concede, Joe
On the anniversary of 9-11, I wrote of the 2000 election that in the end, Bush was uniquely positioned to win, and Gore uniquely positioned to concede (in possibility the greatest concession speech in history).
I remember thinking in 2000 that while Gore was out there, trying to win, that Joe was nowhere to be seen - especially in the critical post-election Florida limbo. Joe wasn't invested in winnning, just being the winner, and so he left Al to do the dirty work. Many on the right castigated Gore for endorsing Dean over Joe in 2004 and now refusing to support Joe against Lamont, but the simple truth is that Joe abandoned Al, not the other way around.
Now, the Democratic party voters of Connecticut have spoken; they want Lamont, not Joe, to represent them. And Joe will run as an independent. I can't help but make the connection between the lack of commitment to his Party today and the lack of commitment in 2000.
Lieberman lost this race by less than 5 points. The sole reason he lost, in other words, was his public decision to run as an indy should he lose this primary. It was hubris, plain and simple, and it cost him.
There is no dishonor in submission to the will of the people. That is the essence of democracy. I hope that Joe realizes that public service is about the public, not the servant. I hope that he realizes that he should follow the example of Al Gore. Lamont won this primary with honor, and now it is finished.
Concede, Joe. Or bear the title of Sore Loserman as your political legacy.
I remember thinking in 2000 that while Gore was out there, trying to win, that Joe was nowhere to be seen - especially in the critical post-election Florida limbo. Joe wasn't invested in winnning, just being the winner, and so he left Al to do the dirty work. Many on the right castigated Gore for endorsing Dean over Joe in 2004 and now refusing to support Joe against Lamont, but the simple truth is that Joe abandoned Al, not the other way around.
Now, the Democratic party voters of Connecticut have spoken; they want Lamont, not Joe, to represent them. And Joe will run as an independent. I can't help but make the connection between the lack of commitment to his Party today and the lack of commitment in 2000.
Lieberman lost this race by less than 5 points. The sole reason he lost, in other words, was his public decision to run as an indy should he lose this primary. It was hubris, plain and simple, and it cost him.
There is no dishonor in submission to the will of the people. That is the essence of democracy. I hope that Joe realizes that public service is about the public, not the servant. I hope that he realizes that he should follow the example of Al Gore. Lamont won this primary with honor, and now it is finished.
Concede, Joe. Or bear the title of Sore Loserman as your political legacy.
Comments
fwiw, I am not against independent candidates. What I am against is someone claiming to be a partisan and then acting otherwise. Partisanship is like emotion (to ref your earlier post) - its a good thing, in balance.
but with all due respect, parties are not gods. fundamentally parties and a purple philosophy are an odd fit!
At what point in time did Lieberman claim he was a Democratic partisan? It's Lamont's supporters who are the partisans that Lieberman opposes.
Arcane, I am pleased that your tolerance level for our tomfoolery has increased somewhat. Try to bear with us :)
he was, but in also in a way his supporters like to emphasize: despite his moderate rhetoric, on social and economic issues he was a convential liberal. lieberman's ADA ratings.
Uh, his Democratic bonafides was that he was one of the most reliable Democratic voters in the Senate, but has continued to support the war effort. Those who say he wasn't a Democrat are obviously blinded by a blatant disregard of the facts.
The way the primaries are set up, Democrats are forced to move to the left (or Republicans to the right) or else they stand no chance of getting elected.
And while his TONE was bipartisan, his voting record was clearly on the side of the Democrats. He liked to talk the talk of the centrist, but on most issues he never walked the walk.
Lamont ran and won as a Democrat, which is what Democrats are paying for.
Lamont is no more of a Democrat than Lieberman is. The Democrats used to be a big tent party, not an explicitly leftist party... if I get what you're saying right, you're saying that if you're not a leftist, you're not a Democrat. Let the purges begin!
he was, but in also in a way his supporters like to emphasize: despite his moderate rhetoric, on social and economic issues he was a convential liberal. lieberman's ADA ratings.
My point exactly. I support Lieberman because he supports the war effort, but I have been extremely critical of his move to the left since he joined the Gore campaign in 2000. Prior to 2000, he was far more conservative than he is now, opposing affirmative action, proposing capital gains, income, and corporate tax cuts, promoting free trade politics, supporting school vouchers, opposing the Kyoto treaty, etc. He has since ditched all of those positions.
He was punished because he supported the war, not because he didn't vote with the Democrats.
I quit talking about the war, since everybody has their position made up by now and debate is useless. My position on a slew of policies and actions changes on a monthly basis (like in April I was advocating a strategic partnership with Iran, although right now I'm back into my war mode). I seem to be the only person who actually has changing thoughts on the issue, so I've given up.
"There are still Democrats who believe [in having a strong national defense and an assertive foreign policy] but they are a diminishing factor in the Party. Jane Harman, who is the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee was until this spring a national security liberal in the Lieberman mold. Then she was challenged in a primary race by a brainless millionaire named Marcie Winograd. Winograd -- a nobody and a flaming anti-American, Cindy Sheehan leftist -- got 40% of the vote, despite the fact that Harman, who is also wealthy, spent $500,000 on her campaign. Following the primary, Harman has done a 180 turn and become a leftwing Democrat on national security issues."
The "progessive" blogosphere, like Kos, MyDD, Seeing the Forest, etc., are actively working to purge all pro-war Democrats from the party.