Joe Lieberman to endorse John McCain

[Democratic Hawk]

Why doesn't Lieberman just pull a Jeffords and give Senate control to the Republicans?

Why should he? He's only really with the Republicans on defense and national security

Dave

[Boris]

Why doesn't Lieberman just pull a Jeffords and give Senate control to the Republicans?

I wouldn't mind if Lieberman did that, but, from his perspective, his term in the senate will most likely out-last major U.S. military involvement in Iraq.

[JSojourner]

I could see Lieberman as a VP candidate (again). He might be very socially liberal but surprisingly he's quite well respected by the RR because of his anti-pornography work, by Northern Republicans and by the base because of his stance on Iraq. Putting him on the ticket is no more implausible than putting HW on the ticket in 1980. A McCain-Lieberman ticket might be only ticket that could win 54%+ of the vote for the GOP and end the trend of '4th and Inches' elections.

http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2007/12/17/is-this-the-moment-that-lieberman-changed-politics/

I would respectfully disagree about the Religious Right's view of Lieberman.  They may like his support for warning labels on music, tighter restrictions on internet porn and his "Israel is always right" perspective on international policy.
(The John Hagee crowd especially loves him.)

But unless the RR is planning to shift emphasis, they'll never fully put their arms around a guy who they believe enthusiastically supports the "murder" of unborn children.

I basically agree.  Even though Lieberman agrees with most Republicans on national security issues, he disagrees with them on so many other issues that it's crazy to think that McCain, who already has enough problems with his own party, would pick Lieberman as his VP.  The only way that would happen is if they were to run on some kind of hawkish-on-foreign-policy/moderate-on-domestic-policy 3rd party ticket.

Both McCain and Lieberman are against drilling in ANWR.  So they have some environmental common ground.  But I think it's highly unlikely Lieberman would be warmly received into the GOP fold without some sort of "give" on social issues like abortion, gay rights and general civil rights.  People compare Lieberman to Zell Miller, and in terms of hawkishness and seeking media attention, it's apt.  But beyond that, no dice.

Of course, all that could change.  The GOP could start listening to people like Chistine Whitman, and move away from Theo-Neo to Paleoconservatism.  Or even...   <gasp> ...moderation.

[lonestar]

If McCain were to get the nomination, I believe his running mate will be former PA Gov. Tom Ridge.

[© tweed]

If McCain were to get the nomination, I believe his running mate will be former PA Gov. Tom Ridge.

Pawlenty

[Aizen]

Does anybody know Lieberman's last approval rating?

[JSojourner]

If McCain were to get the nomination, I believe his running mate will be former PA Gov. Tom Ridge.

That would be a smart move.  Ridge is socially moderate, has executive experience and was relatively popular in Pennsylvania (I believe -- Correct me if I am wrong.)

That Ridge is another war hero, like McCain, might strike some as overkill.  But in the long run, it's an asset.

Oh, one other possible benefit.  Ridge is seen by some as yet another moderate cast out of the current administration.  (I know, I know -- he wanted to spend more time with his family...)  But Christine Whitman, Andy Card and Colin Powell all vacated.  Ridge, another social liberal, did also.
Coincidence?  Maybe. 

But coincidence or not, Independent voters and moderate Republicans who might be inclined to vote Democrat in 2008 could see the inclusion of a moderate castoff from The Decider's administration as a plus.

[12th Doctor]

Funny, I just read an article in FP that said a smart Republican would put Lieberman on the ticket.

[12th Doctor]

If McCain were to get the nomination, I believe his running mate will be former PA Gov. Tom Ridge.

That would be a smart move.  Ridge is socially moderate, has executive experience and was relatively popular in Pennsylvania (I believe -- Correct me if I am wrong.)

That Ridge is another war hero, like McCain, might strike some as overkill.  But in the long run, it's an asset.

Oh, one other possible benefit.  Ridge is seen by some as yet another moderate cast out of the current administration.  (I know, I know -- he wanted to spend more time with his family...)  But Christine Whitman, Andy Card and Colin Powell all vacated.  Ridge, another social liberal, did also.
Coincidence?  Maybe. 

But coincidence or not, Independent voters and moderate Republicans who might be inclined to vote Democrat in 2008 could see the inclusion of a moderate castoff from The Decider's administration as a plus.

The Ridge luster has worn off a bit for some of the peopel in this state, but I think that is largely due to Ed Rendell's efforts to rewrite history in order to blame his failures on the previous administration.

That being said, Ridge is still pretty popular he.  He would certainly help McCain in the west, though I suspect McCain would be pretty popular here as is.  Same with the Northeast.

[Gustaf]

Not too surprised. I can't see why Lieberman should feel obliged to support a party that already kicked him out? He owes the Democrats nothing and he doesn't need them. Will he even want to run for reelection after all?

And a McCain/Lieberman ticket would be awesome but is sadly quite unlikely.

[AndrewTX]

Not too surprised. I can't see why Lieberman should feel obliged to support a party that already kicked him out? He owes the Democrats nothing and he doesn't need them. Will he even want to run for reelection after all?

Exactly! Democrats here in Connecticut are getting all sorts of pissy over this. Come on people! You guys threw him aside the second he lost the primary, and he won thanks to the Indy sand Republicans (mostly Independents).

[opebo]

I see no problem here.  The man can endorse whoever he wants.

And we can dislike whatever scumbags we want, JR.

...Democrats here in Connecticut... threw him aside the second he lost the primary...

Um, of course - that is what primaries are for - the losers go home and the winners contest the general election against the enemy party.  What are we supposed to do, build a shrine to everyone who has ever lost a Democratic primary?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

And a McCain/Lieberman ticket would be awesome but is sadly quite unlikely.

And that's more for saying any ticket with McCain on it (a far right Republican) would be awesome, not one with Lieberman.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Dodd also even endorsed Lieberman in 2004. Nice payback traitor.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

And a McCain/Lieberman ticket would be awesome but is sadly quite unlikely.

McCain/Lieberman verses Bloomberg (sp?) verses Obama (or Hillary) would be pretty good for the GOP, IMO.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Dodd also even endorsed Lieberman in 2004. Nice payback traitor.

Didn't Dodd endorse Lamont in 2004?

[Lief 🗽]

Only after he had won the primary, like every other member of the Democratic party.

[Gabu]

I can't see why Lieberman should feel obliged to support a party that already kicked him out?

What I can't see is why Lieberman still persists in calling himself an "independent Democrat" when he clearly wants nothing to do with his old party.

[Joe Republic]

Dodd also even endorsed Lieberman in 2004. Nice payback traitor.

Didn't Dodd endorse Lamont in 2004?

No, Dodd endorsed Lieberman's presidential bid in 2004, and then endorsed Lamont over Lieberman in 2006.

So of course, Lieberman should feel no guilt for stabbing Dodd in the back now, since his own back still has Dodd's knife in it.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

No, Dodd endorsed Lieberman's presidential bid in 2004, and then endorsed Lamont over Lieberman in 2006.

Damn typo.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep. You can hardly demand personal loyalty if you've not shown it yourself.

[TheresNoMoney]

Not too surprised. I can't see why Lieberman should feel obliged to support a party that already kicked him out?

No one "kicked him out". We have something called a democracy, where the voters decide who they want representing them. They chose another candidate over Lieberman in the 2006 election. The election was fair and square.

Joe should've accepted his loss like a man, but his ego was too big to do that.

[Joe Republic]

Not too surprised. I can't see why Lieberman should feel obliged to support a party that already kicked him out?

No one "kicked him out". We have something called a democracy, where the voters decide who they want representing them. They chose another candidate over Lieberman in the 2006 election. The election was fair and square.

It certainly was, but it was also not particularly important either.  Losing the support of his party was an inconvenience of course, because it made things just a little harder for him, but ultimately the party banner that anybody of his political seniority runs under shouldn't matter a great deal.  The general election results proved this, more or less.

Lieberman now owes the Democratic party absolutely nothing.  In fact, the party owes him a great deal, for permitting them to form a majority in the current Senate.

[Хahar 🤔]

Why doesn't Lieberman just pull a Jeffords and give Senate control to the Republicans?

Why should he? He's only really with the Republicans on defense and national security

Dave

He may be able to wring some concessions out of the Republicans.

[TheresNoMoney]

It certainly was, but it was also not particularly important either.  Losing the support of his party was an inconvenience of course, because it made things just a little harder for him, but ultimately the party banner that anybody of his political seniority runs under shouldn't matter a great deal.

I would've respected Joe if he had just chosen to run as an independent from the beginning, but he didn't. He wanted to have it both ways. He loses the primary, and still finds a way to get on the ballot in the general. Only a true egomaniac would do that.

And it's also infuriating that Lieberman blatantly lied throughout the duration of his general election campaign.

[Joe Republic]

It certainly was, but it was also not particularly important either.  Losing the support of his party was an inconvenience of course, because it made things just a little harder for him, but ultimately the party banner that anybody of his political seniority runs under shouldn't matter a great deal.  The general election results proved this, more or less.

Lieberman now owes the Democratic party absolutely nothing.  In fact, the party owes him a great deal, for permitting them to form a majority in the current Senate.

I would've respected Joe if he had just chosen to run as an independent from the beginning, but he didn't. He wanted to have it both ways. He loses the primary, and still finds a way to get on the ballot in the general. Only a true egomaniac would do that.

And it's also infuriating that Lieberman blatantly lied throughout the duration of his general election campaign.

I wouldn't say he "wanted to have it both ways" exactly, but I understand what you mean.  What he wanted was to win re-election, and although I condemn his tactics once the general campaign was under way, his method of ensuring that he kept himself on the November ballot was sensible and intelligent.  He and I probably share the same view that party primaries are merely a way for the respective bases to make themselves feel important, but don't actually need to matter once the general election rolls around.

I still find it amusing that the Democratic party rank-and-file are so hateful towards him when they owe him so much at the moment.