the democrats on the war and Lieberman is more in tune with the dems on the other issues.
Lamont combines the good parts of Joe and doesn't have his bad parts. Lamont has talked about his volunteering for schools, his business successs, his ability to work with republicans in other settings. He has espoused support for the same ideas Lieberman finds himself in tune with the Dem party. So what more does he have to prove without the beneift of 18 years in the senate and a big staff to help him with specifics.

As I said before, all a challenger should be expected to do is give us a strong vision. Is his overall vision better than the incumbent? Yes. Do we have confidence by looking at the challenger's past if he can walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Yes.  Has the incumbent failed on a pass/fail test for a reelection. Yes beecause while Lieberman has done well on a lot of quizzes and assignements(the 90% scorecard he touts), he has failed on the final exam with the big issues(obsessed with war so much that he  he is unwilling to persuade his buddy Bush to reform even a tiny bit on the environment while he has no problem lecturing his own party people on the war). Has the incumbent had enough chances to do his thing? Yes.He has had three terms. I think that pretty much gave us the best of him. We need fresh ideas now and his increased bitterness will only  be counterproductive.

And the war is not just one issue. As we explained here many times, the war is a multifaceted issue. I wrote a diary explaining why. But very briefly, it includes issues like judgement for future wars, money drained away currently that could be used for domestic issues where Lieberman is supposedly in tune with us but is unable to help in carrying them out because of budget limitations and political climate that has encouraged republican bullying(and Lieberman is one of those that has emboldened Bush) , inability to learn from mistakes, and engendering illwill among our allies.

by Pravin 2006-11-04 09:24PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

That's been the CW for some time now. Why is it a reason to trust those that made a nightmare out of what was widely considered to be a lower priority?

by sb 2006-11-03 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

The fouled up Iraq in a big way because they didn't listen to their military commanders on the ground.  I wouldn't want ANY opperation to go forward unless planned and prepared by the military commanders, not the political hacks.

I've always been against Bush's Iraq policy, but I am a hawk.  I was a supporter of President Clinton's air war against Serbia and the attack against Afghanistan.  I wish action had been taken in the Darfur area of Sudan to prevent the genocide occuring there, but we can't have everything I guess.

I actually considered joining the military after graduating high school in 2000.  At the time, I took a political stand against it because I'm gay, and therefore not allowed to serve openly.  The day we can serve our nation without hiding that we too can do a great job is the day I head to my local recruiting station.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-03 05:26PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I am a hawk too. But might should not be wasted. Misplaced might only invites a lack of respect for future threats especially if it's not effective as we are in Iraq.

by Pravin 2006-11-04 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I think people are missing one thing.  I don't think Lieberman will switch parties and stay in the Senate as a Republican.  I think the most likely scenario would be Rumsfeld suddenly needing more family time and Bush nominating Lieberman for Sec. of Defense.  That would be a bi-partisan gesture after a bad election cycle and would allow the Republican Governor of Connecticut to appoint a real Republican to his seat for the next two years.  After all 2008 could be a banner year for Democrats in the Senate when Republicans must defend 21 seats.  Lieberman, should he stay in the Senate, would not want to be chairman for two years and then in the wilderness after 2008.  Something to ponder.

by sandzen 2006-11-03 08:27AM | 0 recs
the problem with this scenario

is that Lieberman would be Sec Def for two years and then be in the wilderness after 2008 anyway. So what's in it for him?

Unless they dangle the GOP VP slot in front of him--but the fundies would never allow that to happen, even if we know Joe's not 100 percent pro-choice.

by desmoinesdem 2006-11-03 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

That would also only give Lieberman 2 years at most to be Defense Secty.  He'd give up 6 years in the Senate for 2 at Defense?  I doubt it.

by MyDD Fan 2006-11-03 08:31AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

I do think Lieberman's time has passed for consideration for Sec of defense. I do think Bush is not going to back off of Rumsfeld for the entire term.

However, i do not see why lieberman would refuse it. His whole life has been building to that ultimate goal - savior of mankind. If he can get to a higher position, even if it's for a lesser term, why not. Just imagine how proud his parents will be of their little boy becoming the SECRETARY OF DEFENSE. As far as job security past two years, are you kidding me? He will get more lucrative assignements as a former Sec of Defense than as a sitting senator. Just ask Cheney.

by Pravin 2006-11-04 01:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

Something that continually interests me about the Lieberman race is that now that he's running as an "independent", he really is probably running the first purely neoconservative candidacy for any office in American history. Most "neoconservatives", hard as that word is to define, are burdened with the baggage of either classically "liberal" or "conservative" pasts or party ties. Not so Lieberman.

by mcc 2006-11-03 08:41AM | 0 recs
Lamont going dark not the biggest problem

In retrospect, going dark after the primary wasn't a great idea, but I think the bigger problem is those not-very-informed 25-35 percent of Democratic Party voters who are sticking by Joe no matter what.

Who knew that so many of them would stick with Joe? I honestly thought his Democratic support would fall through the floor after the primary--especially when he ratched up the Republican rhetoric.

I also thought that the Republican would have to get at least 15 percent of the total vote, but amazingly, that seems like it's not going to happen.

Lamont's tv ads since the primary have not been nearly as good as his ads before the primary. I don't think running more ads in August would have changed the basic equation, which is that a lot of CT voters are used to voting for Lieberman and are not open to new information about his true record.

by desmoinesdem 2006-11-03 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

What's the recall mechanism for a Senator in CT?

by global yokel 2006-11-03 10:14AM | 0 recs
Re: The Final Push

Is Lieberman the next Bush?  You know, narrowly reelected incumbent bombing (more) policies before people really see how bad he is?

by psiren 2006-11-03 11:34AM | 0 recs
Good stuff Matt...

but I believe that Joey the Liarmann and his ReThug mob are doomed no matter what.

Bomb Iran means gas prices go through the roof...permanently.

The economy tanks...

Just like after Nixon's re-election. The difference here will be that you and I will be around to point out to the 'folks' who got scammed by Joey and BubbleBoy who is responsible.

And if you think people are pissed off now you cannot imagine how it will be if gas is $10.00/gal. and interest rates go through the roof.

It will be ugly.

And if we an pin it on the Repubicans and Joe...

They will be done in politics for the rest of their lives.

by Pericles 2006-11-03 01:50PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------