John Kerry vs. Joe Lieberman
This Connecticut senate race is really getting interesting. Yesterday,
John Kerry declined to endorse Joe Lieberman in the primary. Kerry "generally does not get involved in primaries," according to a spokesman of his.
Why does this matter? Well, previously Democrats such as Hillary Clinton have said that they supported Lieberman in the primary against
challenger Ned Lamont, but then, tellingly, have said that they would support whatever Democrat wins the primary.
That's damaging to Lieberman, who has said he'll run as an independent if he loses the primary. But it's not a huge shock: The party needs to rally its troops, and can't risk losing a Senate seat by supporting an independent when there's a Democrat in the race.
Moreover, Hillary is probably worried that the same anti-war forces which have turned on Lieberman will hurt her in 2008, and wants to ease their anger by qualifying her support for Lieberman.
But Kerry is the first Senate Democrat who won't even go so far as to endorse Lieberman in the primary. In the clubby world of the Senate, that's highly unusual, and quite pointed. It, too, could be a sign of presidential aspirations, a way of building support from the party's base by distancing oneself from a senator who is not loved by liberal activists.
I love this race, I must say: Politics is enormous fun when campaigns are closely contested and there are stark differences between the candidates. Because the main issue here is the war in Iraq, the Globe calls the fight
a battle "over Democrats' souls." That's a little hyperbolic—I still say that Lieberman's personality has grown irksome over the years, and in a small state like my home state of Connecticut, that matters—but if it's a fight over the party's soul, bring it on. Pundits say this will damage Democrats, who need to appear unified to take back Bush. Maybe. But the country isn't exactly unified on the war, either, at least in terms of what to do now. Most of us, however, do believe that
starting the war was a mistake, and I think that's a position that Democrats can take and win with.
Meanwhile, the Globe prints two quotes from each candidate, and the differences are telling:
``George Bush and the Iraq war are not very popular among Democrats -- have you noticed?" Lieberman said on Monday. ``It doesn't take a lot of courage to run [Lamont's] kind of campaign."
And this:
Lieberman ``is undermining the Democrats who are trying to present a constructive alternative to what President Bush is doing," Lamont said Tuesday. ``He's too reluctant to challenge President Bush. You've got a Republican House, a Republican Senate, a Republican judiciary, a Republican executive -- I think you need a constructive opposition to that in Washington."
It's just two quotes, true. But Lamont makes a reasonable point, while Lieberman sounds defensive and a little nasty; he's essentially calling Lamong a coward.
Joe Lieberman has always gone dirty when he's losing. Watch for him to do it again.
