Gambling With Your Vote

I’m watching the streaming video of the three-man debate for Connecticut Senate and I think I’ve figured out why Lieberman is ahead in the polls. Granted, this is all based on a few minutes, but it seems to me that the real Republican candidate is the race is a complete nutcase. Then again, you’d have to be even crazier to vote for Joe. The guy’s too wishy-washy to pick a side a go with it. If he’s reelected, will he support the Democrats or the Republicans? The consensus seems to be that he’ll stay a Democrat as long as he gets to keep his seniority, but if the GOP offers him a better deal, all bets are off. After all, Joe’s been cozying up to the Republicans for a while now and has refused to support any other Democrats running for election.

Why would Democrats or Republicans vote for Lieberman when they don’t know which one they’re voting for?


posted by greg on October 16, 2006 @ 10:24 am

5 comments »

  1. Why would Democrats or Republicans vote for Lieberman when they don’t know which one they’re voting for?

    Because the Noble Experiment has failed. It failed long ago. You can only have a republic when all the citizens are well informed enough to make good decisions. I am not sure that ever was the case. It certainly isn’t the case now.

    Talk of universal suffrage is all well and good, but the reality has given us two consecutive presidential elections that were close enough that a fool could get “elected” with a minimum of chicanery. This clown should not have garnered more than a few thousand votes. The fact that he appeared to win means Americans are not mature enough to be trusted with something as important as choosing our leaders.

    Comment by Biff Usually — October 16, 2006 @ 11:25 am

  2. America has a problem!

    http://www.liebermeforme.com

    JOE MUST GO!

    Comment by liebermeforme — October 16, 2006 @ 3:24 pm

  3. Enough with this ‘split vote’ gambling bullshit. Just bring in a system of preferential voting already. It’s in the interest of both major parties to do so, I don’t understand why so many places still use ‘first past the post’ to determine a winner on what are often piss-poor pluralities

    Comment by Matt of the Open Range — October 16, 2006 @ 11:44 pm

  4. The reason Republicans in my home state of CT are rallying around Lieberman has little to do with Lieberman the man. I think they’re doing it to thumb their noses at the Democrats in CT. Joe thinks he’s a unifier, when he’s really the biggest divider in CT politics. His republican mandate proves what we’ve known for some time now – Joe’s a republican in his heart, if not on paper. It’s really depressing that he’s going to win in a state where the constituents of his party don’t want him.

    Comment by FreedomByChoice — October 17, 2006 @ 6:13 am

  5. Hey,

    Lieberman is not the only stupid politician, others can be not only funny but also quite apalling.
    I found this nice little list with comments to political pundits such as Arianna Huffington, Dennis Miller, Chris Matthews and many more.

    It´s on this site:

    http://maximonline.com/slideshows/index.aspx?slideId=2626&imgCollectId=128

    Enjoy

    Comment by mr.p — November 2, 2006 @ 10:34 am

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)