Replies

These 5 percenters supporting Schlessinger need to give it up. I'd love nothing more than a Republican to take that seat, but it's not going to happen with a piss poor candidate like that, who is only getting 5% of the vote. CT. GOP voters need to back Lieberman or we're going to end up with George Soros' sock puppet in the form of Ned LAMEont and his big mouth having a Senate soapbox to mouth Soros' Marxist sedition from.

Lieberman may not be what any of us would normally want in a senator, but this is a special circumstance that requires us to support him to keep this seat out of the hands of the Moveon.org crowd, not to mention out of the hands of the Democratic party which will deal them a serious blow.

Yeah, I agree. And one has to start wondering... just who WOULD vote for Schlesinger at this point? I mean maybe the same people that vote third party in normal elections, as a "protest vote"? But I agree, it's stupid when the alternative is possibly letting loony Lamont win.

Lieberman is not sufficiently scared of losing (yet) to understand that he needs to aggressively court moderates and Republicans and Libertarians by giving them a reason to vote for him. Rather than talking sense, he is still spouting hard-left dogma (such as whining about tax cuts for the "rich") in an attempt to woo the leftist nutjobs. But he's already lost them to Lamont - so there's little or no upside to courting those folks.

So then, why is he still sounding like one of them in every single area except for the war? The war is important, but Lieberman is even hedging on that (for example, with his unfounded attacks on Rumsfeld, perhaps intended to show that he's not Bush's poodle). Yes, I know that he wants to convince the moderate Democrats (ha ha ha) that he is still a Democrat. But it's not the Democrat vote that is going to make or break his candidacy. If Lieberman is not careful, and continues along his current dumb strategy, it's going to backfire on him.