Lieberman Perspectives

John McIntyre, Real Clear Politics

“Democrats lost the 2004 presidential election over leadership on national security. Last night's win by anti-war Ned Lamont over pro-war Joe Lieberman, while joyous for the far-left netroots crowd, is a bad harbinger for future Democratic Party prospects nationally in 2008 and beyond…

…Nationally, the images from last night are a disaster for the Democratic Party. Perched behind Lamont during his victory speech were the Reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, grinning ear to ear, serenaded by the chant of "Bring Them Home, Bring Them Home." For a party that has a profound public relations and substantive problem on national security, these are not exactly the images you want broadcast to the nation.

Anti-war Democrats and much of the mainstream media continue to confuse anti-war with anti-lose. The incessant commentary that 2/3rd of the country is against the war completely misreads the American public, as much of the negativity towards the war isn't because we are fighting, but rather a growing feeling that we are not fighting to win or not fighting smart.

Democrats went down this road in the late 1960's with Vietnam and they are still carrying the baggage from that leftward turn. Lamont's win is a big step back to that losing formula…in the long run the real victim will be the Democratic Party if they continue to purge the few remaining FDR/Truman/Scoop Jackson Democrats from their ranks.”

Dick Morris, New York Post

“Reports of Joe Lieberman's political death are (as Mark Twain once said of rumors of his own demise) "premature and grossly exaggerated." Lieberman has lost a battle, but he can still win the war running as an independent…

…Freed of the confines of the Democratic primary, Lieberman can now appeal to independents, Republicans and mainstream Democrats who were not sufficiently motivated to participate in the primary, he can win.

…Lieberman's primary defeat sends a message to all presidential contenders, particularly Sen. Hillary Clinton, that they have to move to the left on the war or be buried by the party's increasingly radical and leftist base….”

Hartford Courant

Make no mistake, The Courant's editorial board endorsed Mr. Lieberman in the primary because he built a fine record over his 18 years in the Senate. His experience and his ability to work with colleagues across the aisle are of value to his state and the nation. He has a more realistic notion than does Mr. Lamont about the timing and conditions for the United States to leave Iraq.

A majority of Democrats who voted Tuesday, however, had no patience with Mr. Lieberman's bipartisan ways and his support for the war. He may find a friendlier reception in the general election campaign if he makes good on his intention to run an independent candidacy.

The Dallas Morning News

"...Mr. Lieberman lost for one reason: his support for the war in Iraq and President Bush's leadership.

Because of that, liberals will be tempted to draw from the Connecticut result national lessons about the depth of the anti-war vote this election year.

They shouldn't. For one thing, party primaries always bring out the most committed partisans. That a majority of Democratic primary voters in a blue Northeastern state prefer the peace candidate is no bellwether for the rest of the country.

Besides, polls indicate that if Mr. Lieberman makes good on his promise to run this fall as an independent, he'll win the general election. If that happens, the Democrats will lose a seat in the Senate. Advantage: GOP...."

Michael Goodwin, NY Daily News

“…So now that the wackadoo wing of the party has a bloody scalp, what are they going to do with it? Wave it at Islamic terrorists in Iraq and Lebanon and Afghanistan and Indonesia and Great Britain and Spain and Israel and New York and declare peace? That will work for sure. They better also wear armor and duck.

Lieberman is the first casualty of the war against the war on terror. If last night's results are a window on the party's tilt, then a huge slice of the Democratic party is ready to sit out the war to protect America. God help us if the Republicans also get the wobblies. Let's hope the Connecticut Condition isn't contagious. And let's hope last night's decision is overturned…

…I believe that Islamic terrorists will stop at nothing in their mad quest to rule the globe. As a result, World War III has started, whether we like it or not. It will continue, whether we fight back or not. But if we think we can win by not fighting, then we're not just wrong. We're nuts. As in nutmeg.”