Robert Cox has an interesting piece on how Joe Lieberman’s attempt to run against the climate of hyperpartisanship in the country may be the right course to take. I’m inclined to believe that – when we’re facing problems from high gas prices to war in the Middle East, the last thing the average American voter wants is to listen to a bunch of politicians fighting like two-year olds. Ned Lamont spends more time running against George W. Bush than anyone who’s actually on the ballot. George W. Bush’s “stay the course” rhetoric is hardly persuasive when the “course” in Iraq appears to be right off a cliff. There doesn’t seem to be a single politician on the major national political scene that doesn’t come off looking like a vainglorious prick.
People are getting sick and tired of the ineptitude and corruption in Washington – and that feeling is bipartisan. (Although the Republicans, being in power, do get the brunt of it.) The Republicans got elected saying on a platform of compassionate conservatism – and so far have demonstrated a considerable deficit of both. The Democrats are running on the “we hate Bush” meme, which is great if the entire country were represented by Martha’s Vineyard, but gives the American voter nothing to vote on as an alternative.
I think Lieberman’s onto something here. As Cox explains:
In his Tuesday night speech, Lieberman, both conceding defeat and launching a new campaign for the U.S. Senate, decried the “old politics of partisan polarization†and said, “I went into public service to find solutions, not to point fingers. To unite, not to divide.â€
Lieberman went on to describe a political environment within his own party in that “Every disagreement is considered disloyal. And every opponent it is not just an opponent but is seen as evil.†He vowed to continue fighting for stronger national security and work with Democrats and Republicans to “build a better life for the people of Connecticut … regardless of what the political consequences may be.†In staring into the abyss of an election loss, Lieberman may be on to something.
That’s a message that no one else has in politics right now, and it’s a refreshing change. There’s no doubt that Lieberman is well to the left of the American mainstream, but he’s one of the few Democrats who can speak credibly to people of faith. If the Democrats were smart, they would have used that to their advantage – of course, they threw him under a bus instead. The Democrats are assuming that the backlash against politics as usual works to their advantage – and there’s some compelling logic towards that. At the same time, when it comes to a level of partisanship that veers towards the insane, the Democrats have it in spades. The sort of “netroots” activists that now have the Democratic Party under their sway turns off nearly everyone else who doesn’t already share their views. As Lieberman said, when every disagreement is an act of treason against the Party, you’re not going to be able to appeal to those who don’t believe as you do already.
Lieberman’s anti-partisan backlash may be the smartest political move of this election season – a refreshing voice of sanity in an ever-more shrill shouting match. Lieberman is the first politician to embrace such a strategy – we’ll see if more read the political tea leaves the same way and follow suit.
“Lieberman went on to describe a political environment within his own party in that “Every disagreement is considered disloyal. And every opponent it is not just an opponent but is seen as evil.—
And two days later, he told the media that his opponent’s victory “would be taken as a tremendous victory by terrorists”. Way to take the high road in the face of all this mean partisanship, Joe! Lieberman’s rhetoric is getting harder to discern from Dick Cheney’s with each passing day, which is of course the reason why the Republican party won’t even endorse its own candidate in the Connecticut Senate race. As his talking points lurch further and further into wingnut territory, he’s essentially made himself into the unofficial Republican Senate candidate for the state of Connecticut. Just goes to prove that the only “opposition party” Republicans can tolerate is the kind that agrees with Republicans on every issue.
Except Lieberman agrees (provisionally) with the GOP on a grand total of one issue. It just happens to be the most critical issue of them all.
Liberman’s a liberal. He’s wrong on nearly every issue that faces us today, except for this war. In this case, with a Republican candidate who stands a rabbi’s chance in Mecca of winning, one might as well choose the devil we know….
Three cheers for Joe!
“Except Lieberman agrees (provisionally) with the GOP on a grand total of one issue”
It’s more than just the war. He’s also never met a GOP-sponsored free trade agreement he didn’t like, and shares the GOP’s sanctimonious condemnations of movies, music, and video games that he’s never watched, listened to, or heard. The latter is more a matter of mere annoyance than a serious invalidation of his political profile, but all the favorable procedural votes in the world isn’t gonna save a guy who votes against the vast majority of his own party’s wishes on the two biggest issues of the day.
Whatever way you spin it, Lieberman is now the Republican candidate for Senate in Connecticut. Republicans in battleground races all over the country (ahem, Mark Kennedy) are attempting to “capture the center” by endorsing Lieberman. Even the Republican Party refuses to support its actual candidate in Connecticut because they love Joe so much. Lieberman might be able to win if not for every Republican in the country piling onto smooch him the way Bush did. Hitching his wagon to the Republican semi won’t do him any favors this year in a Connecticut Senate race, though. I can’t see how he wins.
It also has something to do with the fact that the candidate that they’re running has a history of gambling debts and tried to gamble in a casino under an assumed name. Then again, being a Republican in Connecticut is about as lonely as being a big Woody Allen fan in Tehran…
I don’t know about that. They have a Republican Governor who’s the most popular in the nation. It’s not nearly as Democratic as any of its three neighbors.