Democratic Senators to vote on Lieberman's fate

[Ogre Mage]

According to Talking Points Memo, the full Democratic caucus will vote on whether Joe Lieberman is allowed to keep his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.  Keep in mind this strictly is a vote on whether to allow him to keep his committee chairmanship, not a vote to expel him from the caucus.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/its_official_full_dem_caucus_w.php

For those who are represented by Democratic Senators, how do you think your senators will vote?

My guess is that Patty Murray will vote to take away Lieberman's chairmanship.  She is in the Senate Leadership and I have seen indications that the rest of the leadership (Reid, Durbin, Schumer) are in favor of removing Lieberman from the post.  I can't see any reason why she would not join them, especially as there are rumors that she could benefit if Lieberman is removed:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008360377_webmurray06m.html

Maria Cantwell I am less certain about.  As far as I know she isn't close to Lieberman but she doesn't have a personal grudge against him either.  She did endorse Ned Lamont after he defeated Lieberman in the 2006 Democratic Primary.  My guess is that she will decide at the last minute after carefully calculating what is the best move for herself politically.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

[Хahar 🤔]

Feinstein against, Boxer for.

[Lief 🗽]

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

What?

[Franzl]

Durbin in favor...and Obama probably won't vote.

[Lunar]

I expect a lot of abstentions

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

What?

He's campaigned for plenty of Republicans in the past, and badmouthed plenty of Democrats.

[Spaghetti Cat]

Casey against

[Lief 🗽]

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

What?

He's campaigned for plenty of Republicans in the past, and badmouthed plenty of Democrats.

When he was a Republican. Over a decade ago.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Remember, guys, it's a secret ballot. Easier to stick a knife in the back.

[AndrewTX]

Sadly, they will take this away from Joe.

[Nutmeg]

Sadly, they will take this away from Joe.

Poor Joe.  What did he do to deserve this?  Why do appropriate things happen to disloyal people?

[Keystone Phil]

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

What?

He's campaigned for plenty of Republicans in the past, and badmouthed plenty of Democrats.

When he was a Republican. Over a decade ago.

You must have forgotten his endorsement of George Allen in 2000. That was eight years ago, not "over a decade ago."

[Lief 🗽]

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

What?

He's campaigned for plenty of Republicans in the past, and badmouthed plenty of Democrats.

When he was a Republican. Over a decade ago.

You must have forgotten his endorsement of George Allen in 2000. That was eight years ago, not "over a decade ago."

Oh wow, I was off by two years. Grats Phil.

The point is, Webb has been a loyal Democrat since he entered politics as a Democrat. He doesn't undermine the party, and he doesn't attack Democrats for being liberal, despite his state being reddish purple.

[AndrewTX]

Sadly, they will take this away from Joe.

Poor Joe.  What did he do to deserve this?  Why do appropriate things happen to disloyal people?

Disloyal? How?

[Хahar 🤔]

Sadly, they will take this away from Joe.

Poor Joe.  What did he do to deserve this?  Why do appropriate things happen to disloyal people?

Disloyal? How?

Telling his party, "fuck you", more or less.

[Keystone Phil]

Sadly, they will take this away from Joe.

Poor Joe.  What did he do to deserve this?  Why do appropriate things happen to disloyal people?

Disloyal? How?

Telling his party, "fuck you", more or less.

He's not a member of that party though. And before you go on about how he shouldn't even have a Chairmanship, remember that without him caucusing with the Dems, the GOP would have controlled the Senate for the past two years.

Webb won't vote to pull Lieberman, having done the same sort of thing.

What?

He's campaigned for plenty of Republicans in the past, and badmouthed plenty of Democrats.

When he was a Republican. Over a decade ago.

You must have forgotten his endorsement of George Allen in 2000. That was eight years ago, not "over a decade ago."

Oh wow, I was off by two years. Grats Phil.

Well then let's not exaggerate by saying "over a decade" which implies more than just a decade.

[ilikeverin]

Klobuchar will take the safe route.  If abstain is an option, she'll do that.

[Ogre Mage]

Interesting update on this -- apparently Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman will not participate in the vote.

But the 6 newly elected Democratic Senators will:  the two Udalls, Warner, Shaheen, Hagan and Merkley.

So far as I can tell, Obama has not tipped his hand on this.  His spokesperson said that he is fine with Lieberman staying in the caucus, but as for the chairmanship, the incoming Administration is not taking a position.

[Хahar 🤔]

Sadly, they will take this away from Joe.

Poor Joe.  What did he do to deserve this?  Why do appropriate things happen to disloyal people?

Disloyal? How?

Telling his party, "fuck you", more or less.

He's not a member of that party though. And before you go on about how he shouldn't even have a Chairmanship, remember that without him caucusing with the Dems, the GOP would have controlled the Senate for the past two years.

But that's not the case anymore. Time to send him out the airlock.

[Lunar]

It's too bad that I think Connecticut doesn't have one of those "appoint someone of the same party" laws because that's the ideal situation - give him a cabinet spot and let Lamont or whoever take over.  Too bad. 

I wonder how much of his decision to campaign for McCain was based on his "principles," how much was bitterness towards his own party that rejected him for Lamont, and how much was his desire for a cabinet spot/VP slot as an alternative to running for reelection.

This is a lose-lose situation for Democrats.  If they let him keep his spot, the blogosphere erupts.  If they kick him off, then the GOP gains more senate votes and the Democrats just "put revenge over national security."

I dislike Lieberman on policy positions - he's pro-censorship and pro-war.  But I think the Dems should let him keep his spot but remove his other committee assignments.

[Bacon King]

It's too bad that I think Connecticut doesn't have one of those "appoint someone of the same party" laws because that's the ideal situation - give him a cabinet spot and let Lamont or whoever take over.  Too bad. 

That'd be a funny situation, actually. Poor Rell would have to scrounge up someone in the Connecticut for Lieberman Party, no?

[Lunar]

Actually, it still wouldn't be awful.  She'd appoint someone like Shays, no?  I think I'd prefer him over Lieberman.

[Хahar 🤔]

It's too bad that I think Connecticut doesn't have one of those "appoint someone of the same party" laws because that's the ideal situation - give him a cabinet spot and let Lamont or whoever take over.  Too bad. 

That'd be a funny situation, actually. Poor Rell would have to scrounge up someone in the Connecticut for Lieberman Party, no?

Nah. CT uses fusion, so Lieberman's still a Democrat.

[Erc]

It's too bad that I think Connecticut doesn't have one of those "appoint someone of the same party" laws because that's the ideal situation - give him a cabinet spot and let Lamont or whoever take over.  Too bad. 

That'd be a funny situation, actually. Poor Rell would have to scrounge up someone in the Connecticut for Lieberman Party, no?

Nah. CT uses fusion, so Lieberman's still a Democrat.

But the Democratic line still lost...so unless a law accounted for the officeholder's party switching, one of the crazies in the CfL party would have to be chosen (who, at the moment, are all rabid rabid anti-Liebermanites, if I recall).