Why does the Lieberman defeat Freak Cons out so much?

.

This is hilarious!

Dixie thinks a lamont victory will create a backlash against Dems for "going too far left", when the actual post-lamont Polls from Fox News show the exact opposite.

And that the Demcractic establishment ("DNC") worked against Lieberman, when in fact virtually all the big wigs in the Democratic establishment from Bill Clinton on down, were supporting Lieberman.
 
Just let dixie keep believing that, it is good for the demoncrats :)
Lieberman is busy drumming up support from Repubs for his run as an independent. Tell ya anything ?
 
Cypress said:
This is hilarious!

Dixie thinks a lamont victory will create a backlash against Dems for "going too far left", when the actual post-lamont Polls from Fox News show the exact opposite.

And that the Demcractic establishment ("DNC") worked against Lieberman, when in fact virtually all the big wigs in the Democratic establishment from Bill Clinton on down, were supporting Lieberman.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think Lieberman will win big as an Independent. I think the Howard Dean Liberals just shot the Democratic party in the foot, because not only will you lose a respected statesman and voice of reason, as well as a senior committee chair in your party, you will also give up one more precious seat in the Senate. It doesn't help to lose Democratic seats, when you are trying to regain power.

Keep in mind, the CT Demo primary garners a fraction of the general election votes. Soros and Company managed to sway 100k Indies to help them oust Joe in the primaries, but there are 900k more voters in CT, who will be die-hard Lieberman Lovers in November, and MoveOn.Org can't sway that many.

Now, the good news is, you will have spin... Oh well, Joe... he's STILL a Democrat... and now that he's been straightened out, he will start to back our lunacy to surrender this victory to the terrorists! So, it's not like it's going to be the end of the world when this one blows up in your face, it's just funny to watch you hacks throw a respected statesman under your own bus!
 
actually, what you "think" will happen on the American political stage and what does happen are synonymous infrequently.
 
Cypress said:
Hmmm....deja vu. the republicans keep making these kind of claims, over and over - "the destruction of the Dem party!" - but, it never seems to come true.

-I remember when Howard Dean was elected chairman, that was supposed to destroy the Dems. Yet oddly, the polls keep getting better and better for the dems.

-Russ Fiengold amendment to censure Bush was supposed to destroy the Dems. For some odd reason, it never did.

-Having a San Francisco-liberal in charge of the House Dems, (Pelosi) was supposed to annihilate the Dems. Doesn't appear to have done so.

-Having Al Sharpton run for prez in the Dem primaries, was supposed to destroy the Dems. Oddly, it didn't.

Put down the kool aid stirfry, and turn off the Fox News talking points.
Click to expand...



Cypress
have a lookie here. What's that? Liebrman ahead ina poll?
http://rasmussenreports.com/2006/State Polls/August 2006/ConnecticutSenate.htm
 
big fucking deal. he was ahead of the primary polls until the week before the election. Iraq continues to stink up the middle east...now that the ceasefire is on in Lebanon, Iraq will get back toward the front of our national conscience once again.... Joe is a turncoat and a quisling.... I hope he loses big...and the fact that he is leading by a whisker in the first post primary poll is no indication that he won't.
 
Leading by a whisker after losing . Sort of like the last horse in the race making it back to the barn first. Does not count.
 
klaatu said:
You are right .. it is the will of the people .. for that reason it is good ... but it just seems that it is only happening to Lieberman .. if it catches on and it begins to happen across the board in both party's ..you know what? Im on board come November .. I wouldnt mind a good 'ol fashion house cleaning! Throw the bums out! Lets keep this up right through 2008 and bring both houses back to ground zero ...

Sometimes I do look at things too strategically ... you actually got me thinking about that one ...
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that 60% of the population opposes the occupation of Iraq. On situations as grave as war, lost support almost never comes back. Once the public sours on a war, it rarely cnanges back to support, so that 61% represents a solid (and probably permanent) majority opinion. For the GOP spinmeisters to pretend is is a leftwing position is ludicrous. Aposition held by 60% is by definition the moderate position. Teh first definition od moderate is "being within reasonable or average limits", and one of the three types of average is tbe mode (the root of moderate), which is the value appearing most often

There is a good article about the spin vs the reality of the current state of national security at http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0814-27.htm Yeah, I know it's a progressive web site, but that's immaterial, and the next website,http://www.fallacyfiles.org/poiswell.html ,will tell you why the article musat be judged on its own merits, that diusmissing it as liberal is a logical fallacy known as "poisoning the well", a form ofad hominem. You might want to bookmark the second site as a reference for those times when sombody's argument just sounds wrong, but you can't put your finger on it. This is a pretty thorough listing of all the major logical fallacies, formal and informal, all those arguments and leaps of logic we aren't allowed to make, at least not of we want our arguments to be legitimate.
 
zoombwaz said:
Keep in mind that 60% of the population opposes the occupation of Iraq. On situations as grave as war, lost support almost never comes back. Once the public sours on a war, it rarely cnanges back to support, so that 61% represents a solid (and probably permanent) majority opinion. For the GOP spinmeisters to pretend is is a leftwing position is ludicrous. Aposition held by 60% is by definition the moderate position. Teh first definition od moderate is "being within reasonable or average limits", and one of the three types of average is tbe mode (the root of moderate), which is the value appearing most often

There is a good article about the spin vs the reality of the current state of national security at http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0814-27.htm Yeah, I know it's a progressive web site, but that's immaterial, and the next website,http://www.fallacyfiles.org/poiswell.html ,will tell you why the article musat be judged on its own merits, that diusmissing it as liberal is a logical fallacy known as "poisoning the well", a form ofad hominem. You might want to bookmark the second site as a reference for those times when sombody's argument just sounds wrong, but you can't put your finger on it. This is a pretty thorough listing of all the major logical fallacies, formal and informal, all those arguments and leaps of logic we aren't allowed to make, at least not of we want our arguments to be legitimate.
Click to expand...

Zoom, I think that's right that once the public sours on a war, they do not turn around, change their minds, and support it. And I believe that is why you are seeing a real orchestrated attempt to demonize the peace movement in this country. It seems that the public soured on Vietnam quite a bit sooner than general wisdom has said. However, the anti-war movement, viewed (and portrayed as by the establishment in power) as wild-eyed, radical, dangerous, and violent leftists, scared and disgusted them even moreso.

I think the bushies are hoping for a repeat. So get used to being called an "Al Qaeda type".
 
AnyOldIron said:
They believe it is anti-semitism from what I've read.

Some of them, ie Dixie, assume people can't be judged on their actions, but only their ethnicity....
Click to expand...


More likely some of them like Dixie, are projecting their own bigotry onto others. Many people cannot even conceive of a motivation that differs from their own driving motivations. Thus, a thief will always be the one to most jealously guard their purse, the obese person will always assume that you too, are obsessed with that last donut that's just sitting there, the cheater will always accuse and suspect you of cheating, and the racist will always presume a racist motivation.
 
Beefy said:
Well, its looking like the Dems will take a gain in the Congress come November.

What if they take the lead? This worries me, but nor for reasons you may think. I am worried that if the Dems gain the hill, then we will have a bunch of Lame Duck Republicans on the hill that may make one last stand. Maybe a couple of "pre-emptive strikes" on Iran or whatever. It'll be W's last ditch effort to wage war while he legally can.

Am I a fear monger?
Click to expand...
In my more cynical moments -- usually between 3:45 and 7:00 PM -- I worry about that too. It's a risk, but not a particularly grave one, I think.
 
tinfoil said:
Cypress
have a lookie here. What's that? Liebrman ahead ina poll?
http://rasmussenreports.com/2006/State Polls/August 2006/ConnecticutSenate.htm
Click to expand...

Your poll also shows the republican nominee Schlesinger dropping to 6% - meaning that Lieberman's gain is probably coming from republicans who refuse to support their own candidate

Unless the RNC bails on their own candidate, and starts pouring $$$ into lieberman's coffers, I think Joe's money will dry up in a few weeks. He may not be able to sustain a real campaign.
 
Dixie said:
How was this an asinine move? For that matter, how was it a "move" at all? It wasn't some grand strategy, cooked up in a back room by a group of insiders. It was a vote. The will of the people, expressed in a democratic tradition. The voters decided that he no longer represented their best interests, and voted accordingly.


This is why people call you a koolaid drinking idiot, you don't acknowledge the facts. Like the fact that MoveOn.org and George Soros, in connection with the DNC and Howard Dean, targeted the Lieberman race, backed his opponent, and swayed 100,000 Independents to vote in the Democratic primaries... that's what MONEY will do for a campaign. Why did they do this? Simple... fundraising! This was, and is, being billed as the "early indicator" of things to come, it's being played up as this big grass-roots movement of the anti-war left, to get the kooks worked up into a frenzy so they will send their money in! To assume that how 100,000 people in CT voted, is reflective of what 300 million Americans think, is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

The only people who call me a kool ade drinking idiot are fuckups like you who have their heads planted firmly up their asses. Have you ever made a prediction on hese boards that came true? I haven't seen one. On the other hand, I haven't missed yet on my predictions on Iraq. You still think Bush is doing a good job, and have yet to figure out that he's a liar. How fucking stupid are you? Now to your latest in a series of moronic statements. Did Soros and MoveOn also pull the levers in the voting booths? Did you take a look at Lieberman's voting record? It isn't the record of a Democrat, but of a Republican, and all the folks voting against him knew it. He continues to defend a war that a clear majority of the public opposes.

And now for the clincher. The fact that right wing assholes like you are so upset that Lieberman lost is the clearest evidence that the voters did the right thing. Every time you jerkoffs shoot off your mouths about Lieberman, you make the case for the vote as it played out. Lieberman himself is adding to the stupidity, comparing al Qaeda to t USSR and the Nazis. What a dipshit. The Soviets had 3 million men in the Red Army and 10,000 nuclear warheads aimed our way. Bin Laden is hiding in a cave with an AK47, and has maybe 10,000 men. AQ has killed thousands. The Nazis exterminated 10 million, and started a war that led to another 41 million deaths. Talk about your moronic comparison. Loserman is a self-centered little asshole who is going to run an extremely dirty campaign, slandering his opponent because he can't run on his own record.

What a slimeball.
 
Dixie said:
Actually, I think Lieberman will win big as an Independent. I think the Howard Dean Liberals just shot the Democratic party in the foot, because not only will you lose a respected statesman and voice of reason, as well as a senior committee chair in your party, you will also give up one more precious seat in the Senate. It doesn't help to lose Democratic seats, when you are trying to regain power.

Keep in mind, the CT Demo primary garners a fraction of the general election votes. Soros and Company managed to sway 100k Indies to help them oust Joe in the primaries, but there are 900k more voters in CT, who will be die-hard Lieberman Lovers in November, and MoveOn.Org can't sway that many.

Now, the good news is, you will have spin... Oh well, Joe... he's STILL a Democrat... and now that he's been straightened out, he will start to back our lunacy to surrender this victory to the terrorists! So, it's not like it's going to be the end of the world when this one blows up in your face, it's just funny to watch you hacks throw a respected statesman under your own bus!
Click to expand...


Another in a long line of stupid predictions. Loserman is no statesman. He's a hack. Bill Clinton already bitch-slapped him verbally, and there are a total of 5 senate Dems supporting him, and 42 supporting Lamont, The voters will probably break that way as well, and as his lies about his voting record are exposed, his polling numbers will drop, and his funding will dry up. He's toast.
 
Cypress said:
Its bizarre, really. Personally, I pay very litle attention to GOP congresional or local primaries. Its not my party. I frankly don't give a shit which wingnut they elect. Especially in states I don't live in.

But on this board and the other, Cons have been wiggin' for days and days about lieberman. Post after post, thread after thread.

Possible theories:

1) Lieberman's loss freaks them, because he's the first prominent delusional war-apologist being held accountable - is it a trend?;

2) Its extremely rare for incumbent senators to lose primaries. Is this the beginning of an anti-incumbent mood in the electorate. An anti-incumbent mood is obvioulsy more dangerous for the GOP;

3) Lieberman could be counted on to vote for Terri Schiavo Amendments, lame so-called "free" trade bills that gut the middle class, and various other theocratic agendas. Is his loss a trend that the electorate is fed up with lame, failed policies that don't promote the common good?
Click to expand...

Dimwitted christians have bought into the "chosen people" hype about jews. If jews lose, it must mean god is weak, and that conclusion scares them.
 
Not necessarially, if you know the bible you know God purposely let the Jews asses be kicked many times becuse of their falling from grace. Who is to say it cannot happen again.

clue read Judges, it is pretty much what that book is all about.
 
Yes of course people are scared when something they have put their faith into falters. Take Bushites for instance.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top