Disclosure: I worked for the Lamont campaign doing web design and production and some writing for the official blog (from 9/5/06 to 11/07/06).

Friday, June 16, 2006

 

Debate

Lieberman finally gives in to Ned Lamont's challenge for a debate. Usually a big sign of weakness for an incumbent to agree to a debate with a challenger like this.

Does this mean Lieberman will still be a Democrat on July 6th? Or will he wait to see how the debate goes before deciding on jumping ship? So many questions...
Comments:
It might have been better for Lamont if Lieberman had kept ducking, but there it is. Ned will have to step up now. Lieberman has 18 years of experience on him.
 
Dan- If you had been watching Lieberman these past few weeks, you wouldn't be saying that. Every time he opens his mouth, he loses support.
 
This is a sign of weakness, but don't get complacent. Lieberman is a rabid cornered weasel, he thinks he's entitled to that seat, and he'll go as dirty as Rove. I'd be surprised if Rove isn't helping him already.
 
Assuming that Lieberman sticks to the issues, Lamont can't lose.
 
If the Lieberman that debated Dick Cheney shows up, it's Lamont in a landslide...
 

If the Lieberman that debated Dick Cheney shows up, it's Lamont in a landslide...


Not if Russert is the moderator (will there be a moderator?). Then it will be 2 against 1.
 
ummm, Dan? Did you WATCH Lieberman debate Cheney?
 
I'm pretty sure I did not watch Lieberman debate Cheney, though I did watch Gore debate Bush. So did loserman cream cheaty?
 
Lieberman and Cheney never had a debate.

Instead they disagreed to agree. It was the woprst poli-sci pron this side of Jeff Gannon's call boy page he ran while getting a "Hard Pass" at the White House.
-Mr.M
 
errrrr
worst pol-sci porn
 
Hmmm. Poly-sci porn...

Hey, got some other examples of Poly-sci porn? Should be a fun exercise.
 
"Does this mean Lieberman will still be a Democrat on July 6th? Or will he wait to see how the debate goes before deciding on jumping ship?"

an excellent question!

the july 6 timing of this debate is perfect for a scenario where joe either knocks out lamont on july 6, or failing that, joe bolts the party on july 8 and starts gathering the indie petition signatures then -
 
I know Lamont, I volunteer for him, and Russert, Tweety, O'Lielly, Horowitch, Handjob Hannity and the rest of the Depraved Media asswipes could show up to back Lieberman, and Ned would leave them in tears, wondering how they all grew several new assholes. Ned has a brain, and stands on his principles. It would be a rout, with Lamont last man standing, without a doubt. If Holy Joe doesn't run offstage crying, the righties will call it a win for him. But don't bet on that not happening.
 
I'm pretty sure I did not watch Lieberman debate Cheney, though I did watch Gore debate Bush. So did loserman cream cheaty?

All you need to know happened in one brief instant:

LIEBERMAN: And I'm pleased to see, Dick, from the newspapers, that you're better off than you were eight years ago, too.

(LAUGHTER)

CHENEY: And most of it and I can tell you, Joe, that the government had absolutely nothing to do with it.

(LAUGHTER)

(APPLAUSE)


Two words, Joe. GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS. But nope, not a response. Just laughter. He's such an idiot.
 
This is GOOD for Lamont.

Let us take the first case, that Liebermann declares himself Independent before the debate.

In that case, Lamont debates him, anyway, and clobbers him over the head with that repeatedly. Later on, he has a one-on-one debate with the Republican nominee, Schlesinger, effectively stone-walling Liebermann out of the debate. If Liebermann wants into the debate, Lamont's answer is, "He had his chance."

Second case: Liebermann stays Democrat. Again, Lamont clobbers him over the head with his unfaithfulness to the Democrats of Connecticut by even allowing a controversy to exist about his party affiliation. Liebermann can't run to the right of Lamont, in this scenario, because it's only Dems voting in the primary.

Either way, Lamont has a distinct edge in the debate because of Liebermann's dithering. And if Liebermann stays in the party, he gets doubly-hammered for cleaving closely to Bush.

-- Dumbo
 
Not sure if it's a slam dunk for Lamont--I'd like to see how he's going to respond to that donation he made to Lieberman's campaign ("He was for Lieberman before he was against him.")
 
This is great! Ned better be prepared for Lieberman statements like "A Bush recession will be followed by a Dean depression." Come to think of it, it was statements like that during the 2003 primaries that initially turned me off to Lieberman.
 
I'd like to see how he's going to respond to that donation he made to Lieberman's campaign

Give me a freakin' break. Lamont, who's said to be worth upwards of $90 million and gives Joe 500 bucks as a courtesy donation.

During the same period he's given Dianne Farrell $2000, & Howard Dean, Bob Graham, John Kerry more than that. Hell, he gave Ciro Rodriguez in Texas $1000 a few months ago!

Bottomline: Ned Lamont supports Democrats. Joe Lieberman..not so much.
 
I guess this means my offer for Milford on June 29th has been rejected.

To complete this poem:
I am sooo dejected.

But then again:
[never mind]
 
Joe is (or was) a good debater, but unfortunately the facts are not on his side. And Joe should also be asked just what playing Bush's #2 Poodle has gotten the state of CT; we have been stiffed on the Sikorsky helicopter deal, base closures, our National Guardsmen are risking their lives for nothing in Iraq, etc.
 
Not sure if it's a slam dunk for Lamont--I'd like to see how he's going to respond to that donation he made to Lieberman's campaign ("He was for Lieberman before he was against him.")

Lamont already answered that question. He made his last donation to Lieberman in February 2005, about 10 months before Lieberman wrote that stupid op ed in the Wall Street journal saying that we should not criticize Bush on the war any more. Also Lieberman was not the only Democratic candidate he donated to. Lamont supported Diane Farrell, Howard Dean, Bill Clinton and others.
 
Two points:

1) Lamont, however smart he is does not face an easy debate. Lamont does not have the debate experience Lieberman does; the Cheney thing (if as described ) does not prove anything cause Lieberman's heart was not in beating Cheney; in fighting Lamont all of him will want to wind. I've seen Lieberman interview; he can think quickly and respond wittily under pressure. In fact I would say for Lamont to lose by a nose in this debate would in practical terms be a win.

2) Even if I'm wrong, if you support Lamont this should be your public position. Set the bar as low for your guy and as high for his opponent as possible. So repeat after me: "Lieberman is an experienced and skillful debator. If Lamont comes close to defeating him - for practical purposes this is a victory and will put him closer to winning the election."
 
Can Lieberman control his temper? So far on radio interviews, like with Colin McEnroe, Lieberman has come across as whiney as a spoiled brat. And instead of chucking the whiney attitude, Lieberman over employs it.

During the debate, I expect Lieberman to ramble on to fill his time and he probably will speak beyond his time limit, but will he say anything of significance?

I don't know what the format of the debate will be like. I hope we hear more details about that soon.
 
Well you see that your image was not so high because if you had exposure in this way for a reason. No person is exposed without knowing the profit previously.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home