I'm not a big fan of Slate's chief political correspondent William Saletan (as opposed to their wonderful Chris Suellentrop), but he just nailed Joe Lieberman.
"I want to vote for Joe Lieberman," his piece opens. "I really do. I just want somebody else to deliver his lines."
I really, really don't want to vote for Joe Lieberman, but regardless of whether or not I do, Saletan couldn't be more right with the central argument of the piece, "Joe Lieberman needs to be played by somebody else."
Some of the evidence:
Lieberman's body language is even more incongruous. He speaks of "strength" in a faint, creaky voice. He makes a fist but never clenches it and seldom raises it above the podium. When he does swing it forward in an attempt to look forceful, his head reclines away, as though he's the one getting punched. "My campaign has a lot of energy," he asserts in a voice trailing off. "I'm standing for something," he insists as he leans on the podium. In the flattest tone imaginable, he drones that he's "stunned" by Bush's lack of preparation for postwar Iraq. He accuses Bush of "tighten[ing] the noose around working families' necks" and tries to illustrate the noose, but somehow can't manage to close the distance between his hands to less than 18 inches. He threatens to hit Bush "right up the middle" but defuses the gesture with an avuncular grin....
One big sign of trouble in a campaign is when the candidate makes his campaign strategy a centerpiece of his stump speech. Lieberman does this all the time. He tells Democratic audiences he can match Bush where Bush is strong—on defense and values—and beat Bush where Bush is weak, on the economy. That may be true. But Lieberman shouldn't have to say it. He's the candidate. His job is to be appealing, not to tell people why they should find him appealing, or why they should vote for him because some other constituency will find him appealing.
I'm not saying Lieberman is miscast as a politician. He has strengths, and those strengths worked well in previous roles. . . . Joe Lieberman is a gentle soul. I like him for that. I just don't see how it'll make him president.
It's nice to see a pundit actually grasp that there's more to a president than stands on the issues and likelihood of a labor endorsement. If you don't have the personality to carry it off, none of that other stuff makes a bit of difference.
The incredible part is all the journos who can't see this, who spent half the year writing about him as a major contender. Just how blind do you have to be?
Dutton (Penguin) in 2007. 
