Lieberman ahead in polls, Kerry slams him

uscitizen said:
He is not a representative of the people. the people said they don't wantr him and still he persists. For the people ? No for lieberman.
Click to expand...
The Democrats said that they did not want him, not "The People"

The Democrats are only a subset of "The People"...
 
IHateGovernment said:
The people do not only comprise Democrats. He certainly should run if he feels he will better represent CT. I just want him to understand that by doing so he is now counting on the support of Republicans to elect him not democrats. I hope he is ok with that and will admit it because it is the truth.
Click to expand...

actually you mean independents.... and if he's getting most of his support from republicans then he's really not a democrat anyways, so why pay homage to the dems?
 
hmm, silly me I thought Liebermans state was a blue state. My apologies for my oversight. I guess I should have said the people of the party lieberman was claiming to represent.
 
its funny how dixie and them all HATED him in 2000, called him and gore sore loserman, now they want to make out w/ LIEberman
 
Yeah he's getting a lot of his support from independents but Republicans too. Without their support Lamont would probably win.
 
hmm, silly me I thought Liebermans state was a blue state. My apologies for my oversight. I guess I should have said the people of the party lieberman was claiming to represent.

Not the blue state red state thing.

a state that has 400,200 votes for Kerry and 400,000 votes for Bush may be a blue state but that says very little actually about the will of the people outside that specific contest.
 
Someone may have already addressed this (alluded to in Ihate's post above) but I am watching this race closely and hopeful for Lieberman simply because I would like to see a more centrist candidate elected (even when he is unpopular due to his war stance) and be reassured that not everyone in the NE has gone off of the left edge.
 
Dixie said:
According to the polls, you are wrong, unless you only count Democrats as "the people" and disregard everyone else.
Click to expand...


And this brings us back to the opening post in this thread ...and what John Kerry said .. hmmm ....
 
IHG i think LOVES LIEberman!!!
Reply With Quote

Huh? I said in the thread earlier its dumb to vote for him. I never like Lieberman he is one of my least favorite democrats. I hated him back in the 90s. He sucks.
 
robdastud said:
its funny how dixie and them all HATED him in 2000, called him and gore sore loserman, now they want to make out w/ LIEberman
Click to expand...


I actually said that I might consider voting for Joe, if he had been the nominee over Gore. He's about the only Democrat, other than Zell, I could honestly say that about. Where you people get that we were all bashing on Lieberman, is beyond me, most Republicans at least had respect for his integrity, even though we disagree with his politics, and we felt he sold out his principles to run with Gore.

Nevertheless, CT is a blue state that is poised to elect an Independent to the Senate, primarilly because the Democrats have lost their minds. If I were a Republican in CT, I would vote for Lieberman on principle alone, the Republican candidate is not going to win, and given the choice of Liberman or Lamont, you'd just about have to be stupid not to vote for Joe. JMHO.
 
robdastud said:
Klaatu

LIEberman voted for bush's energy program
LIEberman voted for NCLB --of which CT is suing the federal government... so OBVIOUSLY HE WASN'T VOTING IN CT'S BEST INTEREST...

LIEberman voted for CAFTA+NAFTA to give us da SHAFTA
LIEberman also voted for the Iraq war which as cost us billions..

naw your right klaatu he's a mod dem..LOL
Click to expand...


So what dawg .. voting 90% of the time with your party clearly aligns with the party's base. He is a Left Wing Dem who supports the War ...
And he was right with NAFTA .. you numbskull ...
 
klaatu said:
Dawg .. you are the only one here who thinks in terms of making out with another man ... ;)
Click to expand...

its the only logical solution, either that or you guys like sore losers??

Actually Klaatu i was going to ask you if you wanted me to send you some cigars but i asked about sending em to the US and they wouldn't let me send em or you or me could get in trouble for that.
 
robdastud said:
its the only logical solution, either that or you guys like sore losers??

Actually Klaatu i was going to ask you if you wanted me to send you some cigars but i asked about sending em to the US and they wouldn't let me send em or you or me could get in trouble for that.
Click to expand...

You have a gross misconception of what consitutes a "sore loser" dawg. A "sore loser" is someone who wants to count dangling chads endless times, until they manipulate the results of the election to their favor, a "sore loser" is someone who claims the voting machines were rigged against them. Joe Lieberman hasn't lost anything except the Democratic primary, and he is leading the race as an Independent. There is nothing "sore" about that, or "losing" for that matter. The real "sore losers" are the Democrats, who want to argue that Joe is going against the will of "the people" because Democrats threw him under the bus.
 
IHateGovernment said:
NAFTA is unconstitutional. I would hardly call someone a numbskull for opposing it.
Click to expand...

Eliminating duties and phasing out tariffs is unconstitutional? A Libertarian who is also a Protectionist? NAFTA is at least an incremental step towards Free Trade.. as a Libertarian arent you for a policy to Abolish all trade barriers and agreements ...?
Are you against NAFTA simply because it was a Republican/Democrat policy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top