Conrad & Lieberman Call It Quits

Senators Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota) and Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) have announced that they will retire at the end of this term. Big news in both cases.

Sean Trende has a typically excellent analysis of the Conrad retirement. It obviously seems to be part of the trend in this neck of the electoral woods: the resurgence of Republican dominance in national delegations where Democrats used to do pretty well in spite of largely Republican electorates and Republican domination at the state level. Trende has this:

North Dakota has always been a Republican state, but that was only because of sectional concerns. The real powerbroker in the state was the Nonpartisan League, whose platform was Populist-Socialist; this is why North Dakota has a state bank, state grain elevators, and a ban on corporate farming. Conrad and Dorgan were squarely in the NPL tradition.

Many older voters recalled this tradition; North Dakota was one of the few states in the 2004 elections where young voters voted more heavily for President Bush than did voters over 60. (President Obama barely carried 18-29 year olds). In other words, the Democratic/Progressive base in the state is dying off.

From 1987 until this year, Democrats held both the Senate and House seats from North Dakota. Now Republicans hold one Senate seat and the at large House seat. It would be silly to assume that the Republicans will win Conrad's seat when it comes open two years from now. It would be almost as silly not to expect it.

If a Republican does take Conrad's seat in 2012, and Republicans hold the house seats, that will leave only Tim Johnson. Given the balance of power in the Senate, that would be a serious blow to Democrats.

Joe Lieberman's retirement is harder to game. If Connecticut Democrats can't win back his seat in 2012, the national party will be in really big trouble. It is more useful, at this point, to reflect on what Lieberman means.

When it became clear that Senator Ross Feingold was in trouble in Wisconsin, Democrats argued that Feingold deserved reelection because he was a genuinely independent mind. They were being disingenuous. Feingold was a solid leftist. When he moved against his party, it was always a move to its left.

If Democrats really admired someone who was willing to buck the party line out of principle, they would have had at least a grudging respect for Joe Lieberman. Instead they loathed him. Emily Bazelon at Slate has a sample:

My corner of Connecticut was covered in ice today, until news broke of Sen. Joe Lieberman's impending retirement. Magically, a warm glow spread. It was a delicious feeling: the end of the reign of the politician I despise most.

Why do I loathe, loathe, loathe my 68-year-old four-term senator? My feelings are all the stronger for being fairly irrational. Lieberman's views are closer to mine than many politicians on whom I don't expend one iota of emotional energy. This, of course, is his power: He never loses his power to disappoint. Then there is the spectacle of it all: After each act of grand or petty betrayal, each time he turns on his former supporters, the Democratic Party and the Obama administration came back begging for more. Throughout the last Congress, he never let anyone forget he was the 60th vote.

There you have it. The Democrats forced Lieberman out of their party in 2006, and he won his Senate seat in spite of them. He continued to caucus with Democrats and to provide the 60^th vote they needed at critical moments, yet they loathe, loathe, loathe him. Because, unlike Feingold, he wasn't the right kind of genuinely independent mind.

Joe Lieberman was an interesting man. We won't see his like again. He did, after all, come very close to being Vice President. Therein lies a tale.

Comments

[Chris Taus]

I know that Ol’ Joe, was a turn coat during the 08 Presidencial run. He is great buds with John McCain and went around with ol’ Johnny Boy when he was stumping along with Dizzy Miss Lizzy! Jumping hoops for the the Conservative party, I am trying to imagain the sexual acts though.

[KB]

Mr. Taus. You're an aus.

[Donald Pay]

Trende forgets about 1980. The same statements then were made about ND politics when Andrews won for Senate that year---NPLers dieing off, demogragphic changes, blah, blah. Then Dorgan and Conrad won. Now, 30 years later, he's resurrected the same arguments. I don't buy it. It was just an election where incumbents got punished for the economy.

[larry kurtz]

Good eye, Doc; ya gotta wonder how many of those death threats are just hoaxes. The cascade is underway.

[Jimi]

You gotta love a politician that says to himself, "If I can Win...I'll just quit!"

I believe a "Good Riddance" is in store for the both of them!

[Jimi]

You gotta love a politician that says to himself, "If I can Win...I'll just quit!"

I believe a "Good Riddance" is in store for the both of them!

[Jimi]

Ooops! I meant "If I can't Win...I'll just quit!"

[Douglas Wiken]

I doubt anybody will miss LIEberman very much.

[William]

How confusing, aren't the Democrats decrying the harsh rhetoric and the partisan divide? They didn't seem to care for it for the past couple of years, but they sure do seem to be pretty enthusiastic about it NOW, or at least they SAY they are... What could possibly have changed their mind so quickly?

[William]

So much for Bi-partisanship...

[George Mason]

Douglas; What has Joe Lieberman lied about. He is a rational and honest liberal (a rare bird indeed). The democrats turned on him because he understood the consequences of not pursuing the war on terror (something our president in training is finally realizing). For this he received the type of vicious and dishonest attacks usually reserved for George Bush or Sarah Palin.

[A.I.]

Unlike Lieberman, Feingold never endorsed and actively campaigned for the Republican nominee for President while expecting full acceptance in his own party and a committee chairmanship. That's just one gut punch example of how Lieberman treated his caucus. There is plenty of pettiness in partisan politics to be sure, but I think Lieberman's actions were often far beyond petty and thus deserving of much of the derision cast his way.

William: I'm quite sure you can find examples of extreme rhetoric directed against Lieberman, but they will be from individuals, not elected officials.

[George Mason]

A.I., Your time frame is a little off. Lieberman did not endorse a Republican until after the democrat establishment threw him under the bus. His endorsement of McCain may have involved some revenge but if you listened to why he endorsed McCain it sounded quite principled, not that will carry any weight with liberals.
Lieberman stated that the safety and defense of our country was more important than any other issue. McCain in believed in this also and of course McCain isn't exactly a fire breathing conservative.

[KB]

As usually, my intrepid readers do most of my work for me. Whether Joe Lieberman would have endorsed John McCain had he remained a Democrat is something we cannot know. As George pointed out, he was forced out of the Democratic Party.

Democrats had every right to love Feingold and loathe Lieberman, which they obviously do. My only point was that the praise for Feingold's independence was disingenuous.

[Donald Pay]

If belief in the Constitutional limits of executive power is "left" then, yes, Feingold moved left.

[KB]

In which case, Donald, the Obama Administration proves that only the right is viable. Thanks for the concession.