Information icon.svg Our policy on articles on living people is under review. Your comments and inputs are welcome on the relevant project talkpage.

Nominations and campaigning for the RationalWiki 2020 Moderator Election is underway and will end on November 23.

Talk:Joe Lieberman

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon politics USA.svg

This United States politics related article has been assessed as SIGNIFICANTLY PROBLEMATIC in one or more ways. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Jellybrain.png
This article requires attention for the following reason(s):
  • This article has no source references!
  • Desperately needs to be updated.
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

You know, his name is joe LIEberman. 75.117.232.229 23:51, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Wakka, wakka? Researcher 23:58, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Will he become a Republican?[edit]

Yes[edit]

No[edit]

What would be the advantage, political or otherwise, of kicking him out of the Dem caucus?

// The funny thing is that it was his willingness to run as an independent that cost him the nomination.

That's not how i remember it. A newspaper owner(?) that disagreed with him on the Iraq war knocked him out of the Dem primary, so he ran as an Independent, and everybody said he was done for, but he won. Was that not true?

I think he likes being an Independent and won't change, tho on most issues i think he votes with the Dems. Mainly he differs on the Iraq policy. There are, after all, crossovers -- some Pubs oppose the war and some Dems support it. I wonder if that qualifies them as mavericks?

Did he rebuke Clinton for perjuring himself?

-- RemBeau 13:33, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

The thing is, his polling in that primary plummeted after he announced that, if he lost the primary, he'd run as an independent anyway. If he hadn't made that pledge, many believe he would have won the primary outright. Researcher 18:43, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
It may or may not be true, but that is hindsight, right? Wasn't he losing at the point that he made that pledge?
The hardcore CT Dems are strongly anti-Bush and see the war as his (they believe Gore and the Dems wouldn't have gone to war), so it seems unlikely JL would have won the primary.
Any chance you have an answer for my "advantage of kicking him out" question? Nobody else wants to answer it.
-- RemBeau 08:39, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
I think that I explain him being kicked out rather well below. I don't think there is much advantage to kicking him out, but I don't see any real downside either except as explained below. This isn't just me thinking aloud. This topic was asked of various Democratic senators after Lieberman's speech at the RNC. There answer was basically: we'll wait and see. I took that to mean: we'll see were the numbers (as below) are in January. --Edgerunner76...and a hotplate! 10:03, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

He'll be kicked out of the Democratic caucus[edit]

  • As our article states, I think there is a perception that he might to make it official. There just doesn't seem to be any benefit to his changing. I do see him getting kicked out by the Democrats. The caveat to that being if there are 58 Democratic senators + Bernie Sanders. They would then need Lieberman for filibuster-proofing. 57 or less or 59 or more Democratic senators and Lieberman is out of the caucus. --Edgerunner76...and a hotplate! 12:45, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Anti-Ron Paul[edit]

This guy is pretty much the opposite of Ron Paul, right? In other words, he's a super authoritarian, while Paul is a libertarian. Mr. Anon (talk) 21:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)