2006-08-18 10:29:45 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Think about the real reasons
2006-08-18 10:50:36 · update #1
He hasn't lost his seat. He lost the Democratic primary, but he will still run in the general election. We'll see what happens then.
2006-08-18 10:36:06 · answer #1 · answered by Will 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
That whole deal reminded me of the Blair Witch Project. Few far left libs didn't want him in office. So with the power of the Internet and a lot of time of their hands they posted their anti Lieberman crap. Of course the sheep followed. Same thing with the Walmart stuff. Even though Target is owned by a Democratic Senator who refused to let the salvation army ring their bells there at Christmas time. Lost the homeless people 9 million dollars.
2006-08-18 18:03:19 · answer #2 · answered by Stand 4 somthing Please! 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Primaries in either party are dominated by the party faithful...the most extreme elements of either party. The far left hates the war and voted.... Moderate lefties ...not as much so (but they didn't come out to vote)
2006-08-18 17:46:59 · answer #3 · answered by Brand X 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, many democrats didn't vote for Iraq war, they voted for Afghanistan. Man you guys are really scared now, aren't you? Anyhow, he didn't lose his seat, he lost the endorsement from the dems. In CT.
2006-08-18 17:34:24 · answer #4 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think because he had an ounce of decency and sensibility, it was too much for the Democratic party. They only want the worst of the worst, like the opposite of Top Gun. If you're not one of the most rotten liberals around, you could either not be admitted or kicked out.
2006-08-18 17:36:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because his constituents didn't like the job he was doing.
That's the basic concept of a representative government. The people elect someone who does what they want.
I'm still amazed that so many people can't understand the distinction between going to Iraq in the first place to depose Saddam, and staying there years after "Mission Accomplished". It's amazing to me that some people can't understand those are different factual situations. And it's not flip-flopping when you make different decisions based on different factual situations.
2006-08-18 17:33:33 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Lieberbitch is going to win, unfortunately, even though he lost his party's primaries. Initially, many Democrats were indeed for the war, but now, not so much.
2006-08-18 17:33:53 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Lieberman has an ultra-liberal constituency. And it is unfortnate for a great statesman like him that they don't realize he is the best choice.
2006-08-18 17:37:04 · answer #8 · answered by snvffy 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He has continued to support the war while many of his colleagues have flip flopped
2006-08-18 17:34:06 · answer #9 · answered by Wocka wocka 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
didn't loose his seat fool.. just the demoncrap primary.. He will win the election
2006-08-18 18:45:28 · answer #10 · answered by Buzzy360comeCme 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋