so the possibilities are...

[acroyear]

1. lieberman is right and the voters want a moderate who's willing to put partisan politics aside
2. lieberman's wrong and the liberal voters in the state want more direct representation than they had in him, someone willing to take on the president
3. lieberman's wrong and partisan politics will explode - he'll split the democrat vote between the "always vote democrat" and his own supporters and the republican will take the seat.

The cynic in me is betting on #3, particularly if the (ultra-)conservatives get a rallying open vote on the table the way gay marriage worked in several other states.

it seems, people love to be discriminatory if they can do so anonymously, which is exactly how these amendment votes manage to work...

question: if he wins as an independent, is he still an independent when it comes to senate majority/minority rules, committee memberships, etc?

Comments

[katrinb.livejournal.com]

I believe Bernie Sanders, Independent Rep. from VT, "caucuses" with the Democrats, meaning that he's treated as a Democrat for purposes of committees and majority/minority rules. Might work that way for Lieberman, too.

[vvalkyri.livejournal.com]

Sadly, I agree that it's going to be 3.

I believe that independants can choose to organize the body with either party. Not sure though.

http://www.yourcongress.com/viewarticle.asp?article_id=39

seems to indicate that independants can choose which party to align with.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

if he wins as an independent, is he still an independent when it comes to senate majority/minority rules, committee memberships, etc?

Well, when he won as a democrat he certainly wasn't independent - or democratic - when it came to rules and memberships!

#3 is a real fear, but I'm hoping that #2 is actually "everyone who is fed up with the President's policies." Because I know republications - formerly pro-Bush republicans, yet - who are like "How fast can we get that man out of office?"

[johnbroadfoot.livejournal.com]

It will be #3 unless the DNC can come up with a viable candidate. The last one was a joke and I'm still amazed at how many votes he got. The one before him tried to steal the election and bungled it. Imagine what could happen with an actual runner. The last time a "moderate" Democrat was elected (TWICE, what WERE people thinking?), he turned out to be a treasonous, socialist puppet who handed us TWO new cold wars, rampant terrorism and a health care system ruined nearly beyond repair by his UNELECTED wife. Find a real candidate people! If you wont, dont bitch when the next president AND congress is Republican!

[rsteachout.livejournal.com]

In all likelihood, he'll be counted as a Dem and treated as such since he didn't betray the Party and has been a party supporter for most things. Politicians who switch parties after the election may be treated like poison by their former collegues and but can rely on their new party to come through with the pay-off for their switch. On the other hands, Jeffords -- who ditched his party but did not formally embrace the opposition party even though he caucussed with them -- only got the minimum he was promised before the switch. In fact, when one of the committees was reorganized after the Republicans had regained the Senate that Jeffords had taken from them, the Dems asked the Repubs if they were going to give one of their positions to the "independent" (i.e. Jeffords) The rebuff quickly came: "If you want him on the committee give him one of *your* positions. He's getting nothing from us." Jeffords lost a lot more than he gained. Not only did he lose committees and positions, the Dems refused to back the Milk Compact -- his signature legislation for re-election -- something the Republicans had always supported in order to keep him on their side.