Sunday, July 30, 2006

"I used to be against Joe"

The Nation has a good article on CT-Sen (D) in this week's magazine and online (I warn my conservative friends that the article has a progressive slant). Go check it out.

The paragraph that spells trouble for Senator Lieberman on August 8th:

Lamont's confidence about his ability to win more than just antiwar protest votes is well founded. It's common on the Connecticut campaign trail to run into Democratic voters like Harriet Scureman. "I used to be against Joe, because of the war and a bunch of other issues," says Scureman, a retired Xerox employee from Norwalk. "But as the campaign's gone on, I've realized I'm for Ned Lamont. You can't meet him, listen to him, and not come to the conclusion that he would be a great senator." If a majority of Connecticut voters reach the same conclusion in August and again in November, it will not merely be a defeat for a single centrist senator who supports the war. It will also be a win for a new Democratic mindset, one that displays the energy, enthusiasm and vision that the party will need if it intends to lead the country out of the wilderness of the Bush years.


(emphasis added)

Source:
John Nichols, A Fight for the Party's Soul, The Nation, August 14, 2006.

23 comments:

GMR said...

If Ned Lamont gets elected to the Senate, he's going to be a very liberal Senator. I think only Sanders, the Socialist who looks like the clear favorite to be elected in Vermont, will be more left-wing. Lamont will certainly have many of the national left-leaning groups supporting him.

Lieberman has a liberal voting record, but he has on occasion worked with Republicans. He's a gang of 14 member, for instance.

On the Republican side, a primary challenge to Lincoln Chafee is underway. He's the most liberal Republican, and if he loses the primary, that seat will flip to the Democrats. If he wins the primary, that seat still is likely to go Democrat. Chafee is also a member of the Gang of 14.

It seems as if the Senate will be even more partisan. Lieberman has been criticized for voting against the Alito filibuster. However, had the Dems staged a filibuster, the Republicans would almsot certainly have invoked the nuclear option. There's no way that they would have allowed a new rule to take effect requiring 60 votes for Supreme Court justices.

I used to think Lieberman would cruise to victory in the general even if he lost the Primary. I'm still inclined to think that, but man, he's been running about the most inept campaign I've ever seen. That mule flyer: what in God's name was he thinking?

Gabe said...

GMR - Feingold would have to be up there in terms of the liberalness of senators. Also, Sherrod Brown if he wins in Ohio.

As to your last point, I agree completely - I can't believe how bad this campaign has been. They created this situation; Lamont could have been headed off months ago and they would have won the primary 80-20...

Anonymous said...

is there any credible explanation for Lieberman hiring Sean Smith?

I mean, would you really need to go to California to find a guy to run your career into the ground?

BRubenstein said...

Sorry fella's....Lamont wouldnt have been " headed off" and if he didnt run i know of 3 others that would have....you both have miscalculated the depth and intensity of the anger of demcrats against Joe for being a lap dog of Bush on so many key issues.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said... ...
would you really need to go to California to find a guy to run your career into the ground?



Dick Foley was already busy.

Gabe said...

BR - Lamont or any of the three guys you mention would be losing 80-20 had the Lieberman campaign not been so very very bad at campaigning. They have stoked this fire. And for that, I say thank you.

Anonymous said...

Lamont's latest internal polling has him up by 17%....

Lieberman better be getting those signatures...

Genghis Conn said...

Polling's gone nuts this weekend. My wife the registered Democrat got two (TWO!) polls in the same day! Both from shadowy sources who didn't identify themselves. We're pretty sure one was the Malloy campaign. The other just said, when she asked, that "Uh, this is a Democratic survey" and moved on.

17%? That's a severe beating, if true. We'll wait and see.

ctblogger said...

GC,

If you have the caller ID, email me.

TrueBlueCT said...

GMR--

Simple question for you. If you're saying that Ned Lamont will be a far-left Senator, and Lieberman is sending out flyers about Ned, with pictures of elephants and accusations of siding with Republicans, -- well, who is the Liar??

TrueBlueCT said...

Genghis--

I for one am glad that you are going to endorse Senate and Gov candidates. It will be good to know where you stand, personally, on these important races.

The news I want to hear is that you've joined our Dem Party for a week or two. If these races are important enough for you to endorse, they also deserve your participation as a CT voter.

Honestly, affiliating with the Party doesn't mean you are a Democrat. (just ask Ray Hackett). All it means is that you want to have a say....

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

BRube sez:

Sorry fella's....Lamont wouldnt have been " headed off" and if he didnt run i know of 3 others that would have....you both have miscalculated the depth and intensity of the anger of demcrats against Joe for being a lap dog of Bush on so many key issues.

The miscalculation was running Lieberman against Weicker in 1988. He was a conservative then. All of you good liberals joined in with Bill Buckley to hand Joe the seat for 18 years. You make it sound like he changed during the last 6. He was always an Al From DLC-guy. Why the sudden "depth and intensity" to get Joe? Was the moral imperative just not there before when you were all voting for him for Veep? BRube, you guys built Joe- and he may be too big a monster to slay...

Beware any polling done on the weekends, especially in the summer. That's a polling no-no. No self-respecting professional would poll on the weekend- you were probably being called by Joe or Ned.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

GMR,

I sympathize with most of what you say- but I just don't really think we can project what Nedley would do in the Senate.

The War is basically It- it's the issue for him. When It fades (and it will in the next 12-24 months), Ned would have rediscover his center of gravity. He is a business guy- the question is, would he let his intelligence (and true knowledge of economic issues) supercede his partisanship. Did he become too wealthy to forget the challenges of the small business guy?

An analogy- the Nader's Raiders came in on Watergate (and Vietnam, somewhat)- the Moffitteers, if you will. A good number of those guys fell through the pillow cushions when the memory faded.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Predictions, as I will be having a minor procedure and won't be able to type for a few days. In case I don't make it back for the 8th

Lamont 54
Joe 46

Dem turnout in the low 30s.

JDS 51
Malloy 49

JDS wins b/c progressives are more familiar with him- and the Nedhead effect will work in his favor. He should not confuse it with running a competent campaign. Nor is it a referendum on Stamford versus New Haven- but I do think that you'll find that the Dems who vote will come in heavily in the New Haven area.

Then, we are set up for the 3 way.

Ned and Joe will start off polling even- and then suddenly, the rest of the voters will start to realize that Ned is tooooo left for them- that he would be the biggest lib that many of them have ever voted for in a statewide. Joe will pull away- and eventually get 40-42%.

Rell will win 56-44%.

See ya after they patch me up. Not a big deal. The lesson is not to become the FatGuy.

TrueBlueCT said...

Wow, Lieberman/Lamont diaries are one, two and three on the dKos Reco List.

Excuse me, Mr. Lieberman? by Michael Schiavo.

The Compassion of Ned Lamont - Firsthand.

The 'anti-war left' wants to dump Joe. So do a lot of other Americans.

matt said...

FatGuyinMiddleSeat - a lot of polls are conducted at least partially on the weekend, I know the last CT-Sen Q-Poll ran over the weekend.

As I understand, once you get your random sample selected, you pursue that list pretty rigorously (day, evening, weekend, etc) until as many as possible are contacted. Is this way off base?

Anonymous said...

Michael Schiavo mr opportunist Anything to make money or get publicity off his wife's passing what a horse's ass he is.

Anonymous said...

It's telling that despite the claim Lamont is more than an anti war candidate he has gone back to running anti-Bush ads on TV instead of fluffy feel good ads.

Well after 18 years on the outs maybe the self righteous of the back country can once again project their superior sense of moral indignation in the US Senate

Mr. Reality said...

I read it and it seemed to have a liberal slant. Gabe are you another one of those liberals that are afraid to call yourself what you really are?

I don't care if you are liberal I just think it's funny that so many of you want to change your identity. It's almost as if you are emabarrassed to be called a liberal so you have to call yourself a Progressive!!

Hopewellian_Magi said...

I predict that if Lamont wins by 8 pts or more in the Dem Primary, Lieberman will be pressured strongly to drop his Indy bid. Lieberman already knows that he will lose the Dem infrastrucutre support and it will work against him in the GE. The Dem gubernatorial and Congressional candidates will definitely want Lieberman out of the GE race because Lieberman and Lamont will continue to suck up the Media spotlight.

A Dem ticket united behind Ned Lamont will present a formidable anti-Iraq war/anti-Bush ticket against the Republicans. Bush is in the hight 20's and most CT voters, Indys and Democrats, oppose the Iraq War. This will help drive the 3 Congressional Republicans out of their seats. If Lieberman is at the head of the November ticket, the 3 Congressional Republicans will eked out a win, although I think Rep Simmons will lose narrowly to Courtney anyway.

The gubernatorial race looks like a Rell landslide, but after the primary it will be interesting to see what the Dem gubernatorial primary winner's strategy will be against Rell and vice-versa. If Lieberman is in the 3-way senate race, it will take much of the spotlight off of this race, which will help Rell. If Lieberman retires from an Indy bid, then it would help the Dem gubernatorial candidate present a strong case against Rell, and the Dem gubernatorial candidate needs to attack Rell's poor stewardship of the state of CT. No timidity is allowed.

FatGuyonWaytoHospital said...

matt,

weekends are tricky- if they are being used by pros, it's because it's so close to the election that there's no alternative.

you still don't know who's likely to be home, who's most likely to answer the phone, who's on vacation. we have a pretty good idea of all that, say, during the first week of October.

Weekends in late July are a total wildcard. In fact, polling of close races is becoming a more difficult science (see e.g., VNS, the crash of Zogby)

When I did commercial market research before Do Not Call, we never called on weekends and avoided late July to Labor Day. And the Holidays.

Gabe said...

Mr. Reality - I'm not really sure how to respond to that. How about this: The amount of time I spend worrying what the right thinks about the label I use to describe myself is considerably less than the amount that it took to write this comment. I don't care if we call it pie and ice cream, so long as we work to convince people to vote for it. Why do you think you are so concerned?

JoanBasil said...

What do "Liberal" and "Conservative" mean when the "conservative" position is to phase out Social Security in favor of a scheme that could turn into another "S & L" disaster (the savings and loan scandal of the late 80's where financial operators ripped off the federal deposit insurance)?

That Social Security issue was the epitome of how much Lieberman hurts the Democratic Party. For the sake of getting himself attention, getting himself into the mix, he would have handed Bush and the Republicans a victory, even though it was bad policy and even though the American public overwhelmingly opposed it.