Lieberman?

[bgbill]

It looks as though Lieberman may win as an independant, why exactly did the Democrats kick him out?

Do you Democrats think he will rejoin you guys, or tell you to go **** yourself?

[100days-a-year]

Lieberman has said he'd sit with them.He is the class act of this campaign.

[bgbill]

Lieberman sure isn't very popular at the democraticunderground.

[jackpine savage]

He lost the primary to a challenger, the Democrat Party didn't kick him out the voters did, curious what would happen if this happened to a Republican . He will win because a lot of Republicans and Independents will vote for him. Just because he supported the invasion of Iraq don't kid yourself that he supports what the Republican Party stands for.

[bgbill]

He lost the primary to a challenger, the Democrat Party didn't kick him out the voters did, curious what would happen if this happened to a Republican . He will win because a lot of Republicans and Independents will vote for him. Just because he supported the invasion of Iraq don't kid yourself that he supports what the Republican Party stands for.

The Democratic party may not have actually kicked him out, but they sure did leave him swinging in the wind, I think it will be funny if he does win and stays Independant.

[jackpine savage]

What were they supposed to do, he lost to a challenger in the primary. The Party didn't choose either candidate in the primary but as soon as he lost they had to go with the winner of the primary in the general election. If a similiar situation arose in the GOP I am sure they would do the same thing.

[bgbill]

What were they supposed to do, he lost to a challenger in the primary. The Party didn't choose either candidate in the primary but as soon as he lost they had to go with the winner of the primary in the general election. If a similiar situation arose in the GOP I am sure they would do the same thing.

The Democrats bailed on Lieberman before the primary and favored his opponent.

[WreckDiver]

What were they supposed to do, he lost to a challenger in the primary. The Party didn't choose either candidate in the primary but as soon as he lost they had to go with the winner of the primary in the general election. If a similiar situation arose in the GOP I am sure they would do the same thing.



Well you are wrong about the GOP supporting someone they didnt chose to support before hand.

katherine Harris.

[jackpine savage]

The Democrats bailed on Lieberman before the primary and favored his opponent.
Your right I thought they didn't take a position on the primary. Either way a 3 term Senator loses a primary, he should have walked away. As it is he will probably win but I see him voting with the Dems more than the Reps, but not exclusively.

[bgbill]

Well you are wrong about the GOP supporting someone they didnt chose to support before hand.

katherine Harris.


I would like to see her win, but she won't, it is bullshit the way the Republican party treated her.

[jackpine savage]

why did they back off on their support for her?

[bgbill]

why did they back off on their support for her?

You smokin' crack? :confused:

The Republican party never supported her in the race for Senate.

[jackpine savage]

Well I am up here in NE so I wasn't sure. Why didnt they support her at all. Is she really that bad of a candidate or is it because of the publicity from when she was your sec. of state overseeing the 2000 election?

[WreckDiver]

Little bit of everything but I did not vote for her because of her association with the unhonorable CW Bill Young.

[bgbill]

Well I am up here in NE so I wasn't sure. Why didnt they support her at all. Is she really that bad of a candidate or is it because of the publicity from when she was your sec. of state overseeing the 2000 election?

She did what she was supposed to do in 2000 (she followed the law), then she ran and got a seat in her hometown of Sarasota, then set her eyes on running against Bill Nelson, and the Republican Party didn't want her to, so they treated her like a stepchild.

[bgbill]

Little bit of everything but I did not vote for her because of her association with the unhonorable CW Bill Young.

I voted for her because she has big tits. :D

[jackpine savage]

I voted for Kennedy because he has big tits too :D

[bgbill]

Bill Nelson was going to be hard to beat, no matter who ran against him, being an Astronaut definately helps.

[bgbill]

I voted for Kennedy because he has big tits too :D

I think his tits are saggier than Katherines, but they are bigger. :D

[Christof]

The Democrats bailed on Lieberman before the primary and favored his opponent.
They dont like him because he is a moderate and also backs Bush on the war in Iraq...
I have a lot of respect for the man, I think he is a good guy... BUT....
Okay, here goes....

When he ran for VP, I had hesitation for one reason only. He is Jewish. Now before anyone gets their panties in a wad, let me explain. No, I am not an anti-jewish person per se... But Jewish people are tied together strongly on support of Israel, and it comes #1 to them. That means that someone of Jewish faith will make decisions about the middle east based on how it will affect Israel first, then us second. Of course this is simply my opinion, I have no proof of this. There is probably not one other religion as tight as the Jewish religion. Sure, catholics are a large group, and pretty fervent about their religion, the pope, etc... But it is much different than Zionism. The history itself is over 6,000 yrs different.... I dont know if that makes any sense, and it in no way means he is not a good man, I like him and his values. The situation in the middle east just scares me, and I know we will eventually be drawn into the big one alongside Israel. Maybe I am giving the VP position too much credit, it may not have that kind of power....

I think no matter what he should stay independent, then he could vote either way based on what HE thinks, not his party....

[jackpine savage]

People said the same thing about Kennedy and his Catholic faith

[bgbill]

People said the same thing about Kennedy and his Catholic faith

I thought Kennedy's faith is in Chivas.

[jackpine savage]

Wrong Kennedy, I meant JFK

[bgbill]

Wrong Kennedy, I meant JFK


I knew that, I just like taking shots at Ted. :D

[jackpine savage]

shots and Ted go together

[bgbill]

shots and Ted go together


Except when he is driving with Mary Jo.

[Christof]

Yeah, but Catholics tend more to go on personal level values rather than everything "Vatican".... I cant think of one catholic that is so completely loyal to their faith that they would go to bat for Vatican City at the drop of the hat...
Of course, any strong religious beliefs will affect decisions made by law makers that are of that faith, but again, with Judaism we are talking about "Chosen people" and "Inherit the earth" mentality that bind them stronger than simply being raised a catholic or any other protestant religion. It is their heretage, and ethnicity that is completely based on a religious belief.. For what it's worth, I would also shiver at the thought of a devout muslim in high office. Man, I hate politics and religion mixing together, no matter what the faith...

[Kahuna]

Jackpine just about everyone agrees, even people that were against here that Harris smoked Nelson in the second debate. He couldn't put two sentences together. But she never stood a chance. The republican pary never backed her. I guess they were pissed because she gave her house seat. The talking heads on radio beat her up pretty bad too. If the Repubs loose the Senate she should have the opportunity to kick someone in the ass.

[jackpine savage]

I still don't get it if she won the primary then the party should have backed her with all they can, beating an incumbent is hard enough as it is.

[junior]

Maybe they knew she would get stomped much like she did.

[Kahuna]

They asked her not to run and keep her seat in which she was very popular. She didn't and they turned their back. Bret your right. The old gal still has a great body.

[Kahuna]

And she's rich

[jackpine savage]

butter face

[chuam]

Harris was horrible. She was such a right wing bible thumping neocon.

Rep. Harris Condemns Separation of Church, State

By Jim Stratton
Orlando Sentinel
Saturday, August 26, 2006; Page A09

ORLANDO, Aug. 25 -- Rep. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.) said this week that God did not intend for the United States to be a "nation of secular laws" and that the separation of church and state is a "lie we have been told" to keep religious people out of politics.

"If you're not electing Christians, then in essence you are going to legislate sin," Harris told interviewers from the Florida Baptist Witness, the weekly journal of the Florida Baptist State Convention. She cited abortion and same-sex marriage as examples of that sin.

Harris, a candidate in the Sept. 5 Republican primary for U.S. Senate, said her religious beliefs "animate" everything she does, including her votes in Congress.

Witness editors interviewed candidates for office, asking them to describe their faith and their positions on certain issues.

Harris has always professed a deep Christian faith. But she has rarely expressed such a fervent evangelical perspective publicly.

Political and religious officials responded to her published remarks with outrage and dismay.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) said she was "disgusted" by the comments "and deeply disappointed in Representative Harris personally."

Harris, Wasserman Schultz said, "clearly shows that she does not deserve to be a representative."

Ruby Brooks, a veteran Tampa Bay Republican activist, said Harris's remarks "were offensive to me as a Christian and a Republican."

"This notion that you've been chosen or anointed, it's offensive," Brooks said. "We hurt our cause with that more than we help it."

Harris told the journalists "we have to have the faithful in government" because that is God's will. Separating religion and politics is "so wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers," she said.

"And if we are the ones not actively involved in electing those godly men and women," then "we're going to have a nation of secular laws. That's not what our Founding Fathers intended, and that certainly isn't what God intended."

Harris campaign spokeswoman Jennifer Marks would not answer questions about the Harris interview. Instead, she released a two-sentence statement.

"Congresswoman Harris encourages Americans from all walks of life and faith to participate in our government," it stated. "She continues to be an unwavering advocate of religious rights and freedoms."

[mbhalihunter]

I think the Lieberman issue shows one of the major problem with american elections: the primary system. Here in California there have been tons of good politicians that have been ousted early because of the primary system. The last gubernatorial campaign here is a strong reflection of this. The Democratic primary went down to two candidates, Steve Westly, a successful entrepeneurer, and Phil Angelides, a career politician. Westly did good things in his prior position as state controller. Angelides, he's a lame duck in my opinion. During the primary, the Republican party ran more ads attacking Westly than all the ads Angelides ran (this is my personal opinion, probably not fact). So Angelides wins the primary to face the governator and what happens, he gets his ass handed to him. I know a lot of people who voted for Ahnold because Angelides was weak (not as a girlie man, but yes also in that way). The Republican party in California, yes to the guys in the south there is one, has been able to eliminate strong democratic candidates in the primary system before they have to face them one on one, and the democrats have done the same.
I think that removing the primary system would also help other political parties, even the crazy ones, have a chance at getting into politics. But the more mainstream, moderate parties will usually hold power.

[mnguy]

I think the Lieberman issue shows one of the major problem with american elections: the primary system. Here in California there have been tons of good politicians that have been ousted early because of the primary system. The last gubernatorial campaign here is a strong reflection of this. The Democratic primary went down to two candidates, Steve Westly, a successful entrepeneurer, and Phil Angelides, a career politician. Westly did good things in his prior position as state controller. Angelides, he's a lame duck in my opinion. During the primary, the Republican party ran more ads attacking Westly than all the ads Angelides ran (this is my personal opinion, probably not fact). So Angelides wins the primary to face the governator and what happens, he gets his ass handed to him. I know a lot of people who voted for Ahnold because Angelides was weak (not as a girlie man, but yes also in that way). The Republican party in California, yes to the guys in the south there is one, has been able to eliminate strong democratic candidates in the primary system before they have to face them one on one, and the democrats have done the same.
I think that removing the primary system would also help other political parties, even the crazy ones, have a chance at getting into politics. But the more mainstream, moderate parties will usually hold power.

I think the biggest problem of all was the shitstorm that Westly and Angelides had badmouthing each other. It made both of them look worthless and it made Angelides, the primary race winner, look like the shit that floated a little higher than the other. Arnie didn't even have to do all that much work after Angelides took the primary, he just referenced Westly's ads. The votes reflected this too, as Angelides took a whuppin from the Terminator. Best line of this election, Arnie comes out for his victory speech and the first line is "I love doing sequels!" :thumps: