tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21079623.post115523353198256790..comments2023-04-20T23:23:08.705-07:00Comments on NeoMugwump: Thoughts on the Liberman-Lamont SmackdownDennis Sandershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06115504318620722199noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21079623.post-1156117042517611022006-08-20T16:37:00.000-07:002006-08-20T16:37:00.000-07:00On Lieberman, my problem with his stance is that h...On Lieberman, my problem with his stance is that he wants to have it both ways. It should not be legal for a candidate to have a do over. If he wanted to run as an independent, he should have done that from the get go - rather than running as a democrat, losing in the primary, then running as an independent.lloydlettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18412995051820724783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21079623.post-1155755750196469972006-08-16T12:15:00.000-07:002006-08-16T12:15:00.000-07:00Hi, Dennis. It's been a while since I last posted...Hi, Dennis. It's been a while since I last posted on your blog. I'm a very centrist Democrat, and whoever calls me a Dino will eat teeth. :D<BR/><BR/>I have to disagree with you on your reasoning regarding the Lieberman/Lamont primary.<BR/><BR/>Joe Leiberman didn't lose because the liberal netroots ganged up on him, Lieberman lost because "his" constituents no longer trusted him to represent them. <BR/><BR/>CT isn't a hotbed of radical liberalism. Radical pragmatism, more likely, if that isn't an oxymoron. CT voters tend to be more centrist than flaming wingers of either extreme, as surprising as that may seem right now. Ned Lamont <B>is</B> a moderate. He's not a flaming radical. And the Democratic voters decided to let Ned have a chance at becoming the next Senator from Conneticut.<BR/><BR/>The end result of the primary was not a reflection on liberalism in Connecticut, nor the death knell to centrism. It was a demonstration of public opinion on Joe Lieberman's effectiveness as a Senator. He simply lost his vote of confidence, as the Parliamentarians say.Heiuanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09964271264820857271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21079623.post-1155573238123147862006-08-14T09:33:00.000-07:002006-08-14T09:33:00.000-07:00Dennis, Lieberman didn't lose because he's a centr...Dennis, Lieberman didn't lose because he's a centrist. The Kos/Deaniac crowd respects centrists like Jim Webb, Mark Warner, and John Murtha. Centrism is not the problem. In fact, Democrats value centrists more than today's GOP does. The GOP has marginalized its moderates, even forming "RINO Hunter's Clubs."<BR/><BR/>No, what doomed Lieberman was that he was cozy with Bushco. He backed a war that most of America now agrees is a disaster. He behaved as if he were ashamed of his own party. Who needs a Fox News Democrat? Who needs a Democrat who has no qualms about allying himself with a dangerous administration and failed policies?<BR/><BR/>Check out Glenn Greenwald's great blog. He's written extensively on Lieberman and the reasons for his fall.The Trufflehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16641173488798036738noreply@blogger.com