In 2002 I sought — and was denied — the Democratic nomination for Charlottesville City Council. Having come within three votes, there were a good number of people who urged me to run as an independent. They felt confident that I would win (rightly or wrongly, we’ll never know; wrongly, I suspect) and believed that I would have won the nomination handily had the convention not been such a debacle. I declined, of course. Why? Because I’d taken my fair whack at it and I’d lost, fair and square. I chose to participate in a process that would determine whether or not I’d get to run in the general election. Win or lose, it was my obligation to accept that loss and support the Democratic nominees. I lost, and I supported them.
It was clear months ago that Senator Joe Lieberman was facing a significant challenge in the form of Ned Lamont. Lieberman, as did Lamont, chose to face the gauntlet of Democrats and seek renomination. Sen. Lieberman lost last night. So Lamont goes forward, and it Lieberman’s sad task to support Lamont in his race against whatever token candidate that Connecticut Republicans put forward.
Instead, Lieberman has announced that he is seeking reelection as an independent. Having subjected himself to the test, and having failed, he chooses to ignore those results and move on as if the nomination didn’t matter. I can only imagine that had the results been reversed, and had Lamont decided to run as an independent, Sen. Lieberman would be rightly angry at Lamont’s unwillingness to accept the results of the process.
Members of a party who seek the nomination of their party have the duty to accept the results of a fair contest. Sen. Lieberman’s unwillingness to do so speaks very poorly of him. It puts his fellow Democrats — particularly U.S. Senators — in an extremely awkward position. It will no doubt leave the Connecticut Democratic Party as battered as Virginia’s Fifth District’s after Rep. Virgil Goode switched parties. It is now clear that Sen. Lieberman’s top priority is Sen. Lieberman. Not the integrity of the process. Not his party. Not his state. Not the U.S. Senate.
If he goes forward with this, and if he loses, it will be a terrible way for Lieberman to end an otherwise solid career. What a shame.
Waldo for U.S. Senate (in Connecticut)!
I blame the weak chin.
Just out of curiosity – how did the council in Charlottesville have a Democratic primary? I thought all of the local races like that were non-partisan.
Joe wouldn’t have been able to run as an independent in Virginia. Part of the paperwork that candidates sign in order to run in the primary specifically addresses this and you agree – up front – not to run as an independent. I think they call it the “spoiler” law.
I couldn’t agree more. It’s too bad that there aren’t more folks with aspirations to serve the public with this kind of integrity. Of course, you’re a young guy, and Lieberman is an old guy, so maybe he feels like (a) the clock is ticking and he doesn’t have time to wait around for a future contest, and (b) what the hell else is he going to do with himself if he doesn’t win re-election? Not excusing his choice to peel off and compete as an independent, at ALL, but more just reflecting on how pathetic his actions are. If only this bid as an independent were MERELY pathetic and not so damaging, to CT, to the Democrats, to the Senate… Ugh.
Nope — many municipalities choose to have partisan races. The Albemarle BoS and School Board elections are non-partisan, as is the Charlottesville School Board election. But C’ville City Council is quite partisan, which works out well for us Dems. :)
And, of course, the stakes are so much higher for U.S. Senate than some City Council nomination contest that there’s really no parity in the comparison.
Vivian, the school board races are non-partisan – – – but the City Council race is very partisan, and in theory, competitive. Dave and Julian didn’t have to contend with other Democrats seeking the two open seats during this past city council election, or else they all would have had to compete for the nomination.
>>>And, of course, the stakes are so much higher for U.S. Senate than some City Council nomination contest that there’s really no parity in the comparison.
Yeah, but an ego is an ego, graciousness is graciousness, and sore losers/dignified losers show their true colors in any race, be it the sixth grade class president election, the Cville City Council, or the U.S. Senate race. Your comparison is fair enough. Though I do think it would be tempting (albeit gross and selfish) to do what Loserman is doing if you were old and the incumbent and a pillar of your elected assembly. I just hope if it were me, I’d have the grace and dignity to step down.
I think that’s pretty much true for just about any senator (any politician really) currently holding office.
And let’s say for the sake of debate that you are right. Then what obligation does the National party have to support its candidates who are challenging republican incumbents? If they don’t support said challengers is that not also a violation of the contract between the party and the nominee? I can think of at least one instance where that was the case. And so I call it just another day at the office- if you’re a politician (elected or aspiring).
I also should ad I respect that Lieberman (unlike many of the other Democrats who’ve flip flopped on their original Iraq war yea votes- which should be reason alone to vote them out too) has been consistant with his original position. And in my opinion that deserves a measure of respect.
By state law, school board elections are non-partisan, but local committees can endorse, which effectively identifies someone with the party that endorses them.
We have a special election this year in Cumberland, due to a Supervisor resigning earlier in the year. The person appointed to that post must now run for the seat this fall in a special election, and then run in 2007 again for the full term. We may be having a caucus, since there is interest by more than one person for that seat.
Next year, the local school board will be elected for the first time in memory, if ever.
As far as Joe goes, it has been fascinating to watch, almost like a train wreck you can’t stop looking at even though you know it looks bad. Today’s offer by Karl Rove to help him in his campaign is surreal, and proves why he was defeated.
I respect that Lieberman (unlike many of the other Democrats who’ve flip flopped on their original Iraq war yea votes- which should be reason alone to vote them out too) has been consistant with his original position. And in my opinion that deserves a measure of respect.
You know, I think the value of consistency, when it comes to political views, is entirely over-rated. Circumstances change. People learn and grow. What we, at one time, thought to be true, may turn out not to be true. Policies that used to work don’t work any more. Promising experiments fail.
I’m not impressed by political leaders who are consistently wrong. Principals are one thing, but prescriptions and polices ought to be constantly re-examined and re-considered.
And anyone who uses that dopey phrase “flip-flop” outside of a reference to cheap rubber sandals needs ten minutes in the time-out corner.
Much less of an obligation than the other way ’round. That’s because “support” from the DNC consists primarily of money, something that is in limited quantity. Graciousness and respect for the process on the part of candidates, on the other hand, is hypothetically unlimited.
I should add that I didn’t have a horse in this race. Lamont, Lieberman — who am I to say? I had little patience for out-of-state Democrats complaining that Kaine was too conservative and basically a Democrat, the same thing they’re saying now of Webb. They don’t know Virginia, I don’t know Connecticut.
Republican operatives I have talked with are gleeful over the Lieberman victory, mainly because it greatly aides their ability to hold onto the House of Representatives. All three vunerable GOP incumbents are expected to endorse an independent Lieberman candidacy. This does three things; it allows them not to be tied to an incredibly weak GOP nominee for Senate. Second, it forces the DNC and Democratic Congressional committees to donate time and money to a seat that was, prior to Tuesday’s election, “safe.” This is all time and money that was going to be spent in other vunerable seats across the nation.
Last, but not least, the blogosphere will be donated time, money and volunteers to help Lamont in an already blue of bluest state instead of freeing that time, money and volunteers to work in swing and seats that are in risks for the GOP.
I, for one, have always been a huge admirer of Lieberman; in an era where everyone decries partianship, he defied it. It is a bit mindboggling that a individual that was solidly liberal on so many issues (the environment, gay marriage, abortion rights, tax cuts, anti-free trade, minimum wage, etc.) was defeated by party purists.
That’s what I thought. Down here, the parties stay out of the races but everybody knows who’s what (just about).
Harry Landers wrote:
U-turn, about-face, accommodation, adaptation, adjustment, amendment, be on the fence, change, change of course, change of heart, change one’s mind, changeover, conversion, correction, difference, diversification, exchange, fluctuate, metamorphosis, mid-course correction, modification, mutation, reformation, remodeling, reshaping, reversal, revision, second thoughts, shift, switch, switchover, transformation, transmutation, turnabout, turnaround, vacillate.
Alright Harry – pick whichever one suits you and stop sniping about my choice of words. As it is I’d be in good company in the time out corner with most network anchors, a majority of reporters and politicians.
The problem is people don’t learn. Not the average american. Over the course of time they repeat the same old tired mistates, and with each mistake created they think they’ve re-invented the wheel. If they did learn we wouldn’t be in a war to start with. They should’ve known better before they voted to allow the President to go to war and destablilize a country. A war isn’t a world cup competition or a television mini-series that ends when we get tired of hearing about it.
If we want to give Iraq to Syria and Iran then by all means lets go ahead and pull out of Iraq.
Lieberman isn’t my favorite politician to begin with but I really can’t take issue with his decision to run as an independant.
I think this fits your comment pretty well….
(by from “Attorney at Arms” over at Daily KOS).
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n132/jonerikstorm/sorelosermancopy.jpg