Lieberman's constant presence at McCain's side fuels speculation that he would join a McCain administration. Yet he already has talked with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid about his future in the caucus.
Would Lieberman, 66, a four-term Connecticut senator, be stripped of his committee chairmanship and seniority if Democrats no longer had to rely on a self-described "Independent Democrat" for their one-vote majority?
"I can tell you Sen. Reid had talked to me a few times and said he knows there will be talk if we get more than 51 Democrats next year," Lieberman said. "As far as he is concerned, I will retain my seniority, etc., no matter how many Democrats there are next year."
Reid's spokesman, Jim Manley, confirmed Lieberman's account.
After being asked by Collins for his support, Lieberman announced in April that he would endorse her. He has since raised money for her campaign in Hartford, Conn., and in Washington, D.C., and has contributed $10,000 from his political action committee.
Lieberman said he hopes his endorsement doesn't backfire and that it helps Collins' campaign.
"I'm disappointed to become such a target from liberal Democrats," he said. "Sometimes in our politics today, partisanship overcomes friendship, and that's a value that I don't respect."
Joe, Joe, Joe. The only two candidates that you have thrown your support behind are both Republicans and you are disappointed that you are a target from Democrats? Well, let me inform you Joe that I don't respect many of your values. And any time anyone disagrees with you then it's called partisan.
Others suggest that the endorsement could backfire by generating more support for Allen from liberal Democrats who use the Internet to organize and raise money, and who regard Lieberman as a pariah because of his advocacy of the war in Iraq.
"Nobody fires up the Netroots more than Joe Lieberman, not even President Bush," said Amy Walter, editor of the political newsletter The Hotline.
Well value this Joe. I will work hard against Collins. I do not respect you or her. Period.
Several years ago, many of us in Connecticut started to see Joe Lieberman for who he really is, and isn't. When Ned Lamont joined the cause (with his warchest and devoted talent like Tom Swan) we were able to bring the message of truth about Joe to a national audience. At first we were derided as lefty wingnuts, taking out our hatred of G.W. Bush and the Iraq War on his innocent friend, Joe Lieberman - who other than his stance on the war, we were told, was supposedly still a good Democrat. Lamont and his supporters were opposed by many many Democrats in CT and nationally, including Presidential candidates Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton (and her husband.)
With time, persistence, and $20 million of Neds cash, the message finally got through to enough CT Dems that we voted Joe out of the party in August 2006. You would have thought this would have been enough to convince the national leadership that Joe was no longer one of us, and it was time for them to support the new guy - and that it was about more than "just the war."
Immediately after the primary, our DC bigwigs were supposed to convince Joe to drop his independent bid and retire gracefully. When Joe protested, they immediately backed off, unwilling to put any force behind their request (like threatening to take away his committee positions.) The fact is, the very idea of Ned Lamont was a threat to the whole lot of them. If we could shove a longtime incumbent and former VP candidate out the door, any one of them could be next. So, a few feigned support for the actual Democratic candidate, while secretly hoping for a CT for Lieberman victory.
The November election just emboldened Joe with his newfound independence, and he returned to DC even more determined to throw fellow Dems under the bus. Yet still, our leadership refused to wake up and smell the coffee.
MLN is powered by