Prince Joe?
The Democrats of Connecticut have spoken. Ned Lamont emerged as the winner of Connecticut’s Senate Democratic primary on August 8. So why is Joe Lieberman still running for the Senate? Could it be that he truly believes that pulling out of Iraq or setting a timetable for withdrawal would be a disaster? Or, is he putting his own interests ahead of the people that he represents?
It is clear from the results of the primary that the Democrats of Connecticut no longer want Joe Lieberman to represent them in the general election. Democratic turnout was close to 40% making it a record level of turnout and 15% higher than the previous primary. Of that 40%, a majority of those votes went to Mr. Lamont (52 – 48%).
If the Democrats of Connecticut have spoken, why is Joe Lieberman still running? After conceding to Mr. Lamont, Mr. Lieberman blamed his loss on partisan polarization, lamenting “the dominance of both parties by the margins of the parties.” Now that he has chosen to run as an Independent, Mr. Lieberman has declared war on partisan politics.
Mr. Lieberman has never been one to tow the party line. He sided with the GOP in criticizing President Clinton’s fundraising tactics and rebuked him again during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. He backed the Republicans efforts to intervene in the private family affairs of Terry Schiavo and voted to prevent a Democratic filibuster of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito Jr. But for the remaining 90% of his votes, he has remained a steadfast Democrat.
The 800-Pound Gorilla
What energized the Democratic base was the picture that the Lamont campaign painted of Lieberman. The Lamont team managed to put Mr. Lieberman and President Bush in the same light. One campaign ad in particular transformed Mr. Lieberman into Mr. Bush demonstrating that the two were in fact one-in-the same. The main emblem of his campaign was the embrace that the two men shared at the 2005 State of the Union.
Behind all of this however is the issue of Iraq. In a state that splits evenly down the partisan divide, 70% of Connecticut voters disagree with the handling of the war. An astonishing 93% of Connecticut Democrats disagree, whereas 61% of Republicans continue to support the war. With these polling figures, it’s no wonder, then that in a Democratic primary, Mr. Lamont’s anti-war campaign won against Mr. Lieberman’s continued backing.
Recently, Connecticut Republicans have taken a whiff of the changing tide of public opinion in their state. Representative Shay, a moderate Republican and ardent supporter of the war, has recently come out in favor of a time table to withdraw American troops.
Yet Mr. Lieberman continues to buck the growing tide of public resentment in Connecticut about the war by supporting Mr. Bush’s leadership of it. It’s not that he is wrong about the consequences of an early withdrawal or setting a timetable for Iraq. Instead, Mr. Lieberman should reflect on whether or not he owes it to the people of the state of Connecticut to gracefully bow out and heed to the demands of its voters.
Cake
In typical bourgeoisie-like fashion, Mr. Lieberman is trying to have his cake and eat it too. It’s not the first time he has asked the voters of Connecticut to grant him this excess. In 2000, he angered many Connecticut voters by running on two spots on the ballot. The first was as Al Gore’s running mate, the other for his Senate seat.
By running as an Independent, Mr. Lieberman is in fact saying that the results of THE primary don’t count. That the wishes of the voters he represents, don’t count. He is in essence putting his own interests ahead of the people he was elected to represent.
If Mr. Lieberman goes onto win the general election in November, he has already declared that he will caucus with the Democrats in an effort to retain his seniority and take over the chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security. If the Democrats don’t win the Senate, then he is free to vote with the Republicans. To Mr. Lieberman, this is a win-win situation because he will be able to work both sides of the aisle without ever having to truly commit to the people he represents – all in the name of retaining political power.
In the final outcome, Mr. Lieberman is proving to be a divider, not a uniter. He should heed his own words regarding elections and accept the judgment that has befallen him. The Democrats of Connecticut have spoken and they have demanded that Mr. Lieberman help unite the Democratic Party. Instead, by pursuing an independent bid, he is dividing the party and weakening it.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically each day to your feed reader. If you don't have a feed reader, you can always have these articles delivered to your email inbox every day. Click here to sign up.
