Lieberman Loses!!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
Joe voted for war for Israel, not American interests. That is why he was not voted in again.


Again with this misconception.

Joe is STILL a US Senator.

He lost a preselection vote in his party and cannot run on the Democratic ticket.

But until the Senatorial elections he is still a United States Senator
and if he wins as an independent he will continue to serve the people as a United States Senator.

Jeez some people really need to learn how elections in their own country work.



What does your reply even mean? Are you saying since joe is a senater he has no other interests in the world? If I had a nickle for everytime my representitive supported an inititive that I didn't like, I'd be rich. You probably need to research how politics are really played. Cronism, kick-backs, special interest groups, constintuencies, etc... AAC


Obviously I put too much information into that post. See if this (^^^) clears things up a little.

As for foregone conclusions, that is a prediction about the future not a fact in the present.

JOE IS STILL A UNITED STATES SENATOR today, just was he was last week, last month, last year and last decade.




posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I think the results may have been different if the vote was held today. The recent terrorist plot that was uncovered may have caused a different view in the eyes of the voters. How much? We will never know. I'm not a fan of either candidate but its nice to see that Lieberman is going to run anyways.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   



JOE IS STILL A UNITED STATES SENATOR today, just was he was last week, last month, last year and last decade.


Please, I repeat, what does that have to do with the price of rice in China? *sarcasm*



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I believe it has to do with the fact that there are many people in this thread who apparently think the Sen. Lieberman is no longer in office.

BTW, right before the primary, Quinnipiac College conducted a poll that showed that in a three-way choice between Lieberman, Lamont, and the republican candidate Alan Schlesinger:

Lieberman: 51%
Lamont: 27%
Schlesinger: 9%

Do not count Joe out. He is a rare breed - an honest politician who votes his conscious.



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Only problem I have with Liberman is the the whole Video Game issue
...As a programmer/mapper/developer for Video Games and such, it ticks me off about his wanting to pretty much BAN "M" or Mature rated video games...Yes, there should be an ESRB (rating system) rating on each game...Now, a 17 year old, which is the age required to play the "M" rated games is fine right? Not according to liberman, who believes that these games shouldn't even be sold...that just pisses me off...Him and that other Anti-Game fanatic, Hillary Clinton
....Them and others blaming things such as Colombine and school shootings and violence on Video Games...I mean, movies, television, and other forms of media contribute more...Plus, those kids could have had problems and such...I'm just expressing my opinions/emotions on the topic of Joe but I kind of got sidetracked...



posted on Aug, 17 2006 @ 04:45 PM
link   
How bout this for a Maverick 3rd Party Presidential ticket in 2008?

MCAIN / LIEBERMAN OR LIEBERMAN / GIULIANI.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
How bout this for a Maverick 3rd Party Presidential ticket in 2008?

MCAIN / LIEBERMAN OR LIEBERMAN / GIULIANI.


I'm a Democrat and frankly I hate the way Lieberman was treated because of his position on the war.

I would not mind a McCain/Lieberman Republican ticket, and chances are, I may vote for that ticket instead of a Democratic ticket. And even if Lieberman is not a choice for VP for the Republican ticket he will be a smart choice for Secretary of Defense. It goes in turn for McCain. He will be a smart choice for VP or better, Secretary of State for a Democrat Administration. I'm a moderate Democrat and I'm a fan bipartisanship and crossing party lines. Put the best, most qualified people together and see what happens. I was thrilled when Cohen became Secretary of Defense during the Clinton Administration.

[edit on 18-8-2006 by MasterRegal]



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 03:16 PM
link   


Do not count Joe out. He is a rare breed - an honest politician who votes his conscious.



And has Israel and the Bush Agenda as his top priority. A rare breed indeed, who will eventually go down with the ship he is sailing.


[edit on 19-8-2006 by kleverone]



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by kleverone


Do not count Joe out. He is a rare breed - an honest politician who votes his conscious.



And has Israel and the Bush Agenda as his top priority. A rare breed indeed, who will eventually go down with the ship he is sailing.


[edit on 19-8-2006 by kleverone]


You think Liberman is going down? He is going to win in a landslide!

The best part about this whole situation is that the Democrats are going to have one less Senator! Lieberman will officialy be an Independent!

Still think Lieberman is going to lose? You probably thought the same thing about Bush in 2004!



posted on Aug, 19 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   
cool. Your opinion certainly registers as fact with me
I can tell by all your points that you really have earned the right to voice opinion as gospel. I also love how you simply go by party affiliation as opposed to what the person believes. I do believe I will be ignoring you and all your wisdom



posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Seriously, after all the hoopla of Joe losing the primary, is there anyone who still thinks Lieberman will not be re-elected for Senate...as an Independent?



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
Seriously, after all the hoopla of Joe losing the primary, is there anyone who still thinks Lieberman will not be re-elected for Senate...as an Independent?


For that to happen, Republicans would have to vote for him over their own party's candidate. Why do you think they would do that?



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Two Steps Forward

Originally posted by RRconservative
Seriously, after all the hoopla of Joe losing the primary, is there anyone who still thinks Lieberman will not be re-elected for Senate...as an Independent?


For that to happen, Republicans would have to vote for him over their own party's candidate. Why do you think they would do that?



I don't think they have really this subject given any thought. I mean he lost his own primary, and yet they think his has all of these hidden indendent voters. It really didn't make sense to me from the start.



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Seems to me the most likely scenario is that Lieberman's independent campaign will give the Republican candidate a better chance than he would have if Lieberman gracefully bowed out.

Sort of like what happened in the 1912 presidential race. Theodore Roosevelt lost the Republican nomination (through party machinery -- he was actually far more popular with rank-and-file Republicans than W.H. Taft), and rather than accept this outcome he ran on a third-party ticket. He actually beat Taft in the general election, but by dividing the Republican vote the two of them threw the vote to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Two Steps Forward

Originally posted by RRconservative
Seriously, after all the hoopla of Joe losing the primary, is there anyone who still thinks Lieberman will not be re-elected for Senate...as an Independent?


For that to happen, Republicans would have to vote for him over their own party's candidate. Why do you think they would do that?


Look at the recent polls. The Republican sacrificial lamb has dropped from 16%, before the Democratic Primary to 3%. Republicans know he has no chance. So why not back Lieberman as an Independent? Democrats lose a long held seat in the Senate, almost securing the Senate majority for Republicans!

[edit on 22-8-2006 by RRconservative]



posted on Aug, 22 2006 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Look at the recent polls. The Republican sacrificial lamb has dropped from 16%, before the Democratic Primary to 3%. Republicans know he has no chance. So why not back Lieberman as an Independent? Democrats lose a long held seat in the Senate, almost securing the Senate majority for Republicans!

[edit on 22-8-2006 by RRconservative]





If that is the case he will probably split the independent and the republican vote down the middle. Democrats win by default. Sorry.

[edit on 22-8-2006 by kleverone]



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Party is a lot less important than ideology. That Lieberman is a Democrat is unimportant to me; that he is a conservative means everything. Apparently many Republican feel the same way. And Lieberman will vote the same way regardless of what party label he chooses to use.

Who controls the Senate is not decided automatically by which party holds the majority. Rather, the Senate votes on who becomes majority leader. In that context, we may expect Lieberman, if he wins, to vote for the Democratic candidate for ML, not the Republican. (He's calling himself an "independent Democrat" now.) So if he does win, that does nothing to promote Republican control of the Senate. The only thing that would do that, is if the Republican candidate were to win.



posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I do hope the Leiberman wins as an independant. A politician who votes his own mind and beliefs is so very rare. Even if I don't agree with what he says half the time, his heart is in the right place, unlike some politicians we can all name.

Party affiliation to me is meaningless. Being of a concervetive bent politiacally I will support those politicians who most resonate with my own core values, regardless of political affiliation.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Just thought I'd bump this thread back up so people can eat their words.

Never say never in politics.

Got to give the Senator props, he ran a good campaign, stuck to the issues, didn't go personal even though he had every right to, and let the voters decide.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Well, AnABC, do you understand how US elections work now?


Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
Joe voted for war for Israel, not American interests. That is why he was not voted in again.



Jeez some people really need to learn how elections in their own country work.



Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
What does your reply even mean?




Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
JOE IS STILL A UNITED STATES SENATOR today, just was he was last week, last month, last year and last decade.


Good God, man, if you're going to talk about politics, at least learn how they work. I'm not even American and I know how your system works. Do you even know how many Senate seats were up for election this week?





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join