A Bad Sign For Connecticut Independent Senator Joe Lieberman

President Elect Barack Obama has signaled that his desire for an olive branch to be extended to onetime Democratic and present Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman as Lieberman faces a vote tomorrow by Senate Democrats to decide his partisan political fate. Will he continue to caucus with the Democrats or not — and will he continue to hold an important chairmanship or be stripped of it?

At issue is his conduct during Campaign 2008 when he not only campaigned for his close friend Republican Sen. John McCain in McCain’s losing bid for President but went along with and in some cases repeated Republican suggestions that Obama was soft on terrorism, didn’t really care if the troops lost in Iraq — and a host of other allegations.

Dick Polman recaps the controversy swirling around Lieberman here and concludes:

Actually, he did more than cross the line. He stayed silent as the Republican running mates recited lies virtually every day about Obama’s proposals (notably on taxes), and sometimes he personally fanned the flames. When asked last April 14 whether Obama is “a Marxist, as (conservative commentator) Bill Kristol says might be the case,” Lieberman replied: “Well, you know, I must say that’s a good question.” On Oct. 23, Lieberman said that Obama wants to practice “what used to be known as socialist theory.” At another point in the campaign, Lieberman declared that, while McCain always put “country first,” Obama did not.

And, during his GOP convention speech, Lieberman recited the standard GOP line about how the Democratic candidate is a military wimp who doesn’t care about the troops. The key passage: “When others wanted to retreat in defeat from the field of battle, which would’ve been a disaster for the U.S.A. — when colleagues like Barack Obama were voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield — John McCain had the courage to stand against the tide of public opinion…”

….The bottom line: Lieberman is a special case. He has set himself up to be seriously disciplined by the Democrats, just as three southern House Democrats were stripped of their seniority during the ’60s when they actively worked against the party’s presidential nominees. Precedent, in other words, dictates that the Senate Democrats take some kind of action, if only to demonstrate to their grassroots supporters that the party stands for something, that multiple acts of betrayal should not be countenanced.

But isn’t Lieberman being supported by centrist Democrats including some who pushed for him for President in 2004, before he left the Demmie party?

Actually, Lieberman goes to tomorrow’s vote facing an ominous sign — THIS ONE…that indicates some votes he thought he might have…he might not have.

Most likely outcome: Lieberman will probably be allowed to continue caucusing with the Democrats (as per Obama’s wishes) but will lose his chairmanship as a consequence. He could be allowed to retain it, but there will be backlash from the party base if he does. If he loses the chairmanship he will then have to decide whether he wants to move closer to the Republicans — not a popular party in Connecticut right now. And Lieberman enemy site Daily Kos has a poll indicating Lieberman’s numbers are falling in Connecticut.