Well, I've never been real impressed with Jeffords. He was a loyal Reaganite all throughout the 1980s, and suddenly in 2000 he decided that the Republicans were too "extreme?" Whatever. It was awfully convienient that party-switching got him a committee chairmanship, wasn't it?

Still. Do you have some sort of info that he's thinking of rejoining the Republicans?

Yes, on yesterday's Special Report it was in the Grapevine segment that Jeffords was putting feelers out to the GOP to see if he would get a cozy reception.

Cool. I found the link for that, and went ahead and updated the main article so folks could find it. Here is is again:

Special Report Grapevine for 11/22/2002.

I'm not sure I would agree that Jeffords is the biggest loser in the Senate. I think that honor probably goes to Frank Lautenberg. After all, he left the Senate because he was tiring of being in the minority, and now he's going to be the Junior Senator in the minority, and with a Republican President instead of a Democrat President.

What are the odds that he serves out his 6 years? %-)

re: Jeffords

don't believe everything you read in the funny papers.

My assumption is that his enemies want to destroy this guy once and for all...I'm just saying, you know?

Well. His credibility will surely be shot if he tries snuggling back up with the Republicans. But with a still very tight margin in the Senate, getting Jeffords back would have its strategic advantages for Republicans.

It's all a matter of trust, and I'm not sure who'll want him. Will the Democrats still want him enough to give him one of their ranking seats? Especially if he still continues to refuse to outright join them? Will Republicans trust him enough to bring him back?

He's in a pretty lousy position, unless he's content to be the "voice crying in the wilderness," or however he fancies himself.

>>"America's biggest loser is sniffing around the Republicans."

Errrr, no Americas biggest loser is doing press for his new book (rumour has it that he and Tipper did a book signing and no one showed up) and teasing that he might run for President in 2004.

>>"My assumption is that his enemies want to destroy this guy once and for all...I'm just saying, you know?"

Heinlein defined an "honest politician" as one who stays bought. There have been MANY rumours over the past few days of Jeffords trying to crawl back to the Republicans only to be rebuffed. Where there is smoke, there is a good chance there is fire. BUT, this rumour is not needed to ruin Jeffords. He is gone in the next election anyway. Democrats don't care for him and Republicans hate him. If the Dems were still in power, he would have a chance, with them out, he probably won't even bother to stand for re-election.

Closeness of the numbers nonwithstanding, the GOP cannot give Jeffords the time of day. They will have to settle for fighting and winning in Louisiana, and then strategizing to extend their lead in '04. Sans Jeffords, the lost boy.

Jeffords needs to be punished, not just to be punitive, but por encourage les outres. Not only did he not have the class to declare prior to the election and then run as a Democrat (like Phil Gramm), but he knowingly did what he did to switch the Senate and deny the GOP the leadership posts in Congress. It was a blatant and outrageous power play on his part. Roll the dice that big, they better come up sevens, bucko. Didn't happen. Snake eyes. Time to pay the House, Jeffords. Life's a bitch. But look to Bill Clinton if you someone to "feel your pain". The GOP ain't interested.

Just read Jeffords' op-ed piece in the NYT.

Look, let's get one thing straight: I personally don't care much about the guy, nor am I proud of what he did. Nor am I ashamed either.

It's just politics, you know?

But contrary to the conventional wisdom espoused above, he sure doesn't sound like someone who's hoping that the GOP will take him back. Nor does he sound remotely chastised. Nor does he sound particularly worried about punishment or retribution from the GOP.

Like I said before, don't believe everything you read in the funny papers.

C'mon, begrudging a guy a little party swapping? I think a guy named Reagan (who greatly admired FDR and many of his ideas and policies) changed parties once, albeit not in midstream, but he did go to the side that would indeed butter his bread. I thought it was a bold move on Jeffords' part.

You people throw around words like "loser" and "traitor" carelessly, but what the hell have you ever done? You haven't put yourself out there for public scrutiny....you only add to the public disgust in modern political dialog.

Isn't it nice to sit up in your little world as a barstool philosophical genius rattling on about our "obese" federal government and how we've got to get government out of business....you know, intelligent people can be so blinded and naive....thanks to all the Reaganites for proving my point time and time again....trickle down this!!!

Tim

Uhm. Tim. You were the only one who used the word "traitor" here that I can see.

I have about 450 people a day visiting here. It's not the world's biggest audience, but I'm willing to put my name and myself out there.

I don't have a problem with Jeffords, except that I have a hard time believing he swapped parties for ideological reasons, purely based on his record, his method, his timing, and the benefits he accrued to himself thereby.

I'm also terribly unimpressed with the paint-by-numbers and rather shallow analysis he published in the NYT, since so much of it is so debateable. Who cares how much federal funding there is for education? The states fund education, not the Feds! Also, folks on the Left claiming to be "moderates" were as vicious on George H.W.'s "horrible" environmental record as they are today. In the meantime, even The New Republic has admitted that George W.'s environmental record is actually quite good.

But you know, whatever.

By the way, Bill Clinton spent his entire presidency nurturing the same trickle-down economics you say you despise. Even expanded 'em in some important areas.

[shrug]

You people throw around words like "loser" and "traitor" carelessly, but what the hell have you ever done? You haven't put yourself out there for public scrutiny....you only add to the public disgust in modern political dialog.

You wanna know what I've done. I worked on every presidential campaign starting with Bill Clinton. I've helped in my local area with state elections and federal. Finally, I ran for election as a delegate and won. I am a sitting delegate for my district. I am putting myself out there for public scrutiny and standing up for what I believe constantly.

Posting articles and running this blog make Dean and I targets for every asshole with a grudge to bear. You think that you didn't just publicly scrutinze Dean and I with your post. I mean you missed some serious irony with your own little rant there didn't you?

BTW, Jeffords ran for re-election with Bush actively campaigning for him, taking republican money and making promises that he knew he was not gonna keep. He betrayed the very republicans and independents that elected him in the first place.

If he had been an honorable man he would have changed parties before election season and run as an independent. Like Phil Gramm did when he switched.

Ara,

I don't believe anything I read in the NYT anymore than I believe the National Enquirer.