Wednesday, August 09, 2006

My take on Lamont over Lieberman

I think it is truly sad how badly BOTH The Reps and Dems are interpreting Lamont over Lieberman...

The Republicans like Sean Hannity are as lost as usual. A Primary is designed so that the members of a political party can choose the candidate they wish to support. Primaries are a regular event and are part of the political process. Just because Lamont beat Lieberman does NOT mean the end of The Democratic Party.

The Democrats are lost for different reasons on this issue. I do not think that the anti-war segment of The Democratic Party has accomplished anything other then having a candidate win one Primary.

The Democrats are NOT the anti-war party on the national level. The National Libertarian Party is the anti-war party.

The Democrats almost unanimously voted to approve the Iraq invasion and they keep voting for the funding of the war, etc. The Democratic Party has NOT actively opposed the Iraq War and that must be understood.

Mike Sylvester

7 comments:

Jeff Pruitt said...

Mike,

Although the party hasn't been able to completely come together on Iraq, MANY democrats (led by Jack Murtha) have been speaking out against the war for quite some time.

Make no mistake, last night's ousting of Lieberman was not simply an anti-war vote. That's just the media boiling it down to some simplistic issue because they think the American people are too stupid to really understand the issues. This was about Lieberman undermining the party from Iraq, Plan B, Social Security, Terry Schiavo, etc.

More importantly, a new trend is emerging - one I've spoke of before. The beltway insiders such as the DLC and DCCC are no longer the Democratic party puppetmasters. They, and their candidates, now have to answer to the people and the grassroots movement. The internet has given ordinary, average people the infrastructure to enact real change at a national level.

First Jon Tester and now Ned Lamont. I don't think it's an overstatement to say that 20 years from now people will look back to last night's election as a fundamental shift in the democratic party and politics in general. We shall see I suppose, but for the first time in a long time I feel the party is moving in the right direction...

William Larsen said...

I have one quesion. How does a person who loses in the primary get to run for the same office in November? In the state of Indiana, you cannot run for the same office after losing a primary election for that office. Since it is a federal office, I would think there would be consistent rules.

Does anyone have information on this?

Jeff Pruitt said...

Bill,

Many states have "sore loser" laws (see the current debacle in Ohio since Ney has stepped down) but Connecticut isn't one of them...

Robert Enders said...

The Supreme Court ruled that US Representatives and Senators are not subject to state laws that imposed term limits on elected officials. It may be the same with "sore loser" laws, but I am not aware of anyone challenging a sore loser law in the Supreme Court yet.

Anonymous said...

The Populist Party is also anti-war I think.

Robert Enders said...

You might be thinking Green Party, but they are anti-war as well.

Tim Zank said...

"The internet has given ordinary, average people the infrastructure to enact real change at a national level." I'd agree with that quote Jeff in some circumstances, but I think the Connecticut win for Lamont had very little to do with "grassroots,ordinary,average people" and a lot more to do with wealthy, martini sipping liberals with big checkbooks. Your party isn't being swayed by the average grassroots american at all, but rather by the holier than thou, snotty elitists who think only they know whats best for all of us.