Posted on 08/08/2006 9:04:33 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - Sen. Joe Lieberman's primary defeat Tuesday night came at the hands of Democratic voters angry over the war in Iraq and demanding that lawmakers stand up to President Bush rather than stand with him.
It wasn't a polite message they sent their three-term senator, a former vice presidential running mate who fell to anti-war challenger Ned Lamont. It was an eviction notice, served by an electorate that has grown remarkably sour about the course their country is on.
That makes the result both an opportunity and a challenge for Democrats nationally as they head into a fall campaign with control of the House and Senate at stake.
To triumph in November, Democrats will need the same intensity, including the support of bloggers and groups such as MoveOn.org, that powered Lamont to victory in Connecticut.
"I think there is huge dissatisfaction with the way the president is handling the war," said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the chairman of the party's Senate campaign committee. "People are divided over whether we should have a strong, aggressive foreign policy, but there's very little division even among those for a strong foreign policy that the president has really botched this in terms of having a plan, in terms of a direction, in terms of an endgame."
The challenge for Democrats is that Republicans already are pointing to the anti-war activists who flocked to Lamont, and their penchant for edgy political tactics, as evidence that Democrats can't be trusted with the nation's security.
"We'll soon find out just how significant this election is, but it's a problem for Democrats long-term," the Senate's second-ranking Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said after Lamont had won.
"The McGovern wing of the Democrat party seems to have forgotten that we've been on offense for the last five years and that's why we haven't been attacked here at home."
There's nothing new or surprising about the GOP rhetoric. Less than 100 days before the elections, it's become obvious to Republicans that they can hardly afford allow the midterm elections to turn on a simple referendum on Bush and his policies.
Stoking concerns, or even fears, about Democratic leadership served Republicans well in 2002 and 2004, the first two campaigns conducted in the shadow of the terror attacks of 9/11.
Their hope is it will again this fall, particularly among swing voters who will settle key House races in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and even Connecticut.
However they handle their balancing act on the war, Schumer, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and other party leaders who sought unsuccessfully to save Lieberman intend to swing behind Lamont as early as Wednesday. Lieberman expects it, and party unity demands it.
That doesn't mean the three-term incumbent intends to go quietly. In the same breath he conceded the primary, he vowed to run as an independent. He would join Lamont and Republican Alan Schlesinger on the fall ballot in a race that could again have repercussions beyond Connecticut.
"Republicans are anxious to say the left wing is taking over, the antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party, the three-term senator said recently, not exactly rebutting the claim as he repeated it.
It will be days before the polls can measure a three-way race with accuracy. A Quinnipiac survey in mid-July suggested Lieberman would head into the campaign in a strong position, finding 51 percent support for him, 27 percent for Lamont and 9 percent for the Republican.
With his primary victory, Lamont almost certainly will gain support, at least intially, in a three-way matchup. In defeat, Lieberman will lose it, and the next poll could produce far different results than the last.
In the final days of his primary campaign, Lieberman was fond of saying that in embracing Lamont's candidacy, the voters were trying to send him a message and that they would in the end return to his side. He offered them a reason to do it, stressing his many differences with the president without changing his fundamental support for the war.
It was more than that, though. In private polls, fewer than 10 percent of Democrats surveyed said they thought the country was headed in the right direction, an extraordinary level of dissatisfaction.
Lieberman, taunted as Bush's best Democratic friend in Congress, bore the brunt of it.
Soon, Democrats hope, it will be Bush's turn, or at least the Republicans who control the House and Senate.
Rice/Lieberman in 2008?
Hye they couldn't beat Bush nor pick up seats in midterm elections thus far so they took it out on Liberman. The irony is delicious!
>>Rice/Lieberman in 2008?<<
No freakin way - Joe's a nice guy and I like him but check his voting record on everything from unions to abortion - he's a nice guy but no conservative.
Espo keeps forgetting that Bush is not running again.
Is Rice?
Long term I think this might be good for the U.S.
This bodes ill for Hillary to pass muster in the primaries.Also the distinct possibility of one less Democrat in the Senate if Lieberman wins as an Independent or "gasp" the Republican can win after a dirty and long race splits the Dem's votes enough for a slim win.
In his heart Joe Lieberman is still a democrat. He will vote for and support the democrat leadership even as they toss him under the bus!
the gift that keeps givin, the lefty rats
>>Is Rice? {conservative} <<
I don't know.... I know she's smart and she's loyal but so far she has always represented the President's positions, not necessarily her own.
The MSM is acting as though Lamont won by a landslide but the way I read it and the way the MSM is really writing it, 48% of the Democrats believe in the Iraq mission.
If either of them is on the ticket I'll do what I do when McCain is up for re-election, VOTE LIBERTARIAN!
If the Bush "standin" got 48 percent of the Democratic vote, how much of the Republican and Independent vote would Bush need to win Connecticut today?
But Bush lost Connecticut 54 to 44 with 2 percent going to third party candidates in 2004. If in fact Lieberman was a Bush stand in Bush should win Connecticut in a race today by at least 55 percent.
And the MSM says anti war is a winner. But Anti War can barely win half the Democrat votes. It surely would do worse among Independents and Republicans.
There's no chance of a republican pickup here.
Clearly written top to bottom far ahead of time, before Lieberman strode in front of cameras to launch his INDEPENDENT re-election campaign as incumbent Senator from Connecticut.
I think this is hugh. Seriously. (couldn't say it)
If Joe plays his cards right, he could tip the Democrat party on its pointy head. And start a new American political party.
I hope he does.
I dunno. A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged. Joey just got mugged.
The Republicans won't win there but it sure is fun watching the Rats eat their own.
Wrong. The moonbats of the Democrat Party aren't "the electorate."
"There's no chance of a republican pickup here."
Is the Republican candidate pro-life?
If not is the GOP candidate for partial birth infanticide as Lieberman is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.