Centerfield

While Kos gets some credit for getting more people involved in elections, I must agree that the POVs expressed on the website are far-left views and serve only to distance moderates from the Democratic Party. For more of the same, see the blogs on the Democratic Party website. It's a real shame that the Party cannot control the fringe and instead gives them free reign exactly where they can do the most damage.

The truth is Kos is no better than Exxon or Phillip Morris executives who spend millions in other states to elect like minded individuals, or anyone else outside of Connecticut that cares about the implications of this race.

I gotta confess I'm somewere between agnostic and skeptical on that one. For better or worse, it seems to me that Kos bases his advocacy on his belief that he has the interests of the entire country in mind. He could well be wrong about that, and he could also be wrong about the prescriptions he derives, but at least he believes that.

Kos is more and more a tiger-rider. Once you start riding the tiger (in this case the far-left "progressives") the longer you ride, the more difficult the dismount. And the tiger gets hungrier, and everything and everyone starts looking like Purina Tiger Chow.

Moose is spot-on. The more power inside the party that the far left gains, the weaker and smaller the party will become. They've worked like hell to alienate the DLC'ers.

FWIW, I saw a story today on a Hillary Clinton speech, and she seems to be concentrating on bread-and-butter middle class pocketbook issues. At lest in this speech. Leaving aside the accuracy of her rhetoric (we know mileage varies there), I think her targeting is spot on.

What matters when you are chasing votes is voter perceptions. It's a good position for a democrat to complain about the GOP messing up the economy and making it harder for little people. This leaves the GOP not just on the defensive (hey, the economy is great!) but also sounding like they are denying the perceived reality of those people who feel that things have have gotten harder for them. See, there's "the economy" which the economists count. And then there is "the economy" in the mind of each and every voter. Which is actually 100 million or more "my economy" perceptions.

I hope to do a thread on that. Perhaps tonight. "That" being the positioning chosen by Hillary in the story I saw. Seems to me she has mostly been toodling along without getting prominently caught in the crosshairs of the Kos wing on the party. How long can that last? Will Lieberman remain the lightning rod of choice? Certainly only until the 2006 cycle passes. Anyone have any thoughts on who might be the standard bearer for the Kos wing? My hope is that they get the candidate they deserve, Kerry.

Leaving aside the accuracy of her rhetoric (we know mileage varies there), I think her targeting is spot on.

I think this is spot-on, Brian. Hillary is winning me over with her focus on the bread and butter issues this week. I think the DLC's American Dream initiative is very Clintonian and an excellent spark to ignite her Presidential campaign. Inevitably, there is going to be a war between anyone associated with the DLC and the Kossites. Your remark about Kerry is exactly correct also. Shall we not forget that he basically became the nominee because he wasn't Howard Dean. They got what they deserved then and did not learn from it at all.

Joe’s problem is that Lamont can run as “Not Leiberman”, but Leiberman can’t run as Not Lamont. , because Lamont’s a tabula rasa. He can’t even make Lamont "Lowell Weiker" as in this *shudder* ad.

If Leiberman wants to pull this out, he needs to set forth a postitive agenda, tell the Dem voters what he's going to do for the next six years, not just tell the Dems "OMG! Lamont used to be a Republican!" and then turn around and tell the Reps "OMG! The moderate sky's falling if I lose this nomination!"

At least, Lamont has a
sense of humor.

Does it have any substance? No, but like I said, Lamont can get away with negative ads (or, in this case, negative negative ads) because he's a challenger in a high anger year. Leiberman can't do that. That's why Joe needs to hammer together a platform--and fast.

%^$#@. "Sense of humor" should be here.

My only question with this would be: Wouldn't you rather individuals be active in elections than corporations?

Yes. But corporations are here to stay. Next question.

Moose has an excellent post today about what a Lamont victory means for the Democratic Party:

To expand on the Moose's post, the nutroots like to vilify Joe for bashing the Democratic party for "sanctimoniously" complaining that the party disserves the nation with calls to pull out of Iraq or for whatever cause. The reality is that Joe is laying out a welcome mat for security/values voters to the Democratic party by leaving a subtext like, "I hear your complaint on these issues about my party, come join me to change this party from within." What the nutroots effectively want to do is roll up this welcome mat.

Also Matthew, could you remove the spam comments from your earlier thread.

Jean, that's an interesting contention that the incumbent really needs a platform. I usually tend to think that it's the challenger that needs ta platform more than an incumbent.

FWIW, I think Joe's platform should be identical to what Hillary is selling this week....if he focuses on middle class bread and butter issues as a way to distinguish himself from Bush and the GOP, while sticking to his guns on the war, ultimately I believe he coasts to the W.

Let's not overlook for the sake of political correctness that Hawkish Joe Lieberman is a Jewish man from from Connecticut. With Israel currently at war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, I think Joe is in a good spot to keep stressing that backing down or stepping back against islamic fundamentalism would be a serious mistake. Joe Lieberman is a wise and skilled politician who knows how to wield an iron fist concealed in a velvet glove. Ultimately, I predict he makes Lamont look like a naive fool. I agree with whoever suggested Lamont will turn out to be a Deanish flash in the pan.

And here I was, trying so hard not to note the anti-Semitism of the left netroots....

FWIW, I wasn't calling attention to Lieberman being Jewish to suggest that those who oppose him are being anti-semitic. For me, noticing that Lieberman is Jewish calls 2 points to my attention:

There are a fair number of Jewish hawks residing in Connecticut who will vote proudly for Lieberman, and turnout among such folk will be very high.

If you're anti-war but at all fair-minded, you're most likely to grant a politician a mulligan for being hawkish on islamic terrorism if he's Jewish. At least, IMO. YMMV. As a Jew, Liebermans view's on the war are about as forgivable as anyone's hawkish opinion can be to a pacifist.

My mileage doesn't vary. It's just that I am quite aware that the anti-Joe forces are mostly from the pro-Palestine anti-Israel segment of the left, where anti-semitism is rife. A major segment of the Democrat's demographic (the Jewish vote) will be lost to them if that bit of the left gains ascendancy in the party.

I think it's a given that if Lieberman loses the primary, GOP operatives will be sure to spread the message nation-wide among the Jewish community in the November run-up that it was an anti-Semitic challenge on the part of the Angry Left, and that the meme will get some traction. I've already heard it muttered by DLC types. That it may not be specifically true of the Lieberman challenge won't matter--there's enough truth to it in general that it'll stick.