Posted on 08/09/2006 8:08:25 AM PDT by presidio9
Joe Lieberman is set to lose his primary election for his US Senate seat on Tuesday. The moderate Democrat is not liberal enough for the Democratic Party in the dark blue state of Connecticut.
They want an anti-war liberal and they feel they have that in Ned Lamont.
James Joyner points out that some are so giddy they believe that a loss in the primaries for Lieberman will move the part on the offensive and they will run on an anti-war, anti-Bush platform by looking at the front page of Sunday's Washington Post.
Dan Balz of the Post takes the long way, but suggests that Lieberman losing the primary could excite interest in a comeback by former vice president Al Gore. While that seems quite the stretch Balz make his case.
***
As a result, a loss on Tuesday could generate more demand for a strongly anti-Bush, antiwar candidate in the Democratic primaries. Several are ready to run, including Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), former senator John Edwards (N.C.) and Sen. Russell Feingold (Wis.), the only one of the three to vote against the war in 2002.
None, however, may be as attractive to the grass-roots activists as Gore. He has said he cannot conceive of circumstances that would put him in the race. But he may be coaxed to reconsider if the sentiment for him grows after the November midterm elections.
***
Certainly a loss by Lieberman will have the activists from the left celebrating on Tuesday night. But taking that all the way out to 2008 and predicting another comeback for Gore might be a bit much.
Al Gore was a terrible presidential candidate in 2000 and basically gave away a race he certainly should have won.
John Kerry may have been worse in 2004, but he certainly is already running strong to the left of Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton.
If Al Gore were to take on Hillary it might be interesting, but it would test the grass roots and the left wing that have already come up with a presidential candidate like Howard Dean and a gimmick like photoshopped pictures of Joe Lieberman in blackface next to Bill Clinton.
It would be fun to watch the meltdown - if this weren't so serious.
I'll bet a few fellow moonbats stroking his giant-size ego would do the trick...
Head, meet bucket. The rats have definitely screwed the pooch now. It is to laugh, a dream come true...
Thank you MoveOn.Org. No way the rats stage a comeback now.
It's hard to decide who would be the worst president: Gore, Kerry or Clinton.
Gore would have lost by 5 percentage points in 2000 if not for the media feeding frenzy the last few days before the election over Bush's 1976 DUI, and the media reporting on election day which caused many people to think Gore had won before the polls closed in their state, so they didn't bother to vote. Of course that made the biggest difference in the Florida panhandle (Central time zone counties).
Since when is Joe Lieberman a "moderate"?
He's a hard core liberal.
Unfortunately, Clinton would probably be the best of a bad lot.
The only moderate Democrat in the Senate is Ben Nelson probably?
Ever watch the show "It's always sunny in Philadelphia?" It is very crude but really funny. Last week's plot was about some of the characters running for office. The Danny DeVito character says "you gotta be a real low life piece of s--t to get involved in politics." LOL!! How true to life.
What ever these guys are on, keep it coming! In the really, real world these guys are going to lead to the final meltdown of their party. We really don't have to do much of anything at this point. They most resemble a bunch of suicide bombers standing in a field blowing themselves up by ones and twos.
************
Why so?
It's rumored that Gore has enough $$ from Google options to finance a presidential run from his own pocket (Gore was a consultant to Google beginning in 2001).
Mark Warner of Virginia is worth several hundred million $$ from his high-tech VC firm Columbia Capital.
Alone or together, they have no need for the Hitlery money machine, and could enter the race with little warning and certainly without the traditional Rat power brokers.
It's almost certain that Gore will change his mind. Hitlery has no chance of getting the Rat nomination.
All it really shows is that the Democrat Party continues it's hard-left turn while the country moves right.
This actually bodes well for Republicans as the anti-war position will look increasingly insane in the coming months.
************
No, I've never even heard of it. I guess I'm out of it, since this is the second time this week someone's asked me if I've ever watched a tv show that I know nothing about. :)
Joe is a hard core liberal. Lamont just makes him look moderate. I noticed who was standing behind Lamont last night. The 2 biggest race hustling poverty pimps, Jackson and Sharpton, along with the head of Planned Parenthood or NARAL, and the commie loving kook racist Maxine Waters. Birds of a feather...
No contest, it would be Kerry as the worst president. Mr. Kerry cannot decide on the day of the week, and he's never run a staff bigger than 90 or 100 people. Disaster.
And don't forget "Mama T!"
Of course, this will never happen because Mr. Kerry didn't fool anyone in 2004, and he certainly won't in 2008 for a run for the WH.
He's a whiz when moving fire hydrants in front of his Beacon Hill home, but after that everything is a toss up.
Unquestionably Gore.
The other two have their agendas, but they basically just try to do what will make them loved by the wine and brie crowd at east coast soirees.
Al Gore's an effing lunatic with a god complex and a leg of lamb for a brain.
Yeah, he prolly told them how he invented the Internet.
You can bet Gore's contribution was negative (less than zero) and this was just another way the Demos line their pockets.
Except that Bush should've won in 2000 with both a majority of electoral and popular votes. It was the media's campaign against him that cost Bush the popular vote, and we are fortunate the Founders structured the electoral system the way they did, or we might have had a panicked and "patriotically" challenged Al Gore forming our response to 9/11.
***************
Good point. I guess that's why people prefer to vote for governors.
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.