GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Nov 10, 2008 22:01:15 GMT -5
Isn't it possible that Leiberman backed McCain because he considered him to be the better of the two candidates? Isn't it possible he criticized Obama because he thought he lacked the experience necessary to be President, just like Hillary and Biden did? Isn't it possible Leiberman did not conveniently change his mind on Obama like Hillary and Biden did? Isn't it possible the Democrats allowed an independent to serve a committee chairman because they needed his vote to assume Senate leadership? Isn't it possible the Democrats might be willing to remove the independent from committee chairmanship because they no longer need his vote for control of the Senate? They'll keep him. I agree that when the guy who called Obama "clean" and unqualified for an office that "doesn't lend itself to on the job training" is VP that perhaps these guys don't get hurt feelings as much as their supporters do. Tough business. Joe B was trying to become president. Joe L campaigned for his friend to get an appointment. Both threw Obama under the bus. Both will remain in support of the party. Giving up principles for power is American politics at its most basic. |
|
DanMcQ
Moderator 
Posts: 32,868
|
Post by DanMcQ on Nov 18, 2008 17:07:45 GMT -5
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Nov 18, 2008 17:21:39 GMT -5
And the Ned Lamont for Senate campaign just received thousands of dollars, I'm sure. I really don't think Lieberman can win in 2012, but we'll see I guess. |
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Nov 18, 2008 18:04:10 GMT -5
I think Reid deserves a bunch of credit for finding a compromise.
The 2012 CT Senate race is going to be interesting. Last time, Lieberman won because virtually the entire Republican vote went to him. I'd bet in 2012 Lieberman will have a much harder time because there will probably be a higher profile Republican on the ballot (Shays, Rell, etc), unless Lieberman fully flips and runs as the most RINO Republican.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Nov 18, 2008 23:01:20 GMT -5
Well, this is an opportunity for Lieberman to say the least. Hopefully he'll be able to make more of a contribution during the coming years.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Nov 19, 2008 10:56:20 GMT -5
Funny how the Democrat caucus was prepared todecide Lieberman's fate via secret ballot, something they are against when it comes to Union strongarms.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Nov 19, 2008 12:16:41 GMT -5
Not to get on a tangent here, but I'm not entirely familiar with organized labor law, could somebody explain to me why I should be worried about card check unionization. As I understand it, this used to be the law in the US under the Joy Silk Doctrine and it basically just allows the union to become the bargaining agent if a majority of the employees sign cards expressing support for unionization. The employer can still challenge the legitimacy of the cards on the grounds of fraud or intimidation. Under the current system of secret ballot, it is up to the union and employees to show intimidation and fraud was perpetrated by the employer against the employees. Is that correct? Is it simply that the burden shifts from employees to employers on the question of intimidation and fraud?
|
|
