Posted on 11/09/2006 2:52:30 AM PST by ngupta94
Please look at the results and comment. I confirmed it from the official government web site for the actual numbers.
Please look at the Republican votes.... -----
in 2000 here is the break down in voting
Democratic votes = 828,902
Republican votes = ***** 448,077 *****
Other votes = 34,282
The 2006 results:
Lieberman votes = 562,850
Lamont votes = ***** 448,077 *****
Schlesinger votes = 109,329
Ferrucci votes = 5923 Knibbs votes = 4638
HMMMMMMMMMM! Computers are wonderful things, no?
coincidence or not, Lieberman still won by a landslide. don't worry about it.
bottom line....he has a (i) after his name...and he still will causcus with the lib/dems....they might owe him some fake respect and make amends will some chairmanship...but it will not do the republicans much....just because he has an (i)... he is no jeffords or sanders ... he is still (d) and he is counted as one of theirs!!!!!
Time to cue the Twilight Zone music.....
de de de dum
de de de dum....
I think we can count on him voting no on any cut and run (i.e. pulling funding) measure with Iraq.
GWB "saved" Groton from the BRAC list as a thank you for his support. He knows he has a friend in the White House. When needed, on national security/WoT issues he will come through for us.
My! That is odd!
My! That is odd!
Very interesting. Thanks for posting.
Thank God for that. Sanders is a frikkin communist.
I'm pleased to know that all our election woes have been fixed. No disenfranchised voters, no Diebold or black box problems, it's wonderful to have a working system this go. (end/sarcasm)
How many times this weekend did we read stories about how the system was expected to give us big problems and lawyers were in the wings waiting to jump on voting problems.
Democrats are such hypocrits...suddenly, because they won, no complaints about the voting system.
He causcus with the LIB/Dem party cause he is a Lib and Libs are in power right now. If he wants one of the leadership roles... he has to kiss up no matter what they did to him.
Links to support this?
The CT 2004 statement of vote: http://209.101.151.73/statementofvote/
Nothing on there lists Republican vote. You said you checked this on the official website - can you provide something to show what the heck you were reading?
I was focusing on the number of votes in 2000 and in 2006.
It is exactly same number for the loosing candidate.
In 2000 the loosing candidate was a republican and got 448,077
votes.
In 2006 the loosing candidate is a Democrat and he gets EXACTLY the same number as the 2000 loosing Republican !!!
2 things - Exact number and the switching of the party.
You were looking at 2004 results. Please look at 2000 results at the following site:
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/2000senate.htm
Actually, if he votes GOP for Senate leadership, it becomes a 50/50 Senate again, with Cheney breaking the tie.
Lieberman is not a Republican, that much is clear. He's a solid liberal, far more so than anyone we refer to typically as a "RINO". That said, he still needs to remember that his party abandoned him -- threw him out the door -- for putting national security ahead of partisan politics. If the new GOP Senate leader offers Lieberman a good commitee assignment for a leadership vote, that's a good deal for both.
These sort of freaky things happen with numbers all the time. The probability is higher than you'd think.
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.