I have voted Democrat for the last 17 years (since I was 18) I have always been true to the Democratic Party never voted across the party line. Tonight I finaly decided that I will be walking away from the Democratic Party it has been hijacked by the far left liberals that I can't stomach anylonger.

Joe Lieberman has been a true Democrat for over 20 years he has served the party and 90% of the time voted along the party line and this is his repayment. It disgusts me that far left liberals now seem to have the megaphone because of one issue in this country.

I am happy to say I will be registering as an Independent voter and walking away from a party that supports people like Cindy Sheehan. I hope at some point the rational middle of the road Democrats will wake up and take back the party that I love so much, until then I vote Independent hell maybe even Republican.

 

Welcome to the 'Right' side.

 

and the GOP have been hijacked by the far right.


Now is the time for a 3 party system. The coin-flip system of voting has got to go. 3 or 4 parties would force ALL to be more accountable.

 

I'm not really sure why the results in CT would shock anyone. I grew up in CT and my Mom is still very politically active with the Democratic party up there. Given the CT is clearly a "blue" state, it has well established itself as politically anti-war and anti-Bush. In 2004, more than 54% of the voters chose Kerry over Bush. From what I have read and been told, this primary really only involved a single topic, the Iraq war.

Given that Joe Lieberman has supported the Democratic Party's social and fiscal ideals over 90% of the time in his voting, and given another Democratic party opponent would likely do the exact same thing on these same issues, with the exception of Iraq, the people of Connecticut voted on this single issue.

While I don't agree with the outcome, I actually have to respect the political process, in a sense. We all bitch and moan that our politicians do not represent our ideals of why we elected them, and we all wish for choices and a way to make change. In Ned Lamont, the State of CT got what it wanted, a candidate with (assumed) similar social and fiscal views to Lieberman, but was against Iraq and Bush.

From a national level, I do find it sad that the Democratic Party did not throw more support behind Lieberman. But, the party has made either bashing or ending the Iraq war much of its primary focus and to support a candidate that supports the war would only hurt its national agenda.

That's my $.02...from someone born and raised in CT...and damn happy he moved out more than ten years ago.

 

amen

 

Might want to read this. This guy was "surprised" by the bigotry of the far left. Been there for a long time.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008763

 

I have to agree with you on that one. I think extremism is pulling both parties places both of them dont really want to go. While the majority in the middle is being unheard.

 

I tend to disagree that the far right has taken over the Republican party. The President is absolutely no conservative domestically, beyond his views on abortion and the fact that he is Christian. The Republican party says what we want to hear on a lot of issues, and then falls in lockstep with the status quo that the Democrats have established over the past 40 years or so. There are ideological differences in the parties; but, the things they do in office are indistinguishable on a party basis.

I honestly think that if a Democrat had been in office over the past 2 terms, we would still be in Iraq; but, the outcry from the lefties would be much less. There wouldn't be a huge split on Capitol Hill, that gives our enemies hope for a change of policy in a few years. If we were all behind this, it wouldn't be as bad as it is now. Look at Bosnia, under Clinton, we had to bomb the Chinese Embassy to hear anything negative about that conflict. Guess what, they didn't attack us either. It's been sabotaged from the beginning. I'll never forgive the Democrats for it. I was registered Independent until the last election. I changed to Republican. After the past few years of domestic policy, I'm going Libertarian. I can't put a candidate into national office by voting that way; but, if enough people register for the party, notice will be taken.

 

I'm disgusted by the whole mess. You've either got to pick an oil loving $4.00/gallon Republican or a Environmentalist wacko Dem. I happen to think there are lots of immoral things going on both sides. I used to vote morals, but I don't even think we have THAT anymore.

 

Yeah when it comes down to it none of those people running the show no matter really what party they are in really gives a crap about the majority of us just trying to make our mortgage payments and try to put something away for emergencies.

I fought for this country and I love it, god knows its the best thing out there but somedays it just disgusts me how much party politics and special interest groups are running it all.

 

Lieberman lost because he started siding with Bush and backed the war. This November will be very interesting. What sucks is GW will be long gone and will be washing his hands of the mess he created. I just hope Castro doesn't kick the bucket while he is still president.

It disgusts me when our administration talks about the inocent civilians being killed in the Israel/Hezbollah war and it must end. What about our GIs and innocent civilians being killed in Iraq? I have zero use for those 3 arrogant SOBs...GW, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

 

Right, wrong, or indifferent, if Al Gore was elected instead of George Bush, I can't emagine we would have ever stepped foot in Iraq... If you think the progress we have made and the direction we are headed in Iraq is positive, then I can't think of anyone else to give credit to moreso then Bush. If not, then I can't think of anyone else that deserves the blame moreso either.

 

Pretty soon the Democratic party will be inundated by scientologists, treehuggers, and Hollywood star types. Oh, wait, it already has been.

 

Who can say what Al Gore would have done. He initially supported the entry into Iraq. There would have been pressure after 911 for a more active role in the middle east. What that would have entailed under Gore is anybody's guess. I maintain that the obvious campaign by the left to paint everything "George Bush" as wrong, or backward, has led to emboldening those that oppose us. Much the way running from Somalia, when things didn't go easily for us, did under Clinton.

George Bush does not deserve full credit for anything but having the ***** to initiate what needed to be done, and was long overdue. Whether it fails or succeeds, he is a big factor; but, nor more influential than public opinion, which has been swayed against him, and against the war. Most people still have no clue why this action is necessary. George Bush is important because he opened the forbidden box. Now, what was inside that box "MUST" be dealt with. He will not be around for the final act of this play; but, will be remembered, whether for good or bad, as the one who pointed us in this direction. Right or wrong is yet to be determined. If you've made up your mind already, you're not thinking for yourself.

 

What do you think people thought of Truman after he dropped the atomic bombs? What do you think people today think of his decision.

Vocal people, people opposed to the war on terror[ism] seem to feel absolutely certian that this war cannot be won.

Hindsight is 20/20.