Sunday, June 11, 2006

Lieberman may run as an indie
In previous posts, I've touched upon some of things going on in the U.S. Senate race in Connecticut where Joe Lieberman - a former presidential candidate and Gore's VP in 2000 - appears to be in trouble. The latest is that Lieberman is leaning towards running as an indie if he loses the primary: ["Senator Keeps Options Open"].
"I am not going to close out any options ..."
Boy, talk about Sore Loserman!

Unity08: I haven't really been tracking this Unity08 movement thing but I'm intrigued by it. The "people" are clearly irked by both parties. But, I'm worried about some of the rumors I have heard about the people involved in the movement not wanting to take specific positions on trade, immigration, and other important issues. What is the point of that? But then, there is this from Novak, of all people: ["Bloomberg for President?"]. Bloomberg? Bloomberg?!? Well, he is a liberal Republican and he was a Democrat before and he is worth billions and he seems to be an OK mayor so ...

Newt: Another campaign to be intrigued about is Gingrich's, who is leaning towards a run: ["Gingrich May Run in 2008 If No Front-Runner Emerges"]. In other words, he is running. There is no clear frontrunner except McCain and he doesn't count because he ran before and he has about as much chance of being the nominee as Pat Buchanan did in 1996. Gingrich is trying to reinvent himself - by not being as vicious and criticizing his own party - but the big question mark is what the moralists within the party will think about a guy who dumped his first wife on her death bed and dumped his second wife for a twinkie intern. Lesser sexual activity by President Clinton killed Al Gore's campaign. What will it do to Gingrich in a nasty, bloody, 10-way GOP primary?


Anonymous said...

Could we please come up with a system where we can distinguish "independent" candidates who can't get the support of their party (i.e., Lieberman) and independent candidates who don't want the support of the GOP/Dems (i.e., people I might actually vote for)? And while I'm fixing things, could I please not have to be called Unenrolled just because I am not a member of either of those parties? I am a registered voter and I bloody well vote, and Unenrolled sounds like a lesser status -- can't we call it something like Informed Individuals? (Well, that name isn't great, either, but it's better than Unenrolled.)

Peter Brackney said...

I believe that U08 is not taking positions because it is to promote dialogue by leaders, not to indicate how they should lead. It is a very intriguing organization and I am proud to be a part of it.

I believe that other organizations and thinktanks are putting together centrist "platforms". However, U08 is not about leaving your party and your beliefs - it is about listening to the convictions of others and finding the common ground and solutions between the opposing viewpoints.

Tony said...

Suzy: I agree. If they can't label you an independent, they should at least call you a "non-party voter." Thanks for reading.

Tony said...

Peter: Thanks for reading.

I will have to take a look at them more deeply before being too judgmental.

But for me - and many other indies - we aren't a part of the two major parties because we don't like their issues or don't like their candidates. Meaning, if you want our votes, and the Unity08 folks seem to, you have to put forth candidates who stand for something. That means taking a stand on the specific issues and having some political values.

If you are an indie org, and you aren't going to take positions on the serious issues of the day, what makes you any different than any slippery, weasily, crafty evil pols of the two parties who are destroying the country? A "unity" ticket of to middle-of-the-road, centrist boobs who are afraid to stand for anything isn't going to solve jack.

Lastly, I don't have a problem with a polarized nation, with a very conservative right and a very conservative left pounding the pavement for my vote. Both super conservatives and super liberals have legitimate positions on the issues of the day - especially when compared to centrist and moderate Democrats and Republicans who are bought and paid for by multinational corporations.

Tony said...

For whatever reason, this comment didn't post even though I cleared it. It's pretty funny:

Join the club! You're not a real independent until you've been banned by Ko$. Now you can get the graphic!

Posted by AlanSmithee to Politizine at 6/12/2006 01:19:03 PM