Trish Regan: "Ned Lamont has used this now infamous kiss to his advantage on campaign buttons and television ads, suggesting Lieberman is just too cozy with the president."
Infamous is a strong word. Perhaps Lieberman being embraced by President Bush at the 2005 State of the Union Address may be infamous to the far left, but I highly doubt mainstream America views two former rivals of differing political parties hugging as an infamous act.
Senator Lieberman’s opponent, Ned Lamont, is described by Regan as:
"…a political novice with deep pockets who's now the frontrunner thanks to one issue, the war in Iraq."
Seems Mr. Lamont’s money has enabled him to exploit the vitriolic hatred the far left has for President Bush and the war on terrorism, including the war in Iraq, and that’s what has made him a contender, that and nothing more.
In fact "Early Show" co-host Julie Chen mentioned the importance the war in Iraq is playing in this race and how it could impact the November elections as she introduced Miss Regan’s piece:
Julie Chen: "It's a race that draws on voter anger over the war in Iraq and could offer insight into how Americans will vote in November."
Exactly which voters are angered by the war in Iraq? That is, which voters are going to cast votes for candidates based solely on the war? Could it be the fringe left? Secondly, this primary may predict how liberal democrats will vote in November, but that is not necessarily representative of the American people.
Finally, Ms. Regan opined on the implications a Lieberman loss would have on Democrats:
Regan: "If Lieberman loses this election, it has pretty broad implications for the Democratic party nationwide. It could mean that Democratic candidates will come out very strongly against the war. They may feel that they need to do that in order to mobilize their base and win the midterm elections this fall. "
However, Miss Regan stops short of predicting that in order to placate the base, the Democrats may move too far to the extreme and alienate independents and moderates. Yet, this is not something CBS had a problem with during the 2000 and 2004 Presidential campaigns when they often wondered if President Bush was moving too far to the right and risked alienating these more middle of the road voters.
However, Regan is correct on one account. If Lieberman loses it will have broad implications. Lieberman is a liberal. He has a lifetime rating of 70 with Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), which is the exact same lifetime rating as Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid. In contrast, Lieberman has a lifetime American Conservative Union (ACU) rating of 17 which is lower than that of the leader of the Senate Democrats, Mr. Reid. A loss by Senator Lieberman today sends the message that it doesn’t matter how reliably liberal you are on most issues, if you stand up for national security and take a stand to make America a safer place, the fringe elements of the Democratic party will ensure there is no room in their party for you.
