Rasmussen polls are finally public. Gubernatorial, U.S. Senate (general) and U.S. Senate (primary).
Interesting show today on WTIC, looks like.
And now Nancy Johnson is questioning Schlesinger's candidacy. Still waiting for the latest round of revelations.
What else is happening?
24 comments:
It's hard to call the gubernatorial race, because of the number of voters who haven't made up their minds (50%).
In the latest Q-Poll:
17. (If candidate choice given 16) Is your mind made up, or do you think you might change your mind before the primary?
Made up 48%
Might change 51 %
For Lamont/Lieberman, the numbers are:
Made up 79%
Might change 19%
Nowhere near CT, but this is one of the funniest things I've seen in a while.
That's D likely voters, though.
Brucey- who the heck are you to question whether or how someone interprets a poll? I'm relatively sure that most people who post on here have had somethign to do with campaigns, past or present. Past, long past, in your case. Turrfy makes a decent point, and since it flies in the face of your stance, you fall back on the old lawyers trick of, 'When all else fails, attack the witness's credibility.' I'm fairly certain that there are many people who read and/or post on this blog who are far more qualified than you to interpret polls, give advice, or take candidates to task, yet none of them seek to underscore their political blandishments as you do with nearly each passing day. No one thinks less or more of your from your past exploits--and your shouldn't think less or more of anyone else.
So Chris Murphy and others are upset that Ned might spoil things for them? Too bad Chris, you will be left out because of your support for Joe. I thought you were with us but you were on stage supporting Joe W. Liberman.
Surely we all remember the 2004 presidential election, where anger about Bush and the Iraq war were supposed to drive people to the polls? Well, it turned out that the anger evaporated then, so what's to say that it won't this time around?
There were some differences between 2004 nationally and 2006 today.
First, Iraq was but one of many issues. You may say that's the same today, but in reality, there's little difference in Lamont's and Lieberman's stances otherwise. Yes, Lieberman voted to end the filibuster, but this may have part of a calculated strategy so that the nuclear option wouldn't be invoked.
Second, Kerry really had no coherent policy on Iraq. Lamont doesn't need to spell this out as much: he's not running for President, but for one of 100 Senate slots.
Third, Iraq is passionately disliked by the core Democrat base. There may be many Republicans and Independents who don't like it, but it's not the most important issue. I bet if you did an exit poll of Lamont voters, the Iraq war would be #1 on their list of issues.
Chris, I'd send this to your blog but you won't answer - why would you thumb your nose at Lamont and the Nedheads when you know he will be the Dem candidate? How will you explain to voters that you were for Joe and against the war and then for Ned on August 10th?
I can hear the giant sucking sound coming out of Murphy's campaign.
IvyElitist:
First of all, I give you kudos for the name.
As far as your comment about Murphy, how can you blame the guy? If not for Lamont sucking up the media attention, Dem challengers like Murphy would instead be getting the puff pieces that would help them out. Challengers like Murphy have a real shot -- unlike Lamont in the general election -- at winning and you can't blame them for seeing this as a missed opportunity.
amazins860: Where can we see the ad?
Turff -
How can you criticize the 70% of Lamont donations from out of state while not mentioning the 82% of Lieberman donations that come from out of state? Also, notice the number of donors - over 15K for Lamont.
While you can (mis)interpret the polls all you want, talking about the donor numbers in this way is completely disingenuous.
truebluect said: "And none of you anonymous Republicans are going to drive a wedge between Lamont people and our Congressional challengers."
You have no clue! Lamont supporters are Ds, and Rs don't win races by getting D votes. Rs like Johnson, Shays and Simmons win with a combination of R & U votes. The Us that will be voting for Lieberman on the 4th line will have no problem moving up to vote for those Rs, whereas traditionally they may have stayed on the straight D line this year. The sheer hypocracy of people like Murphy and Farrell (good for Courtney not to show up for Lieberman) first they support Joe, then they don't, will come back to haunt them in the general election. The U voters in CT is a lot smarter than those D challengers give them credit for!
Turff:
Right you are. So, including the most recent filings, Joe is down to only 79.6% of contribs from out-of state. http://opensecrets.org/politicians/geog.asp?CID=N00000616&cycle=2006
That is still significantly more than Ned.
Also, note that only 1 of the top 5 and 4 of the top 10 zip codes are in CT.
Disgruntled: Tom Delay is already gone!
Good, positive ad, Micah. I like it.
Brucie, why on earth would Dodd call you? You haven't given to him since 1992.
turfgrrl,
I searched a few relevant websites for the keyword "lebanon" and the results were revealing. (One thing they revealed is that you obviously did not bother searching the Lamont website before posting the comment "There is nothing on Lamont's web site to indicate he even knows where Lebanon is.")
At lieberman.senate.gov = Produces a link to the State Department travel warning for Americans travelling to Lebanon. (Hint. Don't go there.) The next most recent document is a May 2005 press release about terrorist groups involved in distribution of counterfeit goods.
At joe2006.com = No hits.
At nedlamont.com = The detailed page on the Lebanon crisis that an earlier poster linked to.
So far it appears that of the two candidates, Ned Lamont is the only one that has anything to say about Lebanon.
The decision has been made by Rell and others to make believe they want AS out...weaken him..but let him stay in..knowing he will lose...and hoping Lamont wins..so Jodie or a designee can take him on and out in 2112.
Ummm...TrueBlue...if you would actually read the thread, you'd see that it's Bruce who is spewing invective...no one else.
(Unless you didn't understand what the word 'invective' means--in which case, I'm sorry)
Does anyone here actually DO WORK FOR A LIVING?
Sakes alive... Our State's inability to attract new employment may in fact be linked to the incredible waste of brain power you all partake in daily during work hours...
And I suspect your exercise habits aren't much better...
Put down the damn mouse and go for a walk.
xoxo,
Mom
TG,
You are correct, Lamont has not proposed a detailed plan for resolving the crisis in Lebanon. I didn't intend to imply otherwise. (And re-reading my original post, I should not have used the word "detailed.")
The purpose of my post was to point out the inaccuracy of turfgrrl's original post.
I do think it's odd that Senator Lieberman's campaign apparently has nothing to say about Lebanon. One guess at a reason might be that he recognizes the dilema posed by the fact that the Iraqi government our troops are defending shares political and religious ideology with Hezbollah.
Bruce, get over yourself. Some people are forced to post anonymously since they CURRENTLY hold "Senior Operative" status in campaigns. They aren't cowards because they call you out without giving their names - they have people paying them for their political ideas and can't risk losing those jobs or their reputations to bicker on-line with a has-been. If you were so great at what you do, or rather, did, you would be working right now. There are hundreds of campaigns going on in the state, yet you put forth your political platitudes here...for free. So contact the FBI or whomever because someone is ripping you without giving their name. You might think to recover some of your own flagging respect by not posting under your own name every thought that pops into your head.
Anonymous said...
Bruce, get over yourself. Some people are forced to post anonymously since they CURRENTLY hold "Senior Operative" status in campaigns.
It does show no creativity on their part however
Post a Comment