Democrats & Liberals Archives


August 8, 2006 will go down in history as FDR Day - Fantastic Democratic Revival Day. A previously unknown candidate, Ned Lamont, beat the 18-year-veteran Democratic-establishment candidate, Joe Lieberman, in the Democratic primary in Connecticut. This feat shows that the Little Guy has been revived from years of fear and is ready, eager and able to reclaim the Democratic Party and bring it back to working for the good of each of us, not just for the rich.

After losing to Lamont, 52% - 48%, Lieberman announced he would run as an Independent in the general election. He stated:

"I am disappointed not just because I lost, but because the old politics of partisan polarization won today. For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot and will not let that result stand."

He is calling himself an Independent Democrat. Have you ever heard of such a thing? He thinks he will win because a poll of him in a 3-way race has shown Lieberman winning. But that was then, when Lieberman was a winner. Today, he is not a winner, but a loser. Furthermore, he is disloyal to the Democratic Party. Who will support him? Republicans? In today's anti-Republican atmosphere? No, he is on his way down.... down. Too bad.

People flocked in big numbers to vote in this Connecticut primary. Forty per cent showed up instead of the usual 25%. The result demonstrated the power of the Little Guy, specifically the power of:

  • ANTI-IRAQ WAR DEMOCRATS - For years elected Democrats paid no attention to those of us who were against the Iraq War. Democratic leaders were so scared and cowed into submission by Republicans screaming "national security" over and over, that they offered little or no resistance to the militarization of the world and of our society. Lieberman went further by kissing up to Republicans and denouncing Democrats who disagreed with him. An anti-Iraq-war Democrat, Ned Lamont, won

  • ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT DEMOCRATS - For years the Democratic Party was under the influence of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), a so-called centrist group. It is so centrist it has members who used to be Republicans. The DLC favors Big Business over the Little Guy. It believes in fund raisers to collect money from rich donors; anti-establishment Democrats believe in collecting small amounts from all kinds of Little Guys. Joe Lieberman is a member of the DLC, which is often labeled as Republican-Lite. Republican-Lite Lieberman was rejected yesterday

  • PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS - Lieberman and other members of the DLC, such as Hillary Clinton, claim that Democrats cannot win elections unless we move to the center. What center? During the last few decades, the Republican Party has shifted our entire society to the far right. In the age of FDR, Lieberman would have been called a solid conservative. He was part of the Gang of 14 that enabled super-conservative Roberts and Alito to become justices. He also joined the Theocrats in advocating Terri Schiavo be kept alive. The only DLC member that has won recently is Bill Clinton, and he won not because of his triangulation, but because he has terrific political skills. The vote for Lamont was a vote for progressive Democrats
Little Guys could not win by themselves. They won because they got themselves organized and worked together to achieve a common goal. Big kudos go to those who did the organizing.

The much maligned Howard Dean deserves a great deal of credit. While running for president, he discovered how to collect small amounts of cash from people on the Internet, the so-called netroots. When running for the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the DLC savaged him. But Howard Dean won, fair and square. Was he accepted by the DLC? No. It is still fighting him. It wants Dean to kowtow to Big Business donors, but Dean is pursuing small amounts of money from Little Guys. Dean worked hard for Lamont, who won, thus empowering Dean.

Daily KOS, run by a blogger whose name is hard to pronounce, worked feverishly reporting the race from beginning to end and pushing relentlessly for Ned Lamont. Many other bloggers joined him. These bloggers are celebrating.

The netroots were moved to action by, Democracy for America (DFA) and other organizations. The result was an explosing of activism. Little Guys all over America have decided that they have had enough of Republicanism and Democratic Establishmentism. The Little Guy is ready to tell their Democratic leaders how they feel about the issues.

The Little Guy won.

Republicans misconstrue the situation. They think there is a "civil war" raging within the Democratic Party. No, there is no civil war. The Little Guy has won. Already, former President Bill Clinton has endorsed Ned Lamont. So did Hillary, Chris Dodd and many others. From now on you will see more and more elected Democratic officials challenging Republicans and listening more and more to the Little Guy and incorporating his ideas into their platforms.

The Little Guy winning has changed the whole outlook of the November elections. It will encourage more and more challenges to "safe" incumbents. It will lead to a Democratic landslide this November in both the House and the Senate.

Yesterday was FDR Day. The political situation is so wonderful for Democrats, that if FDR were alive today he would jump for joy - while strapped to his wheelchair!

Posted by Paul Siegel at August 9, 2006 5:22 PM
Comment #174316

How much did Lieberman usually win by in a dem/rep race?
Aren’t there more registered independents in that state than dems or repubs?
The race was so close that I really don’t believe anyone can say definitely that either ‘side’ won.
Nothing to get all excited about.
The winning ‘side’ will be known in November.

Posted by: bug at August 9, 2006 5:36 PM
Comment #174317

I hope this is the case… that the average voter is actually being heard. It’s not only the Joe lost, it’s that a large turn out was suppose to actually favor Joe and that Joe is only the 4th Senator to loose in a primary.

I hope sincerely that people will take heart from this - and both sides of the isle will recognize that they can change politics that do not represent their needs… and that if the established politicians seem out of touch, then that means they might also be out of a job.

Of course, that might not keep politicians from trying to ignore election results, but those should be seen for what they are: more in love with their own power than the interests of the people they should’ve been representing.

Posted by: tony at August 9, 2006 5:48 PM
Comment #174320

Yeah the Dems are revived all right. The Dems fought the Dems and one of the Dems won. Celebrate. There was a lot of celebrating in Richmond after 1st Manassas, but it was the beginning of a long civil war. Dems are in for the same.

Posted by: Jack at August 9, 2006 6:04 PM
Comment #174324

Thanks for that assessment Jack. (We haven’t considered Joe a DEM for quite some time.) We DEMs are not facing a Civil War… we’re facing the realization that we don’t have to let DC dictate our political choices. You should try it some time.

Posted by: tony at August 9, 2006 6:11 PM
Comment #174328

Here’s a nice link to links showing how Dems are coming round to sticking with their party’s nominee after a few early hints to the contrary.

Nice article Paul, but I’m pretty sure the meaning of FDR ain’t gonna be changing in America any time soon. ;-)

Posted by: Walker Willingham at August 9, 2006 6:18 PM
Comment #174329

I am enjoying the result of “anti-establishment” winning in any race! This harkens back to my anti-vietnam days and the deflation of Nixon.

The bush-house is saying this is the doing of the Democratic Party’s extreme left. What they can’t seem to understand (or believe) is it’s not the extreme left but most everyone who sees the influence of the extreme right creeping out of the crevices and into their once-happy home. Democrats who creep with them are feeling the ax.

Posted by: myles at August 9, 2006 6:21 PM
Comment #174331

However, I must posit that, in answer to your question “Who will support him?” - the 48% of Dems who voted for him in this primary, for a start. I wouldn’t think too many independents would (he’s too Repub, maybe?) but you never know.

Posted by: myles at August 9, 2006 6:27 PM
Comment #174334

Such lofty claims from the outcome of just one of 100’s of races held and to be held. My, My, but the powers of extrapolation are mighty in this article.

Mighty ……, I leave you to fill in the blank.:-)

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 9, 2006 6:30 PM
Comment #174338


Exit polling shows that 21% of Lieberman voters did not want Joe to run as an independent if he lost. If his sore loser profile increases in the coming weeks even more Lieberman primary voters will see fit to vote for the candidate who actually won their party’s primary. So the 48% who voted for him in the primary are far from guaranteed. Actually Lieberman will certainly get plent of votes from Independents as well as Republicans who see him as the more plausible general election opponent to Lamont. How that translates into numbers in November is an open question.

Posted by: Walker Willingham at August 9, 2006 6:34 PM
Comment #174342

David -

Jump on in… don’t just walk by and guess if the water’s cold. BTW - you gained an IND candidate yesterday…. Thoughts?

Posted by: tony at August 9, 2006 6:38 PM
Comment #174345

Walker’s point is well made.

tony, you mean in Texas? Hadn’t heard.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 9, 2006 6:44 PM
Comment #174347


Ok, so that leaves about 38% of the Dems voting for him… still enough to split the ticket fairly significantly. One can only hope that, like you say, he will split other tickets, as well.

But nevertheless, a large portion of People have spoken out through this vote. More Power to ‘em, to US.

Posted by: myles at August 9, 2006 6:45 PM
Comment #174354

David -

Not specifically in Texas, but one (I guess in spirit) from CT.

Personally, I think leftovers suck… :~)

Posted by: tony at August 9, 2006 7:00 PM
Comment #174360

tony, Liberman is an IINO, Independent in name only. You saw it coined here first.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 9, 2006 7:11 PM
Comment #174362

Paul, I love this article!
And I’d like to think this big of an achievement will be possible, but as Bertrand Russell said: “What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite.”

So, I guess I’d have to say, I’m more than willing to find out!

Posted by: Adrienne at August 9, 2006 7:23 PM
Comment #174363

Hey…..a Lieberman here, a McKinney there…’s a start, a statement, and just maybe a feather in d.a.n.’s cap..;)

Posted by: Sandra Davidson at August 9, 2006 7:33 PM
Comment #174369

Martin Frost predicts the Democrats will retake the House:,2933,207347,00.html

Frost was a Blue Dog Democrat from Texas, supposedly the kind of person who is disgusted with the crazy, zany Democratic party right now.

Posted by: Woody Mena at August 9, 2006 8:02 PM
Comment #174391

I’m not quite sure what to make out of all this. I predicted Lieberman would pull out a win in the primary but I’m not surprised he did not(nor unhappy).

What puzzles me most is the anger being displayed by Republicans. What is their motivation for sticking up for good ol’Joe? Will he take Rove up on his offer?

Posted by: mark at August 9, 2006 9:30 PM
Comment #174394


What in the world is so fantastic about it? An incumbent that failed to represent his constituents desires got the boot. It should happen much more often.

What we Democrats are failing to notice is how the neo-Con’s are using this to their advantage. They’re using it to paint us “titty-pink” again with a yellow stripe down our backs and we’re always slow on the draw.

Compare the number of Lieberman v. Lamont stories to those of Delay’s machinations to get his name removed from the Texas ballot, or those about Katherine Harris. At this rate we will lose again because we get too caught up in “the moment”, instead of looking down the road at the whole picture.

Yeah, this was a “win-win”. The media won and the Republican’s won. We’re just stupid to waste so much time on it. But, we’ve played by the other guys rules so long I wonder if we do know how to make our own rules anymore.

The American people want leadership! That begins by creating our own arguments, not just answering the argument presented by the other party. Where are the fresh ideas?


Posted by: KansasDem at August 9, 2006 9:40 PM
Comment #174395

KansasDem -

This came down to one thing - the voters decided for themselves who to put up in Nov. The party dogs in DC were backing the other guy… and Joe lost despite a huge voter turn out (which was suppose to be to his advantage… imagine the difference had there been a lower turnout.) No one can dismiss this a fringe or leftist… too many voters.

The result, DC had to follow the voter’s lead and back Lamont.

Now, just imagine if we can scale this up on a National level. DEMs will be putting people up that WE believe in while the REPs will be still rationalizing and justifying their failed policies, with nothing new to offer.

I know it’s just one example… but it represents exactly what I want to see continue.

Posted by: tony at August 9, 2006 9:51 PM
Comment #174396

“(CNN) — Most Americans believe the GOP-controlled Congress has been a failure and say they plan to vote for Democrats in November, according to a poll released Wednesday.

Fifty-three percent of registered voters polled by Opinion Research Corp. for CNN said they were supporting Democrats, while 40 percent said they were leaning Republican. The remaining 7 percent either planned to support another party or had no opinion.

As for changing their minds when they get to the ballot box, only 43 percent of those planning to vote for Democrats said that was a possibility as opposed to 54 percent of those saying they plan to support Republicans.”

Posted by: tony at August 9, 2006 9:55 PM
Comment #174401


I love optomistic opinions but I’ll bet you that ocean front property in Wichita that this costs us a Senate seat.


Posted by: KansasDem at August 9, 2006 10:11 PM
Comment #174423

I will take you up on that bet.

The Lamont win was important for several reasons. It represents the ascendancy of liberals, a success for the netroots, and, when all is said and done, this is as close as Americans have come to voting on Iraq.

It represents a loss for the big money, corporate influenced, triangulating, “moderate,” Republcan-Lite Democrats.

The Republicans & conservatives are afraid, rightfully so.

Because it is going to get worse. Iraq is getting worse. Lebanon is a disaster for US foreign policy.

Worse, the economy is nosing into a recession. Last year I predicted a recession by this summer, and last winter I had to push that prediction back by a few months; we will be in a recession by the election.

I am still pretty comfortable with that prediction.

Why Lamont? The factors which won him the primary will become even stronger in the next few months. Americans are going to have a very difficult time approving of spending @ $257 million dollars PER DAY on Iraq when the economy comes apart, never mind the pointlessness of all the death and destruction. People will quite rightly vote for Lamont, and vote for liberals, because it will be the only sensible choice.

Global Warming demands we rethink energy policies. Occupying Iraq is a debacle.

The only question is whether Bush will start WWIII before Americans can vote in the midterms.

Pardon the ramble, but you know, between the prospects of recession, complete failure of domestic policies, an electoral debacle, to be followed by an opposition in control of a Legislature, one which will surely subpoena Bush, I am pretty sure The Bush White House will pull the trigger.

Worst president ever. Yeah, you hear that kind of thing a lot, but we are about to find out why.

Lamont will be the next CT Senator.

Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2006 12:21 AM
Comment #174426

We got to push a different message, not accept the “reality” the Neocons paint. We can safely ignore what they say provide we make ourselves difficult to ignore. If we continue to try to move to a Center which we’re actually to the right of now, we will only bolster the arguments of those who say we’re little different from our opponents.

That, my friend, is what’s going to get us ignored. Like my professor at Baylor said, a difference, to be a difference, has to make a difference. If we can’t demonstrate our indepencence and vigor in opposition to the Republican party, then what answer, if any, can we give to that assertion?

Let the Republicans spin. We’ve got a nice big stick to jam in their spokes now.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 10, 2006 12:33 AM
Comment #174437

—-Tony—- From what I have seen since yesterday
was simply a great occasion.(most of the people I
voted for won. Not bad for an off year election.)
We had about 10% more voters come out in off year
election, this hasn’t happened since Clinton Days!
I see why so many spinmeisters are circling the

Posted by: DAVID at August 10, 2006 1:33 AM
Comment #174438

—-KansasDem—- I fully expect to see all kinds
of new terror threats like we did before President
Bush’s second election, I am sure you remember all
those alerts flashing on t.v. day an night. The
big problem could be a much greater problem than
yellow or orange alerts flashing! I would never
have thought in my life time, that a President
of the United States would misrepresent the facts
for the reason of taking our Country in to a war
an writing over 800 signing statements allowing
him to basically change the constitution. An I am pissed!

Posted by: DAVID at August 10, 2006 1:59 AM
Comment #174444

——Stephen—- I have not seen any input about
Tony Snow His comment was A Vote For Lamont was
a vote for another 9/11 ! I guess that when you
get in the garbage with the other maggots, it doesn’t take long to become one. I thought he was
just a step above the rift-raft but guess I was

Posted by: DAVID at August 10, 2006 3:07 AM
Comment #174449

We are at Condition Red, for the first time ever as of this morning. However, it originates in the U.K. and therefore, can’t be connected to any Bush admin political plot. Not this time.

Posted by: David R. Remer at August 10, 2006 5:51 AM
Comment #174453

My big worries about a “FDR” are two:
1. The possibility that this Lamont victory represents some kind of Democratic “resurgence” is dwarfed by what I see as a far worse possibility: that this loss for Lieberman will represent the turning point in history when the Democratic party begins to lose the Jewish vote. Because of the virtual knee-jerk, “my Israel right or wrong mentality” that is quite evident in even liberal Jews, my concern is that the movement toward an “anti-war” position in the DNC (which was certainly active in yesterday’s decision) will mean that more and more Jews will begin to be independants like Lieberman and leave the Party.
Keep in mind that Karl Rove and his cohorts have done a very clever thing by aligning the Republican Party with the Christian evangelicals. Not only has this made criticism of religion in government a near impossibility for Democrats. It has also made criticism of israeli aggression a near impossibility. The evangelicals are very militaristic people support Israel at every turn and are waiting open-armed for the Jewish vote. An anti-war position in the Democratic Party can seem like a slam-dunk issue for us to take up, but could easily backfire if it results in Jews going Republican.
2. Democrats are famous for taking up Idealistic/Simplistic positions that backfire.

Posted by: Nicko at August 10, 2006 7:18 AM
Comment #174455

“Who will support him? Republicans?”

How about the Independents who make up the majority of Conn.? Some still just don’t understand. Dem poll numbers are as low and lower than Reps. Why? We are sick and tired of parties who are increasingly running toward the fringes.
The fact that Lamont was flanked by Sharpton and Jackson is evidence of his allegiance. The DNC has been hijacked by the radical extemist and are now at code red. Think about it, JFK and FDR would no longer be welcomed!
Independents welcome Liberman and see this as a great victory for the anti-party. (imo), he will win in November.

The great thing about being Independent….we don’t have to listen to any partisan spinning of the facts. Karen Finney (Dem) is one of the worst! She can’t start a sentence that does not begin with “This Adminstration”.

Posted by: curmudgeon-at-large at August 10, 2006 7:24 AM
Comment #174456

“We are at Condition Red, for the first time ever as of this morning. However, it originates in the U.K. and therefore, can’t be connected to any Bush admin political plot. Not this time.”

Damn… guess I better go shopping, and me with my credit cards max’d out. WHAT KIND OF A PATRIOT AM I !!?!?!?!?!

Posted by: tony at August 10, 2006 7:24 AM
Comment #174457

Ha! Ha! Ha!

It’s great to see Joe lose so that, in November, after he wins (and you know he will) we can hear all the leftists scream that the Conn. election was “stolen”. This is going to be good.

Once again, the leftists support a candidate that cannot win in a general election…just like F’n John Kerry. You people can’t see the forest for the trees. Your party has moved so far left that you’ve guaranteed Republican control of the House, Senate and Presidency for the next 50 years…maybe even longer.

You’re no longer the Democratic Party. You might as well rename yourselves the Socialist Party, because that’s what you’ve become. You might as well get used to losing, because it’s going to happen alot in the upcoming elections.

Run, Hilllary, run!

Posted by: mac6115cd at August 10, 2006 7:42 AM
Comment #174458

mac -

That’s all you have to say? Never heard that crap before. I know you REPs have a hard time being original, but come on - try it… please.

Posted by: tony at August 10, 2006 7:48 AM
Comment #174461

Where are all the comments about Cynthia and her buddies?
Anybody catch the clips of the racist fight after she lost?
Imagine if white people left the building calling them the N word, we wouldn’t here the end of it.
One of those terrorist groups fighting Israel called Condi a traitor because all blacks should be with the radical muslims.
Does that include Cynthia & Farakan? How about Al & Jesse?

Posted by: bug at August 10, 2006 8:08 AM
Comment #174463

Tony, phx8, and Stephen,

I just want to clarify that my anger is due to Joe’s decision to run as an independent. BTW, I loved the IINO reference (truly priceless). Such a decision IMO shows that Lieberman was also a Democrat “in name only”.

What I fear is that we Dems could lose this Senate seat when America badly needs a return to some level of “checks & balances” in the government. Just consider that Lieberman took that Senate seat from a three term incumbent Republican in 1988 with a lead of only about 10,000 votes. He held that seat in ‘94 with 67% and in 2000 with 64% of the vote.

I think it’s quite possible that we could see a close three way race between Lamont, Lieberman, and Alan Schlesinger. That could depend greatly on how bad the mud slinging gets between Lamont and “good ol’ Joe”.


Posted by: KansasDem at August 10, 2006 8:24 AM
Comment #174464

“and me with my credit cards max’d out”

Must be wasting your money on gas and food!


Posted by: KansasDem at August 10, 2006 8:29 AM
Comment #174500
This feat shows that the Little Guy has been revived from years of fear and is ready, eager and able to reclaim the Democratic Party and bring it back to working for the good of each of us, not just for the rich.

Isn’t Lamont a multi-millionaire? I wouldn’t be quite to eager to use “little guy” and “not just for the rich” in the same sentence with his name. This guy is a long shot from being an average joe.

Posted by: Taylor at August 10, 2006 10:53 AM
Comment #174523

Where are all the comments about Cynthia and her buddies?

Black Panthers and blaming the Jews for her loss? Well, at least her dear ol’ dad? Very nice a party of the people.
Dems want to sweep this under the rug as quickly as pssible. “The Party of the Black panthers” has a nice ring.

Posted by: curmudgeon-at-large at August 10, 2006 11:51 AM
Comment #174546

—-curmudgeon— Our side votes out the bad apples,
how are you going to deal with all those bad
apples your side keeps re-electing!

Posted by: DAVID at August 10, 2006 1:23 PM
Comment #174564


I wish I could be more original, but I don’t have to. This is too easy.

McGovern couldn’t win in ‘72 and no anti-war candidate will win in ‘08. With Bush not running, I’m sure both candidates will promise some sort of troop withdrawl - then make up some excuse for not doing it after being elected.

Being raised a Democrat, I can’t believe how out-of-touch the party has become. I still believe in the the same things I always have - strong nation, strong families and social equality - things Democratic candidate used to run on. Running on an “anti-” platform won’t work.

I eagerly await the day when we have a choice between two candidates who put the country and citizens first, but I’m afraid I may have to wait a long time.

Posted by: mac6115cd at August 10, 2006 2:32 PM
Comment #174569

Condition Red, it originates in the U.K. and therefore, can’t be connected to any Bush admin political plot Posted by: David R. Remer at August 10, 2006 05:51 AM
And Blair is on vacation, so it probably has not been orchestrated from that end.
We are actually at condition Orange, whatever that means, in Chicago, according to the airport authority.

I am not too familiar with CT politics, but aside from Dodd, I believe the other seat changed more frequently than in a state where nobody ever learns anything. 18 years is a long time in the same job, will Lieberman file for unemployment, claiming that he was fired unfairly by the democratic voters in CT?

And happy days are here again, Sandra Davidson, as well as Adrienne, all we need is Betty Burke.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 10, 2006 2:48 PM
Comment #174592

“Our side votes out the bad apples,
how are you going to deal with all those bad
apples your side keeps re-electing!”


Share with me an Independent who is an bad apple and I will be glad to elaborate. Thanks for Joe, though.

BTW, actually Cynthia was voted out once and then you guys put her right back in. (LOL) I won’t bother elaborating on the bad apples left in both parties. However, how is William Jefferson doing?

Posted by: curmudgeon-at-large at August 10, 2006 3:40 PM
Comment #174638

——curmudgeon— Why would I bite on your spin when
you can’t answer my question, Bate an switch, gads
You are no more a independent than the rest of the trolls on this site, an just enjoy putting misstatements an innuendos out on either side. an
since this is a debate for everyone by all
means please continue with being a dissent spinmeister. it’s always good for the ill informed
to have someone speak for them.

Posted by: DAVID at August 10, 2006 5:15 PM
Comment #174720


Thanks for your insightful analysis. You loyal party elitist provide me with a great belly laugh from time to time.

If by ill informed you mean we do not listen to party spin? then yes pal you nailed it. Try thinking for yourself, it is great exercise.

I left the democrats in the 70s and the republicans in the 80s and neither one of them has fufilled anything they promised since then. Hey, but you keep drinking the Kool Aid and your head in the sand. It doen’t hurt as much that way.

Here is a fact to chew on. Your party has only held the presidency twice since JFK. I doubt you were alive then. See any problems with that sort of success?

Posted by: curmudgeon-at-large at August 10, 2006 10:30 PM
Post a comment