Is this loss a local phenonmana or a more widespread indicater of the voting publics disenchantment with incumbants, war, republicans, etc..
2006-08-09 16:31:36 · 7 answers · asked by Joe Schmo from Kokomo 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think all it indicates is that if you are a Democrat and you say ANYTHING that even comes close to a Republican position, you are going to be thrown overboard. Realize this was a Democratic primary; only liberal voters, only a small percentage of how many people will vote in the general election, and Lieberman's opponent was an ultra-deep pocketed lackey of the kook fringe of the Democratic party.
All this shows is that there is no such thing as a healthy in-house debate in the Democratic party. You either cowtow, step and fetch, or you will be cut off at the knees. And this is the party of inclusion? Give me a break.
2006-08-09 16:37:50 · answer #1 · answered by You'll Never Outfox the Fox 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've wondered the same thing. Great question! I figure it will be widespread on the east coast...but I know that where I live (Texas) people are blind followers, and party line voters who aren't even aware of what the Republican party has turned into.
So, although I hope it's a sign that Americans are paying attention and demanding that politicians work for our best interests or they will be voted out of office, I don't feel like the outrage (or the information that causes the outrage) is that widespread just yet.
Good for Connecticut though! They sent a clear message to their politicians - represent us or lose your job. I wish all Americans would stand up and vote out every incumbent on the ballot. It's time for extreme turnover on Capitol Hill. The Republicans' endorsement of Lieberman only proves that there are no party lines in Washington. They are all in the same party...the party of the their own best interests.
2006-08-09 23:43:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Lieberman loss is an indicator that the majority of americans are sick of the direction this nation is traveling upon and want a change. It is an indication that those that have always held a position such as Senator or Congressman for years are now going to have to get off their rears and do something for the people that voted them in besides raise their pay and keep the rest of american in the poor house by refusing to raise the minimum wage. It is but the first of many more to come people want a change and they are willing to vote that way now.
2006-08-09 23:40:58 · answer #3 · answered by billc4u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't say much right now.
What will matter is what happens November 7 if he does run as an independent.
If he runs as an independant and beats Lamont, the Republicans will be able to hold on to more seats then it looks like right now.
If he runs as an independant and loses to Lamont, because the Republicans did not vote for him, then it bodes well for the Democrats.
Right now there is a lot of anti-incumbent feeling and it looks like a lot of incumbents will be out.
2006-08-09 23:38:30 · answer #4 · answered by DISCOVERI 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Republicans will use the loss to suggest that the Democrats are leaning towards a left-extremist, anti-war platform. Cheney is already saying things to that effect.
2006-08-09 23:36:25 · answer #5 · answered by almintaka 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But they also threw out nutty McKinney. The Democrats are moving to the central core of their platform.
2006-08-09 23:37:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It said that if you do not toe the Liberal Democrat line, they will replace you... That is what it said.
Actually it will probably guarantee a republican Senator.
2006-08-09 23:37:05 · answer #7 · answered by lancelot682005 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋