An August 24-26 Time magazine survey of likely voters found John Kerry and George Bush tied 46%-46% in a two man race and Bush 46%, Kerry 44% and Nader 5% in a 3 way race.
TDS Strategy Memos
Latest Research from:
Editor’s Corner
By Ed Kilgore
-
March 28: RIP Joe Lieberman, a Democrat Who Lost His Way
I was sorry to learn of the sudden death of 2000 Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Lieberman. But his long and stormy career did offer some important lessons about party loyalty, which I wrote about at New York:
Joe Lieberman was active in politics right up to the end. The former senator was the founding co-chair of the nonpartisan group No Labels, which is laying the groundwork for a presidential campaign on behalf of a yet-to-be-identified bipartisan “unity ticket.” Lieberman did not live to see whether No Labels will run a candidate. He died on Wednesday at 82 due to complications from a fall. But this last political venture was entirely in keeping with his long career as a self-styled politician of the pragmatic center, which often took him across party boundaries.
Lieberman’s first years in Connecticut Democratic politics as a state legislator and then state attorney general were reasonably conventional. He was known for a particular interest in civil rights and environmental protection, and his identity as an observant Orthodox Jew also drew attention. But in 1988, the Democrat used unconventional tactics in his challenge to Republican U.S. senator Lowell Weicker. Lieberman positioned himself to the incumbent’s right on selected issues, like Ronald Reagan’s military operations against Libya and Grenada. He also capitalized on longtime conservative resentment of his moderate opponent, winning prized endorsements from William F. and James Buckley, icons of the right. Lieberman won the race narrowly in an upset.
Almost immediately, Senator Lieberman became closely associated with the Democratic Leadership Council. The group of mostly moderate elected officials focused on restoring the national political viability of a party that had lost five of the six previous presidential elections; it soon produced a president in Bill Clinton. Lieberman became probably the most systematically pro-Clinton (or in the parlance of the time, “New Democrat”) member of Congress. This gave his 1998 Senate speech condemning the then-president’s behavior in the Monica Lewinsky scandal as “immoral” and “harmful” a special bite. He probably did Clinton a favor by setting the table for a reprimand that fell short of impeachment and removal, but without question, the narrative was born of Lieberman being disloyal to his party.
Perhaps it was his public scolding of Clinton that convinced Al Gore, who was struggling to separate himself from his boss’s misconduct, to lift Lieberman to the summit of his career. Gore tapped the senator to be his running mate in the 2000 election, making him the first Jewish vice-presidential candidate of a major party. He was by all accounts a disciplined and loyal running mate, at least until that moment during the Florida recount saga when he publicly disclaimed interest in challenging late-arriving overseas military ballots against the advice of the Gore campaign. You could argue plausibly that the ticket would have never been in a position to potentially win the state without Lieberman’s appeal in South Florida to Jewish voters thrilled by his nomination to become vice-president. But many Democrats bitter about the loss blamed Lieberman.
As one of the leaders of the “Clintonian” wing of his party, Lieberman was an early front-runner for the 2004 presidential nomination. A longtime supporter of efforts to topple Saddam Hussein, Lieberman had voted to authorize the 2003 invasion of Iraq, like his campaign rivals John Kerry and John Edwards and other notable senators including Hillary Clinton. Unlike most other Democrats, though, Lieberman did not back off this position when the Iraq War became a deadly quagmire. Ill-aligned with his party to an extent he did not seem to perceive, his presidential campaign quickly flamed out, but not before he gained enduring mockery for claiming “Joe-mentum” from a fifth-place finish in New Hampshire.
Returning to the Senate, Lieberman continued his increasingly lonely support for the Iraq War (alongside other heresies to liberalism, such as his support for private-school education vouchers in the District of Columbia). In 2006, Lieberman drew a wealthy primary challenger, Ned Lamont, who soon had a large antiwar following in Connecticut and nationally. As the campaign grew heated, President George W. Bush gave his Democratic war ally a deadly gift by embracing him and kissing his cheek after the State of the Union Address. This moment, memorialized as “The Kiss,” became central to the Lamont campaign’s claim that Lieberman had left his party behind, and the challenger narrowly won the primary. However, Lieberman ran against him in the general election as an independent, with significant back-channel encouragement from the Bush White House (which helped prevent any strong Republican candidacy). Lieberman won a fourth and final term in the Senate with mostly GOP and independent votes. He was publicly endorsed by Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani, among others from what had been the enemy camp.
The 2006 repudiation by his party appeared to break something in Lieberman. This once-happiest of happy political warriors, incapable of holding a grudge, seemed bitter, or at the very least gravely offended, even as he remained in the Senate Democratic Caucus (albeit as formally independent). When his old friend and Iraq War ally John McCain ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008, Lieberman committed a partisan sin by endorsing him. His positioning between the two parties, however, still cost him dearly: McCain wanted to choose him as his running mate, before the Arizonan’s staff convinced him that Lieberman’s longtime pro-choice views and support for LGBTQ rights would lead to a convention revolt. The GOP nominee instead went with a different “high-risk, high-reward” choice: Sarah Palin.
After Barack Obama’s victory over Lieberman’s candidate, the new Democratic president needed every Democratic senator to enact the centerpiece of his agenda, the Affordable Care Act. He got Lieberman’s vote — but only after the senator, who represented many of the country’s major private-insurance companies, forced the elimination of the “public option” in the new system. It was a bitter pill for many progressives, who favored a more robust government role in health insurance than Obama had proposed.
By the time Lieberman chose to retire from the Senate in 2012, he was very near to being a man without a party, and he reflected that status by refusing to endorse either Obama or Mitt Romney that year. By then, he was already involved in the last great project of his political career, No Labels. He did, with some hesitation, endorse Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump in 2016. But his long odyssey away from the yoke of the Democratic Party had largely landed him in a nonpartisan limbo. Right up until his death, he was often the public face of No Labels, particularly after the group’s decision to sponsor a presidential ticket alienated many early supporters of its more quotidian efforts to encourage bipartisan “problem-solving” in Congress.
Some will view Lieberman as a victim of partisan polarization, and others as an anachronistic member of a pro-corporate, pro-war bipartisan elite who made polarization necessary. Personally, I will remember him as a politician who followed — sometimes courageously, sometimes foolishly — a path that made him blind to the singular extremism that one party has exhibited throughout the 21st century, a development he tried to ignore to his eventual marginalization. But for all his flaws, I have no doubt Joe Lieberman remained until his last breath committed to the task he often cited via the Hebrew term tikkun olam: repairing a broken world.
I am wondering how much power the media holds over the interpretation of the polls. In the article we see author James Camey showing almost insignificant number changes and attributing them to a Bush victory. It’s too bad so few people understand how a poll or percentages work. I’m not even sure my understanding is very strong. If anyone does have a firm understanding of the numbers, how they are achieved, and displayed, I would love to hear it. Thanks.
http://www.maxlogan.com/esquire.0829.htm
The above link is a nice summation of the administration by Ron Reagan. Its long but its worth the read. Its worth sharing with everyone you know too.. esp. those who support Bush.
Cheers
I have quietly read your blog for about 2 weeks.I also watched, in disgust, about an hour of the Republican convention.Lies,lies and more lies and I am ever amazed at the glazed-over look of adoration that I see on these “faith”-blind followers of our present regime. Mayor Rudy came awfully close to a cult leader’s remark when he reiterated the saying”if you’re not with us then you’re with the terrorists!”I feel nothing but contempt for him and McCain…
“To counter Republican attacks, the political-action wing of MoveOn.org launched a $3.2 million convention-week television-ad blitz yesterday — its largest buy to date,” the Wall Street Journal reports. “The ads, featuring former Bush supporters who have turned against the president, will run on cable TV in Florida, Ohio and seven other battleground states.”
I have seen these ads and they are great! They also printed them in the New York Times today. The blitz starts! Go to moveon.org and you can view the ads if you are not in a swing state.
” Kerry clearly benefits whenever the debate moves back to real issues.”
And when it comes to the debates this is where Kerry has him. He has nothing to say as his four years have been a disaster. All he can do is to slime Kerry with a bunch of lies and use Faith to devide our country..
Dagman
Is it possible that its appears as tho Kerry has slipped because of repub convention being in the air?
Could it also have been because the pollster didnt take a corresponding poll since Kerry and others gave a response to the swifters?
Maybe a combination of all the above and other issues. I think that we will know a bit more in the next two weeks but this all depends on how the repub convention goes and how much presence it creates within the media.
In the meantime, the analyses must continue
Cheers
Regardless of which polls we look at, Kerry has slipped. It looks to me as if the slippage is about 4 points across the various polls. I blame this all on the Swift Boat Liars for Fiction, but not for the obvious reasons. I suspect about half of this movement (2 points) is due to people who previously supported Kerry, but no longer do because they are influenced by the garbage. But the other 2 points are the result of the press frenzy on this issue unlike anything we have ever seen. It has sucked all the other news (economy, IRAQ) out of the news cycle just like a giant fuel air bomb sucks all the oxygen out of the air. I think the slight up tick in Bush’s numbers are simply because the bad news (and there has been plenty) about the economy and IRAQ have been completely drowned out – since the bad news has stopped – things must be getting better. Regardless of whether these ads continue, the news cycle is over. Kerry clearly benefits whenever the debate moves back to real issues.
Sky..
“he works his tail off”. You know, this is the most important realisation that you have mentioned and I share your view on this. The guys seems to be running on extra energy.. maybe solar and wind… but you are right, he seems to be working his tail off.. and its something that bothers me because I read so many other blogs where people are asking him to do more… attack more, be more aggressive.. smile more.. just do more and that makes me a tad upset..
Upset because I think that the rank and filers need to work just as hard as kerry.. I think edwards need more publicity.. I think that dem senators and congress persons need to do more… they need to work just as hard as kerry but i am not feeling that as yet..
I like that the dems are going to match dollar for dollar any donations made to the campaign.. thats a gallant effort.
But you are right.. Kerry works hard. I am also happy to know that you too have come to accept kerry’s demeanor. I remember months ago when he was just considered an ugly man. In recent months however, I have encountered numerous people who have come to your realisations also. However you are the only one who says that he works sooo hard.
I think Kerry is warming to people’s hearts. I think he is also getting some sympathetic second glances derived from the Bush sponsored campaign. I think people are now recognising that he has a passion to rescue this country from that flip-flopper george bush.
I hope milllions more will come to your realisation also.. and real soon.
Cheers
Let them have their couple of days…I just had a revelation: looking at the photo gallery on Johnkerry.com, I was struck by how MUCH I like this guy. He’s handsome, intelligent, a real hero, thoughtful, and he works his tail off. We’ve haven’t settled, we’re blessed with a great candidate. And the crowds greeting him are huge! Godspeed John Kerry.
> could it be possible that mccain has started to
> campaign for 2008? creating his platform by
> using bush?
>
> Posted by Bel at August 30, 2004 08:40 PM
That’s what TNR says. But he’d be 72, and I think that that’s a little old. But I guess that he’s the strongest person the GOP will have. Either him or Jeb.
I find it highly amusing that Republicans (and Mickey Kaus) are crowing about a few polls showing their candidate breaking into the upper 40’s. I guess we better throw in the towel, Kerry is toast.
Who wants to vote for a “urinal sticker” ?
could it be possible that mccain has started to campaign for 2008? creating his platform by using bush?
I no longer expect any quality out of McCain… a man is known by the company he keeps.
In an interview broadcasted tonight on ABC McCain called the Swift Boat Liars ads “dishonorable and dishonest”, but when asked directly if they were false talked only of fading memories and the fog of war.
So much for the Straight Talk Express.
Today on the “News hour” Jim Lehrer called McCain “de-facto running mate”. Is it a surprise that will change the course of the election?
I really cannot grip McCain.. how can this guy allow himself to be suckered in this way? Mindless to me… brainless too.
Well, John Mccain speeks tonight. What a dissapointment he is! After Bush calls his wife a drug addict and whore his child a bastard and discredits McCain’s military record he can still support this guy. He deserves a urnial sticker( “PLEASE PISS ON ME SOME MORE MR. PRESIDENT”)
So far, I am not reading anything very convincing or new in the speeches. I am only hearing a softening stance (flip-flopping) from Bush. Have to wait and see what else is in the bag.
cheers
In regards to Nader, he got a little under 3% of the popular vote in 2000. I doubt he gets more than 1% this time. So Jeff is right.
Same poll:
49% think going to war in Iraq was a mistake.
52% think America is on the wrong track.
53% think it’s time for someone else.
These are hardly anything for Bush to be crowing about.
Second, when will these idiots stop polling with Nader in the picture, given that he won’t even be on half the ballots. Including most battlegrounds where it matters.