AP: Lieberman refuses to close door on switching parties

[Eugene]

Lieberman refuses to close door on switching parties

November 12, 2006

HARTFORD, Conn. --Sen. Joe Lieberman on Sunday repeated his pledge to caucus
with Senate Democrats when the 110th Congress convenes in January, but refused
to slam the door on possibly moving to the Republican side of the aisle.

Asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" if he might follow the example of Sen. Jim
Jeffords of Vermont, who left the Republicans in 2001 and became an independent,
ending Republican control of the U.S. Senate, Lieberman refused to discount the
possibility.

"I'm not ruling it out but I hope I don't get to that point," he said. "And I must
say -- and with all respect to the Republicans who supported me in Connecticut --
nobody ever said, 'We're doing this because we want you to switch over. We want
you to do what you think is right and good for our state and country,' and I
appreciate that."

A spokeswoman for Lieberman would not elaborate when contacted by The
Associated Press.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2006/11/12/lieberman_refuses_to_close_door_on_switching_parties

[LynneSin]

1. Yep, one more senate seat and we wouldn't have to bother with him

But for now, deal with him - we need him

[hlthe2b]

4. You know, if he did switch now... that just might be enough...

to get one of the moderate Repugs to come to us... Seeing how many seats they have to defend in 08, the odds are not in the Repug's favor...

[LynneSin]

13. I'd rather not take that chance

Our best hope of switching partylines was defeated last Tuesday (Lincoln Chafee)

[hlthe2b]

33. Me either... but God, I'd love for us to be able to throw him

to the curb...:mad:

[Faryn Balyncd]

82. The sooner Lieberman switches, the better....

We would be far better off with control of only the House, and without control of Senate committees than with that scoundrel constantly threatening the leadership, and NEVER supporting critical causes when push comes to shove -- NEVER giving support when it comes to issues of war and peace, and judicial appointments.

Yes, it would be painful to give up control of the Judiciary Committee - the single most important benefit of control Senate - but that is not as bad as pandering to Hannity's hero.

The fact is, our current control is now dependent upon pandering to Lieberman.

And his eventual formal switch to the GOP is inevitable.

Meanwhile, he will always back the GOP on critical war and judicial votes.

The sooner he goes, the sooner he loses his bully pulpit.

There is no way we would have won the five Senate seats we did is because we stood strong and did not cave to Joe's blackmail in the primary. If we had given Joe his way, we wouldn't even be thinking or talking about control of the Senate today.

The only way we'll get a true majority, with real Democrats, is to stand on principle.

That is what has brought us this far.

Don't stop on the way out, Joe!

Goodbye, and Good Riddance!!

[No Exit]

94. So Holy Joe now gets to hold the whole party hostage...

Well, I've learned something here: never underestimate the tenacity of a parasite when it is struggling for its political life. He's much cleverer than I gave him credit for. Amazing how such a clever fellow can at the same time be so useless to us.

[ChiciB1]

I Just Saw The Scrawl On C-Span A Few Minutes Ago!

Can't say I didn't expect it, but hey all you "closest" Democrats who supported this TRAITOR, tell me how do you feel??

I really don't want him in OUR Party, but what a SLIME-BALL dirty trick!!!

[ChiciB1]

109. I Just Saw The Scrawl On C-Span A Few Minutes Ago!

Can't say I didn't expect it, but hey all you "closest" Democrats who supported this TRAITOR, tell me how do you feel??

I really don't want him in OUR Party, but what a SLIME-BALL dirty trick!!!

[Name removed]

17. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hlthe2b]

2. what a f***king whore....

NOt unexpected, of course, but still...:mad:

As much as I want us to keep control of the Senate, booting Liarman would almost be worth the loss...

[WatchWhatISay]

3. Probably the most powerful Senator in the country

Unfortunately.

And he knows it. And he will use it.

[Blutodog]

7. Holy Joe

It sucks but he's in as we used to say the catbird seat isn't he?

[Cha]

71. Not really..

I'm to understand that some of the reason he won was because he promised the Dems in Connecticut that he would stay with the Dems.

So, as I said, "I dare him to caucus with the repukes." 6 years will come mighty fast when joe has to answer to that.

[Samantha]

129. Exactly -- I heard him say that it was his campaign promise to the voters

of Connecticut. If he breaks that promise, Connecticut should RECALL him.

[fuzzyball]

84. U R right, Lieberman will exploit his new status as a

tipping point senator to the fullest extent. But who
can blame him? It would be sweet revenge for him to
stick it to the democratic party who abandoned him.

[Bretttido]

99. The democratic party did not abandon him

He abandoned the democratic party... when he put his lust for power ahead of the democrat's choice in the primaries.

[SouthernBelle82]

93. If that was true

why is he going to be going over to the republicans side? If Joe thought he was more powerful as an independent why would he be saying he's going over to the republicans side? I just disagree with that. The democrats have control right now so it would be smart if he actually went to their side again instead of the republicans. I wonder what he is up to. Remember that Joe likes nothing more than power.

[fuzzyball]

114. I have not seen a definitive statement from Lieberman that

he will join the GOP. On the other hand I watched
his appearance on Meet the Press and he gave every
indication he intends to caucus with democrats. I
think he is just keeping some suspense in order to
extract the most previleges from Harry Reid.

[KyndCulture]

5. Screw you, Joe.

[WatchWhatISay]

11. Is he on the committee to approve Bush's Supreme Court nominations?

On second thought, he won't even need to be on the committe, all he will have to do is make threats.

That is our only real power in our 1/2 vote majority.

[LynneSin]

14. That is the judiciary and nope

I think we get two more seats and I know Kerry was the one they lost back in 2004 when they lost senate seats so he'll get one of them.

So far, none of the "Gang of 14" is on the committee so it'll be interesting to see who Patrick Leahy picks as his last member of the committee.

[Zhade]

62. Good, because lieberman supports bolton.

NT!

[saracat]

6. What a bastard.And people say he is a Dem and not to worry?

I hope he chokes on his own bile. I hate him as much as Bush.

[bluestateguy]

8. Here we go...

[maryallen]

9. Something stinks to high heaven about Joe's re-election:

I just can't believe the people of Connecticut are gullible enough to fall for his act ...

[sabbat hunter]

12. most of joes votes

came from independents and republicans.

the republican candidate only got 10% of the vote. so its not that surprising at all IMO

[Zhade]

63. lieberman has ALWAYS gotten more votes from republicans than any other group.

Yet people think he's not beholden to them.

:crazy:

[bdamomma]

124. do you think the outcome of this race between Lieberman and

Lamont was tapered with. I wouldn't put it pass Joe to do some kissing up to the repigs to get re-elected again.

[mrdmk]

10. That is a threat, make no mistake

It is like this, "You don't make me captain, I'm am going to play for the other team and leave you a man short".

Thank-you Mr. Ass-hat!

[longship]

15. The NJ voters are just going to *LOVE* this.

Recall a Senator? Is there a way?

[krkaufman]

73. CT n/t

[LoZoccolo]

16. A large number of whiny splinterist DUers would say the same thing.

How many times have we heard the big Green lie about there being no difference between the parties right here on Democratic Underground? If any of them had the initiative to win a congressional seat they'd be saying the same thing.

[bread_and_roses]

35. and maybe he is a good example of why it is said?

In fact, what could provide a better example? Here's Joe, who's supporters or at least excusers point to his 90% or whatever "liberal" record - as if supporting Bike Trails could offset the deaths of thousands, or as if, for that matter, the Corporate Windfall called Iraq would leave any money for biketrails -

Here's Holyier Than Thou Joe saying that the Repub cheap labor, profiteering, all-powerful Executive, "Pre-emptive" War agenda is not so repugnant to him that he wouldn't consider switching Parties?

I'd call him a Poster Boy for the Greens allegations.

[mhatrw]

54. What *is* the difference between the two major parties to selfish

weasels like Joe?

[FredScuttle]

18. This rat will fuck us over, guaranteed.

Our best hope is that Senate seat in Wyoming, cold as it is to say. Joementum has already abandoned the party once and he will do it again.

[Zhade]

64. Apparently not - the law seems to say it has to be appointed from the same party.

NT!

[FredScuttle]

77. Fuck.

That's all I have to say.

[Zhade]

120. It's exactly what I said!

:D

:(

[Conker]

126. Yeah, that's not good news for Dems in the Senate.

[pacalo]

19. Why doesn't he just stamp his forehead with, "I can be bought."

That comment is a bait for some type of deal if I ever heard one.

[Arugula Latte]

20. It's incomprehensible to me this piece of sewage was the Dem. VP nominee

Worst.Decision.Ever.

Thanks a lot, Donna Brazille! :eyes:

21. You read my mind...

[krkaufman]

74. I *would* love to know more about the thought process ...

... behind his selection as Gore's VP nominee.

[maddiejoan]

22. I guess his seat will be right under

--a streetlight.

[Totally Committed]

23. This is a thank you to all Democrats who voted for this a**hole over Ned Lamont.

What a horrid jerk.

Up yours, Joe.

TC

[Mad_Dem_X]

96. "horrid jerk" is too nice a name

for this guy. I can't believe CT chose him over Lamont, after Lamont won the primary. :shrug:

[Eric J in MN]

24. We should all work hard to elect more Democratic Senators...

...in 2008.

Then we can finally tell Lieberman to shut up.

[Totally Committed]

26. Or, maybe work to lure others across the aisle...

Tell me Lincoln Chafee isn't a hell of a lot more palatable a human being than Joe Lieberman! I'd trade Joe to the other side of Lincoln in a heartbeat.

TC

[Eric J in MN]

27. Lincoln Chafee lost to Sheldon Whitehouse, and so

...we already have his seat.

[Totally Committed]

28. I know.... that was hypothetical.

What I was trying to say was I'd rather have Chafee in the Party than Lieberman. If Joe goes to the other side (officially... he's already there in every other way), we will have lost his seat anyway. If Chafee comes to our side, he will have CHOSEN to be a Democrat... unlike Joe, who is making this seem like he's waiting to see where his best "deal" will come from.

TC

[WatchWhatISay]

31. You know Chafee's gone, dont you?

Finally replace by a Democrat

[femrap]

48. Who could be lured across the aisle????

What repug wants to be 'a good guy?'

[Zhade]

66. How about wooing Sanders?

He's great, and would make lieberman powerless.

[Crunchy Frog]

78. Sanders is already caucusing with us.

He's part of the equation by which we have a majority. Majority = Democrats + Independents who will caucus with Democrats.

[Zhade]

119. Oh, my bad. My math's not the greatest.

:D

[Jai4WKC08]

104. Our best chance would be...

a moderate Repub from a battleground state who's up for re-election in 08. Someone who's vulnerable anyway, and might see they have a better chance for reelection, not to mention Senate leadership opportunities, as a Democrat. Does anybody fit that description?

If so, I'd like to think Harry Reid and his lieutenants are already working on talking him or her into crossing the aisle. It doesn't happen every day, but it's not exactly unheard of either.

[Cafe Americano]

25. Keep Lieberman out of every loop

The play it safe move for Dems would be to keep Lieberman out of everything and hope he joins the Republicans because of it. Make snide remarks in public etc. so he'll leave for good. Hoping he'll be "on your side" isn't too smart. It seems better to know than to be uncertain.

[cassiepriam]

30. I agree the only way to deal with blackmail is to call his bluff.

Being a repug right now is very unpopular.
Make this move at your political risk Joe.

[annabanana]

47. (ahem)

If he does, we will lose our "majority" and all the Senate leadership positions that go along with it.

(thank you Connecticut:sarcasm: )

[Greatwildbeast]

52. And turn the whole Senate over to the GOP?

Like it or not Joe Lieberman has power by sitting on the fence. I'd say make him the head of a very important committee he knows something about.

And then pray like hell he doesn't turncoat and join the GOP.

You must make a deal w/the devil when it's all you got.

And that time has come.

[TankLV]

107. I for one am sick and tired of dealing with the devil.

If you lie with dogs, you get up with fleas...

Don't be surprised of the next two year bring a string of "surprises" of Democratic Party leaks, losses and unexpected repuke wins...

NEVER TRUST A TRAITOR!

[bpeale]

103. he should be stripped of his committee assignments

and treated like the outsider he is

[xchrom]

29. lol -- good luck moderates/centrists -- this is your bride.

i guess at the very least big pharma just let out a big sigh of relief.

what a fuckin joke.

[elehhhhna]

42. OUCH! well said.

[Don1]

91. YUP

PfizerPAC loves this result.

[Pithy Cherub]

32. Traitor Joe only matters if his fellow Republicans

are united. And that is SOOOOOOOO not happening, especially on Iraq. Republicans may be Holy Joe's downfall when they take the bi-partisan approach and settle right into showing support for certain positions. Joes' leverage would be vaporware like his democratic credentials. Joe lost his senate pals that voted in lockstep with Bush. Holy Joe is now tryin' out his creds as a domestic terrorist trying to hold true Democrats hostage! Irony will bite Holy Joe and it shall be a wondrous thing to watch as he melts like the Wicked Witch.;)

[TheJollyNihilist]

34. He's always been shady...

Remember his anti-Hollywood "Golden Sewer Awards" that he presented with Bill Bennett, one of the most nutty wingnuts around?

He also was part of the advisory board of L. Brent Bozell's Parents Television Council, a radically right-wing pro-censorship group.

[AussieDave]

36. Hypothetical: He jumps to the Republicans sometime in the next 2 years

In 2008, the Dems pick up more seats (ensuring they don't need him) and kick him to the curb. He loses the committee chair, seniority, his Reason for Being. He'll realize he's in his final term as a Senator, because CT Dems finally wake up and vote his ass out in 2012. Assuming CT hasn't become a Red state in the meantime (how the fuck did Chris Shays get re-elected ??).

Is this a reasonable scenario ??

Has Lieberman thought this through himself, and is just stringing people along ?? I'm not defending him - just trying to see things from another angle.

[Maven]

38. "because CT Dems finally wake up and vote his ass out in 2012"

That's all you need to know. He's not going to switch.

[AussieDave]

41. I tend to agree with you - his main focus is staying in the Senate

He didn't go to the trouble of running as an "Independent Democrat" to throw it all away on some magical appointment as Defense Secretary or anything else.

If he wants to remain in the Senate for 12 or 18 more years he cannot jump to the Repukes. Certain votes on certain issues, perhaps - but he won't formally caucus with them.

[Maven]

37. Never. Happen.

He can't get reelected as a Republican. He knows this. Joe has one thing and one thing only in mind: his own survival.

It'll never happen.

[Cha]

39. End of story. joe sounds like he's

tryin' to get everyone to kiss his ass.

[elehhhhna]

43. Methinks the BA must have some very nasty dirt on Joementum.

Very nasty.

[Cha]

44. The "BA"?

Congratulations on your Texas Blue 22! I'm New York Blue 24!

[elehhhhna]

45. Bush Admin.

[anitar1]

87. Dirty buzzards do that. Maybe Joe will

have a scandal.I loathe the guy and always have. Was astounded when he was teamed up with Gore.

[Cha]

128. "elmer fud lieberman" is leaving

a looooooooooooong snail trail. I never knew anything about him cause I only started paying attention to polititians and politics in 2000.

[Zhade]

67. He's always gotten more votes from repubs than anyone. Why wouldn't it work?

NT!

[Maven]

85. Where are you getting that information?

Lieberman has been elected primarily by Democrats since he first ran for office. Despite running as an independent in this election, he still had to have gotten a sizeable portion of Democratic votes to win. Those are votes he simply wouldn't get if he aligned himself formally with the right wing.

[TankLV]

108. Democrats were OVERWHELMINGLY for Lamont.

Your observations USED to be true - until THIS election.

LIEberman got his vote from almost ALL the repukes (except for the few percent that voted for the declared repuke) and a lot of independants.

The Democrats threw his all out in the primaries, and did so again in the general election.

[Maven]

110. Lieberman got quite a few registered Dems and many Dem-leaning "independents."

Let's not kid ourselves. I canvassed in CT. He had to in order to win. (See here as well.)

In any event, my original observation remains true.

[TankLV]

112. How so? YOUR post proves MY observations are correct.

The overwhelming MAJORITY of Democrats voted FOR LAMONT!

YOU are trying to claim the opposite...

Nice try - we aren't buying...

"Lamont got a big majority of Democratic votes. Over 60%..."
"Lamont got about 2/3s of CT Democrats' votes. Lieberman got about 2/3s of CT GOP votes."

[Maven]

117. Um, right. The MAJORITY of Dems voted for Lamont. Meaning a MINORITY, didn't.

When I said "sizeable portion," above, I meant "a good chunk," not the majority.

Lamont got something like 60% (or about 2/3) of the Dem vote. Which means, as suggested by the Krugman article, that Lieberman still got about 30% of the Democratic votes. Which he couldn't have won without, and which he wouldn't *get* as a Republican.

From the Krugman article:

He got two-thirds of the Republican vote, but managed to confuse enough Democrats about his positions to get over the top.

That was the point of my original post--it's a numbers game.

You're getting defensive for no reason. Please read and reason through before responding.

[Inuca]

95. Absolutely

I was going to write the same thing when I saw your post. If 6 years from now he wants to run for reelection, he will most likely run as a dem.

[Placebo]

40. He'd only be a "hero" to the fucking fascists for a year or two...

until '08 when Democrats are bound to pick up even more senate seats than we did this year, and Lieberman would become an irrelevant part of an even smaller minority.

[kentuck]

46. Bend over Democrats...Joe wants to stick it to you...

Either you play his game or you don't play at all. Period.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

49. so he's an out-and-out liar now, too

having pledged to connecticut that he wouldn't do so.
wonder how many went ahead and voted for him on this basis?

[Zhade]

68. He was BEFORE he ran as an indie.

He promised some of the congresscritters that endorsed him in the primary that he wouldn't run as an independent if he lost.

He's a fucking liar.

[Beacho]

50. He's the main reason I look forward to 08

More so than even the presidency, looking for a larger margin in the senate so Holy Joe will STFU.

[AJH032]

51. I think you're reading it wrong

First I want to say that I am no Lieberman supporter, and I wish Lamont was the senator-elect from Connecticut. However, I think you are all reading this report wrong. It doesn't seem like he's considering switching to be a Republican. It says: "Asked...if he might follow the example of Sen. Jim Jeffords....who left the Republicans in 2001 and became an independent...Lieberman refused to discount the possibility." It looks like he's refusing to eliminate the possibility of becoming a full-time INDEPENDENT, not a full time Republican.

[Lurking Dem]

57. You are correct.

[Zhade]

69. That would make sense, if he were still a Dem. He's not.

He filed as, and was elected as, an independent, NOT a Democrat. He is not a member of the Democratic party.

[FredScuttle]

76. Jeffords did switch to an Independent....

but pledged he would caucus with the Democrats, thus giving them control over the Senate in 2001. Joementum, despite his two-faced bleating, was elected as an Independent and that is what he is. The only place for him to go is the Dark Side.

[Krakowiak]

88. no, he is talking about switching to the GOP (see source)

what an absolute prick.



http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/11/13/lieberman_wont_rule_out_gop_caucusing/

from the boston globe....

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut said yesterday that he will caucus with Senate Democrats in the new Congress, but he would not rule out switching to the Republican caucus if he starts to feel uncomfortable among Democrats.

[Beam Me Up]

53. And this comes as a surprise to whom, exactly?

Someone should have challenged that election. No way that man won. NO WAY.

[bdamomma]

125. the votes could have been tampered with, I wonder,

why don't they ask for a recount.

[yojon]

55. What committee you want, Joe? Maybe Homeland Security?

Anything you want, Joe (silently: you rat bastard).

[The Backlash Cometh]

56. The next hero on my list is the Republican who switches t o the Dem

party so we don't have to put up with Lieberman's blackmail.

[Larry Allen]

58. don't coddle loserman

He is a loser in oh so many ways. Not the least of which is support for the invasion and occupation of iraq. If he wants to side with the rapidly collapsing bush crime family let him make that career choice. At least we wouldn't have joe biden making disturbing noises. Our best chairs are in the House anyway. We knew we had to win a lieberman proof majority and we failed to do so. Credit the Democratic Senatorial Cronies Club for their republican lite strategy in tennessee. Don't give in to blackmail. If Lieberman pulls shenanigans behind closed doors, just make them public.

[Kajsa]

59. Thanks!

He really shows his true colors, here.

:D

[AtomicKitten]

60. Ousting him in the Dem primary

has put him in the position of giving him this clout in the Senate. There's an old saying that if you're going to attack an opponent, make sure you take them out. Lieberman is dangerous now.

[Alexander]

89. Lieberman ousted himself, by filing as an Independent.

He was polling ahead of Lamont until he decided to cut it both ways and file as a Connecticut For Lieberman candidate.

Daniel Akaka faced a primary challenge too, from Ed Case. But you didn't see him going 3rd party.

Given that Lamont's primary victory was a close 52-48 margin, it's safe to say Lieberman would've won the primary had he not made the decision to bolt the Democratic party.

There are cases where a politician can say "the party left me", but not this time. Joe overreacted to the poll numbers before he needed to and left the party in the middle of the campaign. Maybe it was panic, maybe it was deliberate. But he revealed himself for what he truly is, and for what he stands for: Connecticut (and everyone else) For Lieberman.

[Zhade]

61. Gee, now who warned of that...

Oh, right - progressives and liberals and everyone NOT a stupid fucking lieberman supporter.

Let's woo Sanders. He'd be a wonderful person to neutralize this scumbag.

[AtomicKitten]

65. actually we need BOTH their support for a majority

eom

[Joe Bacon]

70. I told you so

LIEberman will jump.

[Unvanguard]

72. A bit of bribery might give the Republicans the Senate.

Sickening.

[marmar]

75. Why do I get the feeling this prick has made a deal with the devil?

Shameless, useless neocon asswipe in Democratic clothing. Not only does he look like Darth Sidious/Chancellor Palpatine (sorry non-Star Wars fans), he acts like him too. He's nothing but poison.

[AJH032]

80. haha!

I was watching Star Wars Episode I today and when I saw Senator Palpatine I thought "damn! he looks JUST like Senator Lieberman!"

[marmar]

81. Absolutely. The resemblance is uncanny.

:scared:

[dommyluc]

79. Lieberman is powerful?

Will someone please explain something to me? I may not be that stupid, but I cannot figure this out for the life of me. I keep hearing these ridiculous politicos and pundits keep saying that Joe Lieberman is so powerful because we have a tied, 50/50 Senate and Lieberman can shift the balance of power, but last time I checked - as recently as Wednesday when the Dems took the election - there are 50 Democrats, indies Bernie Sanders and Lieberman, and 48 Republicans. I may be wrong but I do not see a Socialist like Bernie Sanders voting in league with the Reps, so if Lieberman goes along with the Reps and Sanders with the Dems doesn't that make it 51 (Dems + Sanders) to 49 (Reps + Joe)? Are these pundits that unhinged by the Dems win that they honestly have to spin these fantasies to soothe their broken hearts after Georgie and their other Republican pals got shellaced last Tuesday, or am I using the same kind of math that Karl Rove used for the midterm elections? Just curious.

[tkmorris]

86. You have it slightly wrong

In fact the count in the Senate is 49 Republicans, 49 Democrats, and 2 Independents (Sanders and Lieberman). Sanders will caucus with the Dems, giving them 50. Lieberman is the one that gives us the magical 51 needed (since a 50/50 split would have Cheney as the tiebreaker) and so he has within his power to turn control over the entire Senate over to the Republicans if he chose to caucus with them instead of us. That's a mighty big sword to hold over our head.

Frankly I think he'd be a moron to do it, even if he wanted to. I'll leave my reasoning for that to another post though.

[greeneggs708]

83. No More Lieberman Stories

Please.

[Hippo_Tron]

90. A Lieberman switch would mean less power for Lieberman

His committee chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee is a lot more powerful under a Democratic Senate with a Democratic House than it is under a Power Sharing GOP Controlled Senate with a Democratic House. If the GOP gets the Senate 50/50, if we go by the House GOP rules we still would have a majority of spots on the conference committees since under GOP rules members of the minority party in the House don't get spots on conference committees. That means that vengeful Democrats will cut out all of Lieberman's amendments in conference and he won't be able to do anything about it.

And trying to gain clout with the White House won't do shit. Bush's veto pen will be reserved for wedge issues like stem cell research. He'll sign all of the spending bills no matter what pork is or isn't in them.

[Jai4WKC08]

106. Except who knows what the Repubs might promise

Lieberman as a reward for swapping parties. An even more important committee? Maybe a leadership position? Something outside of the Senate (since CT has a Repub governor), like maybe a cabinet post or ambassadorship? Or even something as simple as a bribe?

Seems to me the Repubs would VERY much like to keep the Democrats from having supeona power and control of the committees and agenda in at least one chamber of Congress. I'd frankly wouldn't put anything past 'em toward that end.

[Hippo_Tron]

122. They'd have to promise him something REALLY big: judiciary, appropriations, finance

Which I don't think is even plausible considering that he doesn't even sit on those committees. Maybe Charimanship of Armed Services would get him to switch, but I still think he'd have more power at the helm of the Homeland Security Committee in a Dem controlled Senate than he would at the helm of Armed Services with a 50/50 Senate.

As far as a cabinet post goes, I think that Joe is smart enough to not piss away his Senate seat to jump on board the sinking ship that is the Bush administration. The only job that I could see him taking is UN Ambassador.

But I think there's also another reason that Joe won't bolt the party. I don't think that he can stand the thought of the rejection he would face from Connecticut voters as well as his own party if he were to enable the GOP to get a majority in the Senate. Simply put, Joe likes being loved too much to jump aboard the sinking ship SS Chimp.

[SouthernBelle82]

92. To me this says

it's all about Lieberman once again he is trying to defy the public. He did it in the democratic primary's and now he's going to do it in this. What does that say to those democrats and independents who voted for him thinking he was an independent? Wouldn't that be manipulation? I can't stand when politicians of any kind pull that stunt. Lieberman is stuck as an independent and should stay that way until after this senate is over with. Same with anybody else who was elected as this or that. There should be a rule that states you can't change your party after you've won. I would be pissed off if someone I voted for did that. Wasn't Lieberman just saying he was a good and loyal JFK democrat? So if that's true why would he change to be a republican? I guess he's a liar like his neocon "friends." Maybe he wants to run for president with them and thinks he can win that.

[Chico Man]

97. He won't switch, he's just being the prick he loves to be

Thats it

[meldroc]

98. Lieberman won't jump, but he WILL threaten to jump.

That's what gives him power. He's the tiebreaker now. He'll stay with the Democrats so long as he keeps his seniority and gets a chair on one of the big committees, which will give him enormous power. If he jumps to the Republicans, he'll still be the tiebreaker, except he won't have seniority over there, won't get a chairmanship, and nobody will trust him at all ("Never trust a traitor, not even one you create." - everyone in DC has read Machiavelli.)

He will be in the position to punish the Democratic party by crossing the aisle on crucial votes, and he'll be able to kill bills he doesn't like in whatever committee he gets to chair. And periodically, he'll say he's thinking about switching, which really means he wants his ass kissed.

Like it or not, the Democratic party's gonna have to find a way to work with him. We're going to have to work with the Republicans as well - after all, Bush does have that veto pen.

[dommyluc]

100. re: Senate make-up

OK. Let me try this again. The Democrats had 44 Senate seats before the election. They won 6 more (PA.,VA.,OH.,MO.,MT.,RI.) without losing any of the seats they held. That makes a total of 50 seats for the Dems. Bernie Sanders and Lieberman both won seats running as independents, which leaves 48 seats for the Republicans (50D + 2I + 48R = 100 Senate seats). So, how does this add up to a tied Senate if Sanders votes with the Dems and Lieberman votes with the Reps?

[smb]

101. Explanation

One of the 44 is the Vermont seat now held by Sanders -- you're double-counting it.

[AussieDave]

127. The Dems DID win 6 seats, but they "lost" CT, which went Independent

Hence - 49 Dems (44 plus 6 minus 1), 49 Repukes (55 minus 6) and 2 Independents (Sanders and Lieberman).

So if Sanders votes with the Dems and Lieberman with the Repukes - 50-50 !!!

But Lieberman would be cuttiing his own throat beyond 2012 if he went with the Repukes - one would think the CT "Dems" who voted for him wouldn't stand fot it.

[bpeale]

102. hopefully his constituents will recall his ass if that happens

[Jai4WKC08]

105. I doubt it, since

Most of the people who voted for him were Republicans and independents. The majority of CT Democrats voted for Lamont.

What makes you think Repubs and indies care whether Lieberman leaves the Democratic party?

[TankLV]

111. Gee, ya mean WE were right when WE called this back before the PRIMARIES?!

Gee - I'm not at ALL surprised!

FUCK LIEberman!

Fucking turncoat traitor LIAR!

I almost hate him more than the bunkerboy and repukes...

[JamesJoyce]

113. Dems must EMBRACE Lieberman

and be a big tent party, as opposed to a party of anti-war purists!

[ChiciB1]

115. Wow... You Signed On 10-30-2006!! Does THAT Mean Anything???? n/t

[Zhade]

131. Maybe it's another of mr. benchley's unconvincing masks.

I already got one banned earlier today - at least, he read exactly like bencley, and he's dust, so...

If it really was him: FUCK YOU, BENCHLEY!

[Richard Steele]

134. So, you like this war, do ya?

[melody]

116. He's an arrogant idiot

The Repubs will never accept him as their own and he has just burned himself forever with the new
political US tide. Say goodbye to Lieberman.

[oc2002]

118. I think the general consensous is that we would be better off without LIEberman in the long run.

The man is a seriously despicable character, and a shameful mark on all of Connecticut.

Although, I serously doubt, that even he would have the gall to do something that low.

He would be branded a scoundrel, and nobody would ever trust him again.(even those that do so now)

[Little Star]

121. If Holy Joe wants to retain his

seniority (and he does), He'll be caucusing with the Dems. To Joe, Its ALL about him!

[bdamomma]

123. now this has me worried, this sleazy Joe Lieberman

if he switches over to repig, that is payback to the Dems. Will it be over for the Dems majority if he does this?

[Skittles]

130. what a slimy little bastard

he won't switch, he just wants to torment people - shame on anyone who ever believed in that piece of shit

[NastyDiaper]

132. Carrot on a sceptre.

He had problems with, well, us here at the DU in the primaries.

Joe told his voters that he would caucus w/ the dems. He backed off his war stance. Mix in the people that didn't/can't vote in the (D) primaries. Joe wins. Ok we all know that story.

But I have to believe that if Joe went (R), CT voters would set record speed for calling in an emergency vote of "No confidence". Maybe someone who knows better than I do can clue me in?

As for Grinning Joe, Dude caught the carrot.

Dems will replace the stick w/ a sceptre.

And Joe will tug away.

[gasperc]

133. Joe, we call your bluff, go ahead and switch

go ahead and thoroughly enrage the CT Dems that voted for you, I think they expected you to lie to their face and caucus with the Republicans.

Go ahead, I'm convinced you have the guts and stomach for the wrath you'll face by splitting the Senate 50/50 and giving Cheney the deciding vote.

Go ahead make OUR day.

Please.

I'm patient, I can easily wait till 2008 and make you completely irrelevant.