I suppose Leiberman is being selfish. You could say that about any third party candidate, though. Ralph Nadar arguably gave Bush his victory over Gore (no, I'm not really interested in debating again if the election was stolen - I'm just pointing out that without Nadar in it Gore wins). Ross Perot gave Clinton the White House the first time.
Does this mean you are against third party candidates? Honestly, how many have a chance to win? Leiberman, however, has a clear chance to win. In 2000, even while running simulataneously for President, he won 63-37, about 2/3 of the vote. If he takes all that he got in this primary and adds in half the independent voters, he probably wins.
Personally, I think he's nuts to do it. If he loses, he's done politically and won't even get a cushy ambassadorship anywhere. If he wins, he's a man without a party in the Senate, meaning he has no power. I could see him winning and the dems urging him back into the fold, though.
|