Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

BRussell · Jul 3, 2006, 03:33 PM

He's being challenged in the Democratic primary in CT by Ned Lamont, and is leading by just 6 points, 46-40. Considering that primaries have low turnout, and only those most energized get out to vote, there's a very good chance he could lose. The primary is Aug. 8.

Lieberman has a 49% approval rating among Democrats but a 66% approval among Republicans.

So Lieberman announced today that if he loses the Democratic primary, he will run as an independent but remain in the Democratic caucus.

I supported him in the 2004 Democratic primary for president. It's too bad if he loses, but he's just been too big of a suck-up to Bush. In the end you've got to be accountable to your constituents. And if he runs as an independent, I hope he loses.

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by BRussell

He's being challenged in the Democratic primary in CT by Ned Lamont, and is leading by just 6 points, 46-40. Considering that primaries have low turnout, and only those most energized get out to vote, there's a very good chance he could lose. The primary is Aug. 8.

Lieberman has a 49% approval rating among Democrats but a 66% approval among Republicans.

So Lieberman announced today that if he loses the Democratic primary, he will run as an independent but remain in the Democratic caucus.

I supported him in the 2004 Democratic primary for president. It's too bad if he loses, but he's just been too big of a suck-up to Bush. In the end you've got to be accountable to your constituents. And if he runs as an independent, I hope he loses.

I've heard this kind of thing before. WHat has he done that has made him a suck up?

smacintush · 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

WHat has he done that has made him a suck up?

He dares not to follow his party like a lemming.

His willingness to go against his party and even switch parties is testament to his conviction. He is more of a "real" person than most of the Democratic or Republican parties.

BRussell, If he is such a Bush "suck up" then why not switch to the Republican party? He could have done that long ago.

voodoo · Jul 3, 2006, 04:00 PM

Lieberman is in the wrong party. He should join with the Republicans, because that's where his heart is.

V

Railroader · Jul 3, 2006, 04:13 PM

Lieberman is NOT a toe-the-line Liberal. That's why most brainwashed Liberals don't like him. He's a very intelligent person. Gore was wise to have picked him as a running mate when he did.

I could easily be convinced to vote Lieberman for president if he ever ran.

voodoo · Jul 3, 2006, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by Railroader

Lieberman is NOT a toe-the-line Liberal. That's why most brainwashed Liberals don't like him. He's a very intelligent person. Gore was wise to have picked him as a running mate when he did.

I could easily be convinced to vote Lieberman for president if he ever ran.

QED

V

BRussell · Jul 3, 2006, 05:03 PM

Originally Posted by smacintush

He dares not to follow his party like a lemming.

His willingness to go against his party and even switch parties is testament to his conviction. He is more of a "real" person than most of the Democratic or Republican parties.

BRussell, If he is such a Bush "suck up" then why not switch to the Republican party? He could have done that long ago.

Yes, you're right, he's quite liberal and a good Democrat on many issues. But I think it's fair to say that the war in Iraq is the fundamental question of this period of political history, and, unfortunately, he's followed Bush like a lemming.

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by BRussell

Yes, you're right, he's quite liberal and a good Democrat on many issues. But I think it's fair to say that the war in Iraq is the fundamental question of this period of political history, and, unfortunately, he's followed Bush like a lemming.

Not to veer off topic, but I bet that the next big issue will become the environment.

BRussell · Jul 3, 2006, 05:35 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

Not to veer off topic, but I bet that the next big issue will become the environment.

This thread is now about lube.

besson3c · Jul 3, 2006, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by BRussell

This thread is now about lube.

Yes, as it should be.

Did you know that WD40 is not actually a lube?

Do you remember wdlove? He named himself wdlove because he likes WD-40.

vmarks · Jul 3, 2006, 06:22 PM

Water Displacement, formula 40.

That is, forty attempts to get a penetrating oil-solvent combination.

Lieberman is a Liberal Democrat. He is. Yet he chose to support the War on Terror in Iraq.
Joe Wilson is reputed to be a Republican, yet he chose to reject the War on Terror and curry favor with Democrats in power.

Interestingly, if both of these people have gone with their conscience and knowledge in arriving at these decisions, then we simply need to ask who knows more information, rather than whose position seems to align with our own.

Is Lieberman in a position to know more intelligence information than Joe Wilson?
What leads Lieberman to support the War on Terror when his fellow partymembers are rejecting it for political gain?

Railroader · Jul 3, 2006, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by voodoo

QED

V

I am NOT a Republican. I am simply 100% anti-abortion. You give me a bleeding heart liberal who is anti-abortion and I will campaign in my free time to get him/her elected.

voodoo · Jul 3, 2006, 08:35 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMeW6wNI1gM

Ann Coulter says it like it is.. for once.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRLMLqwA92E

Liberman opens debate for the Republicans. He feels right at home and Republicans give him a petting like the good dog he is.

Schmuck.

V

BRussell · Jul 3, 2006, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by Railroader

I am NOT a Republican. I am simply 100% anti-abortion. You give me a bleeding heart liberal who is anti-abortion and I will campaign in my free time to get him/her elected.

Then why would you say you could vote for Lieberman, who is very pro-choice?

Pendergast · Jul 3, 2006, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by vmarks

Water Displacement, formula 40.

That is, forty attempts to get a penetrating oil-solvent combination.

Lieberman is a Liberal Democrat. He is. Yet he chose to support the War on Terror in Iraq.
Joe Wilson is reputed to be a Republican, yet he chose to reject the War on Terror and curry favor with Democrats in power.

Interestingly, if both of these people have gone with their conscience and knowledge in arriving at these decisions, then we simply need to ask who knows more information, rather than whose position seems to align with our own.

Is Lieberman in a position to know more intelligence information than Joe Wilson?
What leads Lieberman to support the War on Terror when his fellow partymembers are rejecting it for political gain?

Its either Faith, or one of them is a big sucker.

Railroader · Jul 3, 2006, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by BRussell

Then why would you say you could vote for Lieberman, who is very pro-choice?

Ask yourself why I am would NOT vote for Lieberman. I could be convinced, if he was ant-abortion. Alas, I am stuck voting for the lesser of two evils.