Lieberman on McCain VP Short List

A McCain campaign adviser says Joe Lieberman is being vetted as the Republican vice presidential nominee. As John McCain's puppeteer loyal friend, Lieberman seems an ideal choice.

“Conservatives would be pissed as hell – I think you would have a revolt, but sometimes John does what John wants to do,” the McCain adviser said.

It's difficult to believe that Joe Lieberman is too liberal for conservatives, but Grover Norquist calls Lieberman "completely unacceptable" while evangelical leader Richard Land thinks the pro-choice senator would be a catastrophic pick (William Kristol is a notable exception). At least we know that Lieberman is experienced at losing vice presidential elections, not to mention Democratic primaries. As to his future in the Senate:

Mr Lieberman has left open the possibility that he would speak at the Republican National Convention, a move that would probably ensure that Democrats would strip him of his chairmanship of the committee on homeland security.

With tarring and feathering to follow.

< Election Advice From Michael Moore | Nightline Transcript of John Edwards Interview >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Make my day. (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by andgarden on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:36:14 PM EST

    Puppeteer... (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Thanin on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:36:29 PM EST
    Ahh TChris you crack me up.

    Best thing that could happen (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:43:51 PM EST
    McCain would lose by a McGovern-type margin.

    not an ounce of charisma (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:04:52 PM EST
    between the two

    The only thing better than Holy Joe (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by litigatormom on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:38:33 PM EST
    running as McShame's Veep would be Dick Cheney speaking at the Republican Convention?  Oh, you say that Cheney is speaking at the Republican Convention?

    Thank you, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.


    Gore actually won (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Salo on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:40:33 PM EST
    with Joementum on board. Let's remember that. Florida would be a lock, and a New England Blitz could upset Obama strategy very easily.

    Jews don't universally like (or even trust) (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by samtaylor2 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 09:38:09 AM EST

    Where (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:39:10 PM EST
    are you getting your information from? They certainly loved him in 2000.

    My interaction with other jews (none / 0) (#74)
    by samtaylor2 on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 11:14:39 AM EST
    And polls I have seen (though admittedly if you said reproduce them I would have to google for a bit)

    I don't (none / 0) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:40:59 PM EST
    know why others don't see this. Wouldn't it make McCain the real "unity" candidate if he did it? Since the left wing of the democrats already hate Lieberman it wouldn't change anything there. And it could seriously take a huge chunk of the Jewish vote.

    But but (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:46:23 PM EST
    nobody wants to end the war more than Joe...

    Is this intended to be (none / 0) (#11)
    by weltec2 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:04:02 PM EST
    serious? Upon what do you base this belief?

    Well (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by Steve M on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:21:04 PM EST
    Joe said it very seriously during his 2006 campaign.

    not serious (none / 0) (#13)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:05:09 PM EST
    is my guess

    No. You're right. I'm sorry. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by weltec2 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:08:32 PM EST
    I missed the But, but...

    what would have been funny (none / 0) (#17)
    by Salo on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:15:23 PM EST
    is that your post was also snark.  snark to the third degree.

    This is deeply (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by weltec2 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:00:52 PM EST
    amusing. Lieberman has obvioulsy wanted it for some time now. For a lot of people though I think he may be the final nail in the McCain coffin. McCain is an outsider to his own party. Lieberman is an outsider to both parties.

    His wife Hadassah (like Susan Bayh) has close connections with pharmaceutical companies. She has worked for the lobbying company, APCO Associates, that had many pharmaceutical and healthcare corporations among its clients, as well as for major drug companies such as Pfizer. In March 2005, Hadassah was hired by Hill & Knowlton as "senior counselor" in the firm's "health care and pharmaceuticals practice."

    Also, as with Evan and Susan Bayh, Hadassah's close relationship with pharmaceutical and healthcare corporations while her husband introduced legislation benefiting these exact companies has raised questions about improprieties and conflict of interest.

    So the lines between Democrat and Republican are becoming more and more difficult to determine for me.

    Unity! (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by oldpro on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:15:40 PM EST
    If elected, Obama won't have to reach far to reach across the aisle.

    Exactly. (none / 0) (#35)
    by weltec2 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 02:39:15 AM EST
    He won't even need arms. Hands out the shoulders will be adequate.

    plus she has a funny name (none / 0) (#10)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:03:55 PM EST
    and there might be a whisper campaign that (gasp) they aren't Christians.

    I think Lieberman would be a good (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by MarkL on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:01:50 PM EST
    choice for McCain. He'll pick up more Dem votes with HoJo, I'm guessing.

    He'd be a really dumb choice for McCain (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by rjarnold on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:24:02 PM EST
    He would alienate many Repubs and pick up hardly any Dems.

    Well, what does the polling say? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by MarkL on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:27:03 PM EST
    From conversations I've had, I would say that Lieberman is EXACTLY what a lot of independents like.

    I don't know about the polling, (none / 0) (#30)
    by rjarnold on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:47:59 PM EST
    but I have seen one poll that says that even Obama is liked by Jews way more than Lieberman, and I know that many conservatives would hate him on the ticket.

    Many Jews, especially in Florida (5.00 / 0) (#47)
    by zfran on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 10:36:51 AM EST
    are not really sure if Obama will totally support Israel and this is big in their choice. I have spoken with many and have heard this opinion echoed.

    Yup, a good choice for McCain (none / 0) (#20)
    by SueBonnetSue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:21:59 PM EST
    Conservative Christians love conservative Jews.  
    Sean Hannity and all those righties LOVE Leiberman.  

    UGH,  this is NOT good news.  


    Not good news for whom?! (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by MarkL on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:23:15 PM EST
    I honestly think Lieberman would be a smart choice for McCain. I personally detest him, though.

    Let's hope he does as good a job (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by coigue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:02:50 PM EST
    as in 2000...shudder.

    And who is this McCain campaign advisor? (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:06:42 PM EST
    For all we know this is a red herring to get the hopes of dems up, so they can be dashed later.
    The repubs were lucky, though, to get a replacement for Zell Miller :)

    never gonna happen (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by kenosharick on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:15:08 PM EST
    and lieberman should be stripped of all perks by the party after the election- if the leadership finally starts showing some cojones!

    Agree no VP slot for Holy Joe (5.00 / 0) (#44)
    by MO Blue on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 08:58:56 AM EST
    Wonder if "never gonna happen" applies to Dem leadership actually stripping committees from their good friend and buddy Joe as well.

    Our last two Dem (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by oldpro on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:25:54 PM EST
    presidential candidates have given these two credibility.

    Let's review:

    Gore chose Liberman
    Kerry approached McCain to be his running mate
    Kerry drafts Obama (with Daschle, etc.)
    McCain approaches Lieberman re his running mater
    Obama team floats possibility of Hagel as running mate

    Anybody see a pattern here?

    Oh, yeah...one more thing:  Obama wants to do away with the partisanship in DC.

    Uh huh...

    Incestuous political backscratching? (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Salo on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:37:28 PM EST
    Say it ain't so. Career first party second.

    the pattern is (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by sancho on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 12:25:34 AM EST
    the difference between the two parties is mostly symbolic--as nancy and harry have shown.

    hillary did not fit the pattern. so they cut her out.


    I know this is "received wisdom" (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by andrewwm on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 06:51:42 AM EST
    around here that Kerry "drafted" Obama, but I have never, anywhere, seen one iota of evidence that this is true.

    This place is almost as bad as some other, more well known, echo chambers somedays...


    Don't know about drafted.... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Valhalla on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 10:37:12 AM EST
    but certainly slobbered uncontrollably over him.

    He's my senator and I watched all of that Patrick, Kennedy and Kerry endorsement video, before Mass. had its primary.  All three were like teen boys getting to meet their comic book hero during his book-tour appearance at the mall.

    And Kerry's been voguing for Obama ever since.  I've seen it and hardly watch tv news.

    As one of his constituents, I totally understood why Kerry was barely in the state and barely in the Senate during his own campaign in 2004.  But I'm a bit tired of his spending just as much time not here and not in the Senate for someone else's campaign now.


    Gee whiz (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by TChris on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 11:43:12 AM EST
    A prominent Democrat is busy campaigning for the Democratic presumptive nominee?  Seems to me that helping Democrats gain control of the White House (at long last) is part of his job description.  

    Didn't object to the campaigning (5.00 / 0) (#66)
    by Valhalla on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 07:55:58 PM EST
    but to the neglect of his constituency.

    Valhalla....what do we make of this? (none / 0) (#67)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 08:27:33 PM EST
    LIEberman cuts $100,000 Check To Dems...



    Yes. We no longer have two parties. Just (none / 0) (#68)
    by derridog on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 09:09:21 PM EST
    one big Republican Party.

    He was the reason I held my nose to vote (5.00 / 0) (#31)
    by JavaCityPal on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:58:37 PM EST
    for Gore.

    He is the biggest "say whatever you need to" politician I can think of. Can't stand listening to his slow, monotone speaking style.

    His protege has some of those same (5.00 / 0) (#32)
    by MarkL on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 12:15:08 AM EST

    where the heck is (5.00 / 3) (#37)
    by cpinva on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 04:42:26 AM EST
    millard fillmore, when we really need him? oh yeah, i guess he's still dead. damn, guess that means we're stuck with the weasels we have.

    sen. lieberman is neither fish nor fowl, republican or democrat. he is a "new" breed of politician, the "opportunist". serially, i doubt he even has a clue what, if anything, he stands for, other than self-aggrandizement and enrichment.

    after nov., he'll just shrivel up and blow away with the next strong breeze, having had two years to be sort of important. i wonder if his constituents have the least notion of the wound they've self-inflicted?

    What McCain Needs Is Some Joementum (5.00 / 3) (#38)
    by john horse on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 06:06:17 AM EST
    As a pro-Obama Democrat I hope that McCain choses Lieberman for VP.  At this point in his campaign all McCain needs is a shot of Joementum to finally finish it off.  Not surprisingly McCain's campaign bus was recently in a car accident with Lieberman at the helm.

    What advantage would there be for McCain to chose Lieberman?  At this point, I doubt that Lieberman could even carry his home state of Connecticut.

    Wishful thinking! (5.00 / 0) (#40)
    by mmc9431 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 07:21:14 AM EST
    If this is what it takes for the Democrat's to finally bounce this Bozo, then I think it's a great idea. For every independant vote he would pull, he'd probably cost them two Republican's. Polls I've read show that he'd have a hard time winning dog catcher now in Conn.

    I'm fairly sure John McCain wants to win (none / 0) (#3)
    by PssttCmere08 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:39:40 PM EST
    the election; therefore, LIEberman will not be the VP pick....McCain can only take that maverick mantra so far.

    the irony (none / 0) (#4)
    by Salo on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 10:43:25 PM EST
    of getting two rejected candidates from 2000 is too good for the public to miss though. What a nightmare scenario.

    Will Leiberman flip the Senate? (none / 0) (#23)
    by SueBonnetSue on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:24:48 PM EST
    If he speaks at the republican convention and democrats strip him of any Senate seniority, won't he become a republican?  Won't this give republicans control of the Senate for the next 5 months?  How many judges might Bush throw at the Senate during that time?  

    UGH!!!!  Leiberman could be disastrous!!!!  

    No (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by litigatormom on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 11:43:18 PM EST
    The GOP and the Dems made a deal about the Senate that means that Dems will be in the majority even if Liebertoad flips before the end of this Congress.  So the Dems can't lose their majority status. Although frankly, having Harry Reid as majority leader is almost as bad as still being in the minority.

    What this also means is that the Dems should have thrown Liebertoad out of the Democratic caucus a long time ago.  Or at least stripped Liebertoad of his chairmanship, particularly since he's done jack about homeland security since he's been the chair.


    Not only did the dems not throw him out... (5.00 / 0) (#55)
    by HypeJersey on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:04:43 PM EST
    They actually gave him a warm, clapping welcome when he won his seat er.. again.  This whole thing is a cherade - those people in the senate aren't working for us - they are working to keep the status quo.  They are working to keep their seats.

    LIEberman (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 12:38:35 AM EST
    LIEberman, not Leiberman. Sheesh.

    This could be a very good idea (none / 0) (#36)
    by SoCalLiberal on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:14:34 AM EST
    Here's why.  McCain is attracting a lot of Democratic and Independent voters right now because of his image as the moderate, maverick GOP Senator.  But any of the Republicans he would pick would damage that.  Why?  Because the Republican Party is filled with hard line, radical, anti choice, bigoted conservatives.  So a lot of Clinton voting women (think middle aged suburban moms who used to burn bras but now drive their kids to soccer practice) right now in their disgust for Obama may say "yeah I'm voting for McCain".  However, when McCain picks some radical, anti choice person, are they still going to?  What Leiberman does is remove that.  If he's on the ticket, you don't have that worry that if McCain kicks the bucket in office, you won't have an anti choice Republican replacing him.  

    Also, Leiberman is not young and probably couldn't be nominated by either major party.  So there's no natural successor set up for him.  A lot of people fear McCain winning and the GOP taking power for decades.  Frankly, I don't think McCain would last past one term.  But it is a concern.  Instead of a young, promising conservative to take over the reins, you have old Joe who'll be headed to Boca to buy a retirment condo.  Plus, Joe will likely flaunt the fact that he's a Democrat and McCain will gain a lot of coverage for this true "unity ticket".  That said, I think he'll want to wait until Obama has announced because if McCain announces Joe first, then Obama has the chance to upstage him by picking Chuck Hagel or some other Republican douchebag.  

    The conservatives will have a freak out for sure but they're going to come out and vote for McCain.  I've noticed that in a lot of recent polls, McCain is doing much better among Republicans.  Why?  Because Obama is the devil incarnate to them and they would rather have McCain as the lesser of two evils.  

    Just one thing (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 07:27:06 AM EST
    Those of us who were around for the "bra-burnings" (myth, BTW) are driving our GRANDchildren to soccer practice.

    What?! No no no... I remember (none / 0) (#42)
    by weltec2 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 07:43:22 AM EST
    quite distinctly during a Miss America contest in the early seventies women throwing their bras into a drum and burning them in protest and leading a pig around on a leash. I remember that. Betty Friedan spoke about it as I recall. If you cannot come up with any references, let me know. I will come up with one for you.

    You keep looking. (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 08:47:25 AM EST
    No bras were burned in protest of the 1968 Miss America contest. It helps to have been part of the movement back then. This one is right up there with all of the spitting that didn't take place when our troops returned from Vietnam. Both make for great drama. Although he doesn't cover either of these two topics, Robert Wuhl has a series of specials on HBO called, "Assume the Position". In them he shows how when real history and legends conflict, people adopt the legend as truth and make it part of our "pop culture history". If you get a chance to watch one of his shows, they're pretty funny.

    I did, however, (none / 0) (#45)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 09:17:12 AM EST
    really have a tee shirt that said, "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle", which I wore over my bra. And I do appreciate all of the engineering design that has gone into designing bras since 1968. They sure are a lot more comfortable in 2008 than they were back then.

    I loved how all these Miss America (none / 0) (#51)
    by SoCalLiberal on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 12:00:31 PM EST
    pageant winners kept endorsing Hillary.  I found it pretty amazing.

    To make it all the way to the pageant, (none / 0) (#57)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:36:14 PM EST
    this women had to be smart and driven. No surprise to me that they support Hillary. Back then the Miss America pageant and the contests leading up to it awarded some of the best scholarships available to women. We were protesting making them parade around in their bathing suits to get a scholarship to law school.

    "these women" (none / 0) (#58)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:37:25 PM EST
    My degrees are in science and engineering not English.

    I did not say it was 1968. (none / 0) (#64)
    by weltec2 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 05:51:35 PM EST
    I said it was in the early 70s. You will find it in The Century: America's Time with Peter Jennings Volume 5: The Seventies. Volume 5 is divided into two parts. It's in the first part, 1971 - 1975: Approaching the Apocalypse.

    Sorry, it didn't happen. (none / 0) (#70)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 10:33:08 PM EST
    Women threw lots of things into trash cans including girdles, make-up, spike heels, etc., but we never burned bras. If Peter Jennings has put pictures of it happening to protest the Miss America pageant whenever 1968 or in the 70's, they were staged as part of his documentary and not original news reports. We even crowned a sheep, but we only burned draft cards. After the '68 protest when the term was coined, "Bra burner" became a pejorative term for feminists, and we NEVER would have chosen that as a way to get attention.

    Myth (none / 0) (#52)
    by daring grace on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 12:38:58 PM EST
    I did not mean to stir this up (none / 0) (#50)
    by SoCalLiberal on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 11:58:07 AM EST
    about bra burning, it was just an image that came to mind for one group of many who Lieberman would appeal to.  Or keep the appeal of McCain.  

    You only brought back fond memories for me, (none / 0) (#56)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 03:29:27 PM EST
    but Joe Lieberman doesn't appeal. Sarah Palin does. Or Olympia Snowe. (But she's Hillary's age and would find herself in the "Is she too old in 2016?" spot, too.) If McCain wants to get Hillary's "old feminist biddies", he needs a "kick-ass" woman. I think most of the "soccer moms" have agreed to support Obama, but I would like to be wrong. I was 17 in 1968 when I protested the Miss America Pageant, and I was one of the "youngsters" so you can figure how old most of the protesters must be now.

    You are my dad's age (none / 0) (#61)
    by SoCalLiberal on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 04:06:15 PM EST
    He's not old.  Neither are you.  

    Let me ask you, if you were planning to vote McCain, would Loserman turn you off from voting for him?  


    I might vote for John McCain (5.00 / 0) (#62)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 04:43:02 PM EST
    if he chooses the right woman to run with him. I have long believed that the first woman president will be a Republican for reasons that I won't go into here. Although I might disagree with a Republican woman on some very important issues, if she were a highly competent president, she would open the door for other women to follow. If we choose a woman who does not do a WOW! job of being president, then it will be a long time before another woman is elected. Her positions on issues do not matter as much to me as how successful she is. The "first of anything" must meet higher standards if others are to follow. Other than that I will not be voting for John McCain. It makes no difference to me whether he chooses Lieberman, Romney, or Paris Hilton, who is not the "right woman". I can only speak for me, but I don't think Lieberman will attract many of Hillary's voters. As a matter of fact, I will go out on a limb here and say that the vast majority of Hillary's supporters who will vote for McCain will be doing it as a protest vote against the DNC. I think most of us will be voting "None of the above" if we don't support Obama.

    Oh, and I don't feel "old", (none / 0) (#63)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 04:50:36 PM EST
    but Obama's supporters keep telling me that I am. 8^) My point was that most of the women who staged protests against the Miss America pageant across the country were in their forties in 1968, which makes them in their eighties now. Not soccer moms anymore. My youngest is 28.

    I was in the Army in 1968 (none / 0) (#65)
    by weltec2 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 06:09:53 PM EST
    and I wasn't saying anything at all about the 68 Miss America pageant. In your original post you didn't write anything about 1968 either. In my original post I specifically stated that I was referring to the early 70's. In (the ABC News Presents in association with The History Channel) The Century: America's Time video series Volume 5, you can see women outside the Miss America Beauty Pageant burning bras in a drum. It's there in Volume 5. You can see them doing it and listen to them protesting.

    And most middle school text books (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 10:45:11 PM EST
    say that Columbus was trying to prove the world was round, but Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the Earth in 200 B.C. Women did not burn bras at a Miss America pageant in the 70's either. "Bra-burner" was used as an insult to feminists. We wouldn't have made it a "truth".

    I've been soaking in the hot tub (none / 0) (#72)
    by samanthasmom on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 11:46:04 PM EST
    trying to think of a way to explain this in a non-offensive way. In 1968 a group of women decided to protest the Miss America Pageant. Some of them went to the pageant itself, and some staged "sympathy" protests closer to home. Although no bras were burned, Lindsay Van Gelder created a headline in the New York Post "Bra Burners and Miss America". The term "bra-burner" became a negative slur against women who were involved in the feminist movement, which was not Ms. Van Gelder's intention when she wrote it. She was comparing the feminists to war protesters who burned draft cards. If women had included burning bras in subsequent protests over the Miss America pageant, it would have been the equivalent of black people protesting a "whites-only" lunch counter by holding a watermelon eating contest there. It would have reinforced a very negative stereotype. That's why it didn't happen. The term "bra-burner" is still used to marginalize women who are feminists. There are many "second wave" feminists who comment at TL. Maybe after the election is over and tensions have died down, Jeralyn will write a diary that will bring us all out in the open, and we can have a discussion about the issues that drove the movement, and the younger feminists will join in. I think it would be both illustrative and fun- but not until things cool down. I think I know where to find some of them who have left TL.  
    For most of history anonymous was a woman - Virginia Woolf

    I must have gotten it (none / 0) (#73)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 01:22:58 AM EST
    through the press echo chamber then and conflated the two: "comparing the feminists to war protesters who burned draft cards."

    And by the way, it was a sheep that they crowned not a pig as I said before.


    Loserman would be the kiss of death for (none / 0) (#69)
    by derridog on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 09:15:21 PM EST
    me. I wouldn't vote for Obama under any circumstances, but one person I can't stand almost as much as Obama is Lieberman.

    I guess the Green Party would get my vote.


    Lie-berman (none / 0) (#53)
    by arguewithmydad com on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 01:20:22 PM EST
    Lieberman will be a drag on McCain just as he was when he ran as a Dem VP candidate.  I would welcome him on the McCain ticket because he would make it even easier for Obama to defeat them and it would also make it easier for someone to beat Lieberman for his Senate seat.

    I don't know... (none / 0) (#54)
    by HypeJersey on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 02:57:50 PM EST
    I think we underestimate Lieberman/McCain at our own peril.  Remember how happy were all were when Lamont beat Lieberman?  Only for Lieberman to win overwhelmingly during the state elections as a "Lieberman Democrat?"  There are already plenty of dems who will cross over and vote McCain, adding Lieberman to the ticket will seal the deal for lots of them and I don't think that Lieberman would hurt McCain with republicans at all.  Dems keep saying, "We don't need them anyway!" and before you know it, you've lopped off your entire party.