Joementum the "Democrat"

by emptywheel

Reed Hundt asks a question with an easy answer.

But the question now is whether Senator Lieberman will vote with the Republican or Democratic caucus. He says the latter. But why? That's what needs elucidation.

Easy, Reed! Joe has to vote with the Democratic caucus. Otherwise, he pisses away his newfangled role as the "Democrat who gives Republican extremism bipartisan cover."

And therein lies Joe's real challenge. He has to get re-elected, sure. Though that still looks to be doable, even if he has to do so as an petitioning Democrat Independent. But he has to get elected as a Democrat, or else the power and attention he has accrued by straddling the fence will be lost. Joe Lieberman, Independent Senator, is almost useless to the Republicans (except, apparently, in cloture votes on SCOTUS judges). And therefore Joe Lieberman's victory, unless he can brand it as a Democratic victory, is useless to Holy Joe.

Sure, Ann Coulter, when she endorsed Joementum, invited him to join the Republican party.

I think he should just come all the way and become a Republican. He wouldn't be our best Republican but at least he'd fit in with the party that wants to defend the country.

But think about it. Why do you think Joementum scored the wingnut endorsement trifecta of Coulter, Hannity, and Malkin, in spite of the fact that his voting record is entire galaxies away from the policies they endorse, save on Iraq? Joementum has value to the wingnuts precisely because his endorsement of their approach on Iraq undercuts claims that they are the screaming nutcases they really are. But Holy Joe has value, primarily, because a once liberal Senator would support such nutcases. One more Republican Senator--even an Independent Senator--endorsing their hatespeech is not going to buy them any credibility. Indeed, if he were to flip parties, the scarier side of the Conservative Movement would lose one of few remaining claims they have to mainstream respectability.

And so we find Joementum employing his famous way with words in an attempt to retain the title Democrat even while he throws the party aside.

LIEBERMAN:  No.  John, let me make clear that I am a Democrat and I will remain a Democrat.  I am not going to be unaffiliated if I have to petition my way onto the ballot.  I’m going to be a Democrat and I will caucus with the Democrats and look forward to caucusing with the Senate Democratic majority.

Of course, there's a hitch. Holy Joe may call himself whatever he wants on the cable news. But on the Connecticut ballot, he has to win the party nomination to be able to call himself a Democrat, even to use the word, "Democrat."

So expect to see more of the same, Joementum on teevee insisting he really is a Democrat, attempting to steal the brand for his Independent run. Because Joe knows that, without that brand, even an Independent Senate victory will mean nothing.

Comments

[Joe Student]

If Joe were to win as an independent, wouldn't he lose all democratic senority (to serve as chair on a committee or two)? Or would they make an exception in his case.

Also, the Bull Moose blog (DLC) is supporting Lieberman as a democrat or independent. Will they support the democratic nominee chosen by the voters in the primary, even if it is not Lieberman?

[Kagro X]

That Hundt post was the worst professional analysis, on a per-word basis, I've ever seen offered anywhere. Thank God it was free!

It's only two short paragraphs long, and both of them are crap. The one you hit on is the only one worthy of discussion. The first one, in which he compares Lieberman to party-ditchers Jeffords and Shelby, is so stupid, it's hard to sit still after you've read it.

Jeffords left the Republicans because he couldn't abide by their policies anymore. Shelby might possibly make the same argument, though the fact that he actually switched parties rather than go with the big "I" after his name made his switch smack of opportunism.

Lieberman's leaving the party because the rank-and-file can't abide by his policies.

There's a world of difference, and it takes a special kind of chowderhead not to see it instantly.

[demtom]

Shelby also announced his switch a day or so just after the GOP took control of Congress in '94. Obviously a man of principle.

[Kagro X]

If Lieberman wins as an independent, they'll probably let him keep his seniority, as they likely would with anyone who agrees to caucus with them, and as Democrats have been doing for years in the House for Bernie Sanders. For Lieberman to serve as a committee chair, of course, he'd have to be caucusing with the majority, which would provide an early opportunity to demonstrate publicly who he is caucusing with.

By the way, the Bull Moose blog can barely even be counted as DLC, despite their foolishness in deciding to spend their money on it. Marshall Wittman has been angling for years to set himself up as the blogosphere's self-hating contrarian, hoping to occupy whatever space it is that he imagines will one day be coveted by a center-right "independent" presidential candidate who needs to "understand" the blogosphere, but also have the proper disdain for it.

My back hurts today, and I am going to take it out on others.

[emptywheel]

This is a pretty good refutation of my argument, btw, that Lieberman doesn't get anything out of an I win that looks like an I win.

For Lieberman to serve as a committee chair, of course, he'd have to be caucusing with the majority, which would provide an early opportunity to demonstrate publicly who he is caucusing with.

If he wins as an I, he might be able to guarantee himself a chairmanship one way or another.

Though he really is a lot less useful to the Republicans as an I. Would they take him, to maintain a majority in the Senate? Yes. Would Lieberman caucus with them when he could get a chairmanship either way? I doubt it.

[Joe Student]

Thanks Kagro X!!!
For what it's worth, I once tried doing a running commentary on the bull blatherings under a different psuedenym in a different blog. Needless to say, after the first few days I started repeating myself, much like Wittman does. FortunatelyI had the good sense to quit.

[DemFromCT]

a reminder from the Fix:

Can't get enough of the Lieberman-Lamont skirmish? Make sure to watch C-SPAN -- The Fix's favorite channel -- this Thursday at 7 p.m. for a live broadcast of the first debate between Lieberman and Lamont.

[Pilgrim]

I was concerned I'd not be able to see the Lieberman-Lamont debate, as I live in Canada. But MSNBC says they're going to carry the debate live and people can e-mail in who they think the winner of the debate is. I'm pleased I can see this.

[Kagro X]

A reminder from The Fixx:

But when one little cross
Leads to shots, grit your teeth
You run for cover so discreet
Why don't they

Do what they say, say what you mean
Oh well, one thing leads to another
You told me something wrong
I know I listen too long
But then one thing leads to another.

[p.lukasiak]

ack! the Lamont-Leaverman debate conflicts with the premiere of Big Brother! ;)