What if Lieberman wins the nomination?

Holy Joe's strategy could work. He is following the Edwards strategy:

Lieberman's advisers see a clear if complicated path to victory. They are banking on a third-place or better finish in New Hampshire to wash out what they anticipate will be a poorer showing in Iowa, where Dean and Gephardt are running strong. They see the senator making his big move on Feb. 3, when the fight moves to more conservative territory in the South and out West. By that point, the field will be narrowed, and voters will take a closer look at which candidate is best positioned to win a matchup with Bush, a top adviser said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/washpost/20030819/pl_washpost/a11748_2003aug18

Dean and Kerry could stumble. Many a leading candidate has seen his campaign come to an untimely end by virtue of a single faux paus. If something like this were to happen in the middle of the primary season, the party could find itself having to choose between a bona fide liberal like Dennis Kucinich, and the only remaining "centrist," Joe Liberman. I don't foresee any of the Kucinich supporters joining Holy Joe in singing Kumbaya. While I can see myself easily throwing my support to Kucinich were Dean to falter, I can't imagine a scenario in which I could support Lieberman.

A Lieberman Administration would not differ one iota from Bush's as far as foreign policy is concerned, or the PATRIOT Act. However, one cannot deny that unlike Bush, Lieberman has a good record on women rights and gay rights.

What if Lieberman wins the nomination? What we will do then?

this could happen! I understand your concerns, but honestly don't think when push comes to shove it would ever happen!!!

will become the most popular forum.

Although I seldom post there, I never miss an opportunity to read all of the fascinating threads on a multitude of topics.

Indiana will go for Bush in 2004, no matter who the Democratic nominee happens to be. That's a fact of life in these parts that we non-Republican Hoosiers have come to accept, as predictable as an Indian spring in January, or a snowfall during Indiana's high school basketball tournaments.

I have the luxury of voting for a minor party candidate for President, knowing full well that my vote will not affect the outcome. Many DUers don't have such luxury.

What is this business about DU rules preventing people from bashing the Dem nominee? Are you saying that when the nomination is decided, it will literally be against the rules to criticize the Dem nominee in any way? That strikes me as a little too rigid.

A possible loophole is this: One could continue to attack the war, and demand the immediate withdrawal of US troops, while ignoring the prowar Democratic nominee altogether.

Primary elections attract the more extreme and dedicated members of the political party holding the primary. I KNOW that the Left does not want Lieberman, so I doubt he will be able to hold up.

I'll probably just swat flies trying to land on my monitor. Sorry but I just can't take his bullshit any longer.

I'd bet my life on it.

And the rest of the world will think we are even more stupid than we are and their hatred for US policies will increase. Our 6% favorability in Egypt will go to 1/2%.

I'll vote for him. I won't feel good about it, but when I consider the alternative...... No brainer.

It's a moot point anyway. Lieberman has a slightly better chance of getting the nomination than I do.

but anything's possible. As a sworn Democrat, I'd have to work for his election. However, I wouldn't have to like it. He's dead last on my list of favorites, including those who aren't officially candidates.

if Dean gets Wellstoned :-(

Lieberman is polling in the single digits. If he were to wangle the nomination, it would prove to me that the system is corrupt even in the good guys' camp.

And yeah, I know the drill that his Senate votes have been squarely in line with our notion of truth, justice and the American way. The issue for me is (a) he does too good a job of picking on candidates I like, and (b) he never seems to have anything bad to say about the people we're supposed to be running against. If there's a lesson in the 2002 debacle, it's that rolling over for the Repugs does not win votes. Or to put it another way, I look at Lieberman vs. Dumbya and I see Mondale vs. Reagan, with even wussier rhetoric. He can't win!

Also I'm a First Amendment zealot, and Lieberman's kneejerk Hollywood bashing bothers me a lot.

It's really not a conundrum for me at all.

The party is finally only as good as the values of its nominee. If the party sees Lieberman as its standardbearer, prizing his militarism, theocracy, and corporatism above the sane alternatives offered by the left, then it'll have to win the election without me.

What "we" will do is always a question, though. :-) I'm sure many a Democrat can be gulled into an Anybody-But-Bush vote, even if that vote is merely for a Bush-lite that will bring many of the same disappointments. Progressives are less likely to bite, though. So a Lieberman ticket could be a very good boost for the Green party, which will be able to say, "Look, now the Dems are even worse than last time out."

The best way to prevent this scenario is for progressives to hold the party's feet to the fire now, while there's still time, and say to the DLC bosses:

"If you are thinking of running this joyless toady, then we will defect and bring your party to its knees. Keep in mind that the 2000 result prefigures another tight race, and the Katherine Harris Principle will be in effect once more, with new and uncertain digital technology making sham results even easier to conceal. You cannot win from your ersatz 'center'. The numbers betray you. You had already lost Bubba and Mr. SUV before 9-11 in blood and iron sealed for 100 years their compact with the right, and just hear how they heap derision upon you from every media outlet even as you vainly try to ape Republicans in an effort to court them. Even they can spot a phony. The left is your last set of friends. You don't like us, and we assuredly don't like you. But you need our votes. We need a candidate who does not offend us so egregiously. Shall we work together?"

call myself the queen of france. Why? because I have no pigs.

He might be alittle hawkish and i admit hes not my 1st choice but how many here has actually seen his whole record? he has always been pretty liberal.

If he wins the nomination im pretty sure most democrats will vote for him except the green wanabees

ain't all bad. It's his smooching up to Chimps ass and attacking the other candidates that I can't stand.

I recall Harry S. Truman's admonition.

I'll stay home on election day. "A difference which makes no difference IS no difference," and Joe is just Republican-lite. I want to vote for someone who offers a real alternative.

Not if Clark enters the race. Because if Clark enters the race then he will probably flatten most if not all of the candidates in the South and the West.

and I think you know that, IG. Forty-three years ago popular wisdom held that a Catholic could not be elected President. It took a young, very charismatic candidate to overcome that. Lieberman is no Kennedy.

Without a qualm or a backward glance. I'm a registered Democrat. I've never voted Green. I will vote for both my Democrat senator (Murray) and rep (Baird), who voted against the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Unlike the four dwarves.

probably, this time - there's not much difference between any of them. Lieberman is just the official scapegoat for some reason.

Good one IG!

Julie

Look, Lieberman was a tool for capturing Florida for Gore. NOTHING more. He is uninspired, corrupt, boring, and flip flops like a fish on a dock. He polls for his position, and still comes up with wishy washy shit.

How anyone could think that Lieberman would win even if it were he and Sharpton is just hilarious.

If Lieberman wins the nomination, it will be because Karl Rove successfully created the matchup, and ladies, if Lieberman wins the nomination, democrats will have a loss so drastic it will make Mondale look good.

Democrats must realize just as Republicans do that we must unite behind a candidate that takes on the President's policies of robbing us of our freedoms to protect us.

By the way, does anyone even want to think about the terrorist scenario as our new jewish president moves the capital to Tel Aviv and attempts to finish off the Middle East for Israel's benefit?

Just not gonna happen.

anything but Bush.

of primaries, and even before that if he can't line up the money.

But, stranger things have happened, and if he gets it, I will work for his election.

What the hell is wrong with that?

Are we a bunch of whining children who insist on taking our balls home if we can't play our own game?

Lieberman is far from my first choice, but if he gets the nod, somebody wants him in, and I have to suck it up and go with him. It's not my game to call, and I have to go along.

Nobody, NOBODY, can possibly be worse than that smirking ape-turd in there now. That's what everyone has to remember.

The job is to take back the country from the infidels, and if Lieberman is the one, anything less than fighting for him is to give up the fight and surrender to them.

I, for one, have no intention of surrendering.

...because on atheists' rights Lieberman is not Bush-lite, but rather Bush is Lieberman-lite.

have you noticed? Bush is an extreme right-winger.

If Lieberman wins the nomination, I will support him without the faintest hint of reservation about it.

He will do what Bush is doing. Lieberman will escalate the war!

The west coast won't go for Lieberman. Maybe the Utah Dems (are there any?) will, but not us Pacificans. I have a feeling Dean will clean up here and Cali and Wash. state.

If Lieberman is nominated, I won't vote for him. He has no chance in a general election, anyway. I guess I'll go Green for that particular election.

But, pleeeeeeeeeeeeese, we must try to nip Holy Ass-Kissing Joe in the bud.

so the Utah Democrats won't be supporting him.

or appeal to the general electorate.

The Democratic Party can ill-afford to have as its nominee a candidate that supports the war in Iraq. This is a war that is still going on, it did not end with the media-staged toppling of Saddam's statue.

What will be the bodycount in the Fall of 2004? What crimes would the US occupation forces have committed by then?

I heard a retired general on MSNBC say yesterday that the US would have to forcibly remove the civilian population from entire sectors in the country in order to send the troops after the guerrillas. This sounded just like the ill-fated strategic hamlet program in Vietnam when peasants were forcibly removed from their land and forced to live in hamlets surrounded by barbed wire.

Do you expect Americans that oppose the war, and the continuing violent occupation of Iraq, to rally around a prowar Democratic candidate? It is more likely that Gray Davis will win the recall election than that happening!

Does this mean that someone like Kerry is finished? No, it doesn't. What it does mean is that candidates that voted for the war must part ways with that vote and must call for a withdrawal of all US troops and the end of the occupation.

Nothing short of an immediate and unconditional withdrawal of US troops from Iraq is morally justified!

he's running very low on cash. I think LaRouche has raised more than him. Once the field becomes less crowded he'll be under heavier fire.

1-He's not raising the cash.

2-He's losing ground in every poll, which is especially concerning for him, because he started out at the top of every poll!

The only thing he has going for him is name recognition.

I will eat my hat, shoes, coat, and socks if he wins the nomination. Ain't gonna happen.