Friday, August 11, 2006

Open Forum

What a week it's been! Looks like the Lieberman site is under re-construction.

Don't forget to take a look at the maps of the statewide Democratic primaries:
What else is happening today?


BRubenstein said... next friday good for you and DG for the breakfast? lets nail it down ..pick a place and a time for the 3 of us..

A Different Anonymous (No! Really!) said...

Maps maps maps maps maps maps maps maps God I love CLP.

TrueBlueCT said...

Lieberman is done.

The Rasmussen poll shows that even in the best case scenario, (i.e. with no Republican in the race), Joe would currently have only 52% of the vote. This 52% assumes that Schlesinger drops out, and that his 6% goes entirely to Joe.

If Lieberman could outspend Ned, if Hillsman wasn't in the equation, if Joe hadn't tried to run to the Left of Lamont, if the Iraq War was getting better, not worse; if Ned was a fringe lefty instead of a Greenwich businessman, and if there wasn't a good chance that Schlesinger gets replaced, -- then and only then might Lieberman stand a chance.

The writing is on the wall. The only thing Joe will accomplish with his selfish, CTforLieberman bid, will be the creation of lasting rancor within the CT Dem party.

So let's all hope that Joe chooses to retire with dignity, instead of helping the Republicans on his way out.

Anonymous said...

Looking at the gubernatorial map, I was surprised to see that West Haven was "Dark Blue" for JDS. I was a delegate for John (in an ajoining town) and clearly remember the West Haven delegation not only voting 29-1 for Malloy, but both the WH Mayor and Town Chair taunting the JDS supporters on the convention floor after the vote changes that put DM over the top. It seems poetic justice that the 1000 + win in West Haven helped put JDS over the top. I hope JDS remebers it as clearly as I do.

TrueBlueCT said...


Thanks for the maps. Taking a close look at them, it appears that either DeStefano or Lamont won in every town in Connecticut, except one.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think only Stamford went for both Malloy and Lieberman!

This bodes very well for the ticket, and the Party's chances, going forward.

Anonymous said...

TBC, you seem to assume Joe will reprise his inept primary race as well.

The children were sent home and now the adults are in charge.

Plus, now Lamont and his crew get to be in the spotlight, They have 168 more towns to insult, so they may not succeed before November

Anonymous said...

You're implying that Danger Stein is an improvement over Maid Marion?

Wasn't DS the same doofus that...

Anonymous said...

gerstein can at least get through a Colin McEnroe interview without needing a laugh track added

Anonymous said...

Gerstein will call McEnroe an AntiSemite within the first 5 minutes of any interview and 5 minutes Later he'll call McEnroe a Nazi.

Sadly,it's all he's got.

Chris MC said...

GC -
Were I you (and thank god I'm not), I'd send Brucie boy a gift certificate to IHOP.


Nice maps.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

CGG made some points below that might as well be on the broken record.

1. "There is more to life than fear and now there is a candidate who recognizes that there is more to governance than fear."

Yes. Please tell Al Gore to stop scaring me with his powerpoint presentations re: Armageddon. I don't know whether to fear terrorism or natural disaster more. I can't leave the house.

Seriously, this "politics of fear" thing should go right into the trashcan with the "culture of corruption" sloganeering.

Politics is per se about fear, anger, and greed. Pointing out the obvious never makes the case.

2. "We're also concerned about health care, education, outsourcing, and social security among other things."

Democrats have had their bite at the apple on these things and have done very little. I'm tired of statements of "concern". I'm tired of Ted Kennedy's No Child Left Behind Act. Since Jimmy Carter established the Department of Education has education improved? I'm tired of the fact that rich people still collect social security because AARP wants to preserve the program's integrity. I can't go on, because it makes me ill.

Al Sharpton and Maxine Waters (and any incidental friends of theirs who happen to be Greenwich millionaires) are not going to provide the answers, whatever the question is.

MaxineWatersFan said...

I hope Ned will now stand with lady Maxine Waters and back a full-fledged investigation into how the CIA introduced crack into South Central Los Angeles.

Perhaps a way to generate support for such an investigation would be to have Ned arrange for her to give a talk to the members at Round Hill Country Club.

Chris MC said...

Honestly TB, you see what you want to see, rather than what the numbers actually indicate.

Note the correlation between towns that went for Lamont and for Malloy.

You're either ignoring or missing the strategic reality that the primary results reveal. Wake up and smell the coffee. Or don't. Doesn't really matter.

Anonymous said...

Chris MC,

The strategic realty that the primary results revealed was that rich, white people voted for Lamont and Malloy. These are simply facts. Malloy won every big city (with the exception of DeStefano's home town) at the convention. However, in the general, DeStefano won every major city except Stamford in the primary. This shows that endorsements and insider politics mean nothing when it comes to real elections. I voted for Joe and DeStefano in the primary. i will vote for Ned and DeStefano in the general because I believe in primaries and what they represent. I think a 3-way senate race helps DeStefano because it will energize Dems to come out and vote regardless of which side of the senate race they fall.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Just as a note, my above rant is just a frustration with my brethren about merely naming problems and issues without offering identifiable solutions. And sloganeering. Lamont won because he was crystal clear on one issue- if not in reality, then in the electorate's mind. If only there were more clarity coming from Dems on the other issues...

Chris MC,

I think you are onto something with the Malloy / Lamont correlation. There is something going on in the suburban-exurban-upscale Democratic vote. It's the Paul Newman vote. It's also a female vote- we haven't talked about gender much here.

What I'm watching for is the tipping point among registered Dems. It may mean a lot to the cameras to see Dodd and Blumenthal endorsing Ned. It may mean a lot to people on this board to see Nancy DiNardo doing so. But voters get funny inside of the booth.

Do the 48% of Dems who voted for Joe stay with him? Not all, but many will. At least 2/3. (I wonder what Nancy will do inside the booth.) The Joe voters did bother to turn out for the guy.

What about November Dem voters who didn't vote on 8/8?

Will polls be self-fulfilling? Watch the next 2-3 weeks and you'll see- if there's a tipping point, Joe's done and he's gone. If there's not and Joe hangs around 43-45%- Joe will likely win- because buried in that 45% will be a good number of Dems.

The undecided number is also one to track in these polls. If the undecideds are higher than baseline, it's likely torn Dems in there. Normally, undecideds are bad news for incumbents- but this situation is different- voters are torn between party loyalty and the guy they know.

Anonymous said...

Fatguy...where do you come up with that 2/3 of Joe's supporters will stay with him? Is that from a poll or just spin? I think some will stay with him,but much much less then 2/3.

BRubenstein said...

Folks...the % Dems came out on 8/8 is record breaking...its my belief that the country is in a " anti-incumbant" Ct it will mean that the Dems totals will be higher and in some cases much higher then usual..JDS and Lamont have a great chance to win, especially if oil and utility prices stabilize or go up...the war remains..and busines slumps..

The Dems are angry and energized.

Chris MC said...

FatGuy -

That's a lot to chew on. But I can say that broadly I agree with your analysis.

I've advocated this on behalf of Malloy, and I am saying it from an analytical point of view now.

I'll also add that after reflecting a bit on the LG map, if Malloy/Glassman had been on the same lever, this would have gone Malloy irrespective of all other variables. Just a huge, huge break for JD that there was a motorcycle show pushing us out of the convention hall in May. You just can't account for those kinds of externalities.

Chris MC said...

The strategic realty that the primary results revealed was that rich, white people voted for Lamont and Malloy. These are simply facts.

No, really, they are simply not facts. That is a rather mean-spirited over-generalization and misrepresentation of the demographic that supported these two candidates.

A more accurate description would be what Fat Guy says, or maybe people with Bachelor's degrees would be a good guess. "Rich" doesn't accurately describe what life is like in the suburbs. A lot of two income families, who have to work to maintain their lifestyle. The average household income in Newtown, for example, is just under $100,000. Hardly rich people.

The real divide in the party may well be between people who are marginally more succeptable to campaign messaging and people who are marginally less so, and that may correlate with education.

Anybody paying attention to politics should be able to observe that people's voting habits are not heavily correlated to their economic interests. This is why we have a Republican majority in this country, and more to the point of the dysfunction of our party in this state, it explains why the unions are only a force internally in the party, but cannot deliver anything on election day.

FatGuyInMiddleSeat said...

Brube, Where do I get 2/3? An estimate. It's going to be greater than zero. These people got out of bed and went out of there way to pull a lever for the guy. If there is an "anti-incumbent mood", in this case, the guy who morphed into Bush got almost half the vote. So, while there is a segment that is anti-incumbent, unclear how big it is, how it will project on Dems (not to mention indies).

The 2/3 comes from an unscientific combination of personal polling and some research into other races in other states. Even though Javits lost, for instance, a lot of registered Republicans did vote for him- in a state with a higher independent registry, he might have won in 1980. An anti-incumbent year. Not worth getting into it all.

There are some who are endorsing Lamont now because in one guy's words "they are supposed to." My hunch is that if you voted for Joe once, you really have to have a reason to get the Joe-voter to un-flick that lever in November. You can't scare them into thinking a Republican will win.

BRube, I'm waiting for that argument. Joe was correct when he said that endorsements didn't help him, why would they hurt him?

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Chris MC,

I call these Malloy/Lamont core guys the Democrats who can afford to be Democrats. They can absorb tax hikes, they read the Sunday Times Magazine. They are politically aware, they think Fox News is horrid, they go to Board of Education meetings. They thought Teresa Heinz would have made a wonderful First Lady. Nothing wrong with any of that, just trying to paint the portrait.

You're right- they are not "rich." But they are educated. They are professionals, teachers, physicians, trial lawyers (who really hate Joe, with some justification), NYC refugees. And women. The "security moms" feel burned and have taken it out on Joe.

The heart and soul of the party, the regulars, the old growth, the Truman-JFK Dems, the hawks who DON'T read or have use for the Sunday New York Times Magazine- they're the Joe voter.

Now these categories are not exclusive, they're just meant to be descriptive.

BRubenstein said...

fatguy....trial lawyers arent middle class either by income, most partners or owners of firms make in excess of $500,000 that i know personally, which is more then Lamont made in his business or by education...all lawyers had a JD which as we all know, predates a PHD.

Chris MC said...

Is that from a poll or just spin?

Has nobody learned that polling is extremely limited in efficacy? As others have pointed out, and FatGuy includes in his method described above, talking with people and a good gut for this stuff is as good or better than the increasingly unscientific polling that horserace addicts can't get enough of.

Said another way, I live out here, I'm one of those people you are talking about. You don't know what you're talking about calling us rich, and being white is pretty irrelevant - until Al Sharpton shows up maybe...

Anonymous said...

BR said: "the % Dems came out on 8/8 is record breaking...its my belief that the country is in a " anti-incumbant" Ct it will mean that the Dems totals will be higher and in some cases much higher then usual..JDS and Lamont have a great chance to win, especially if oil and utility prices stabilize or go up...the war remains..and busines slumps..

The Dems are angry and energized."

Reality check Bruce.

First, with respect to voter turnout. Between all 4 candidates for Gov. & Sen. the Ds spent appx. $16 mil. That is an extraordinary and unprecedented amount of money even for a general election in CT, yet this $ was mostly targeted at getting Ds out to vote. And that doesn't count free media (ie. blogs) and 3d party $ (ie DFA, MoveON). Money, as you know, is the mothers milk of politics and this $ played a substantial role in the voter turnout.

Second, you really don't think JDS has a chance to win, as you have told us so in the past (chris mc keeps re-posting it). And by the way, he is not going to win.

Third, with respect to D anger and energy, it seems to me that the Ds were pretty angry 2 years ago. Remember, you all thought Bush stole the first election and were out to get him last time. That anger did not translate into winning congressional seats.

Fourth, I agree, Ds are energized, but they are directing a lot of that energy attacking each other and the party is split b/c of Lamont/ Lieberman.

Fifth, if we are going to blame incumbents for oil & gas prices being high and business slumping, then I hope you will join me in supporting Republican candidates for the general assembly, since these problems MUST be the failure of the Democrats to enact laws to prevent them. Are you with me? I bet not, but note the hypocracy that you want to change the Executive, but not the Legislative leadership. I look forward to your thoughtful response (even if I don't agree with it).

BRubenstein said...

Chris Mc..for once i think you are on to something here...

Rush Knows said...

Brube: Since you believe that there is this "anti incumbent mood" which would put people like Lieberman and Rell in you also believe that State House and Senate D's are in trouble since they control the CT general assembly or do you believe that people want to throw out only Republican incumbents? Which way is it?

Anonymous said...

Sherri Brown is Joe's new campaign manager...since the beginning of his election as Senator,she was Joe's statewide director on his staff,being paid handsomely.

Ms Brown formerly known as Sherri Weady is from New Haven and has been with Joe over 20 years and was a staffer for him in the AG's office.It is fair to say that no one is closer to him, except for Hadassah.She and her husband,Joe Marfuggi live in Hartford.

Her husband Joe Marfuggi heads Riverfront Recapture,Inc. a non profit in Hartford where Joe has been funneling millions of dollars from various federal agencies,especially HUD, to help them along.The more money that Riverfront Recapture takes in from any source..the higher the staff salaries are.I would argue that Ms Brown has both an economic and a political reason for Joe to remain Senator..and she is a known conservative/moderate.

Her daughter is an attorney and works for a large
firm in downtown Hartford in which Joe has been very " helpful" to them.

Her son in law is Matt Henessey, the chief of staff to Hartford Mayor Eddie Perez.Mayor Perez's mother is a paid staffer in Joe's Hartford office. Matt Henessey received the then largest fine in Connecticut's history when he was an operative for Sheriff Walter Kupchunous several years ago. He was fined $4,000 for unfair campaign tactics.

BRubenstein said...

Anon 2:22

1. and you point about the money is? the motivater for the turnout was the war etc not how much money went anywhere..sorry anon

2. I think if the turnout is at a higher % then usual that JDS has a chance to win...right now id say he is losing...lets wait and see how energized both parties bases become.I will admit that i pluged the primary % rate at 30-35 and wasnt prepared for this historic turnout of 43%..which changes the equasion... somewhat.

3. a turnout of 43% in this primary is historic and extraordinary..even YOU should agree..if this trend continues..anything can happen.

4. The party is split anon..i would have preferred that Joe did the right thing and listen to his party and leave like a gentleman..but he didnt.

5. the state legislature has nothing to do with the federal policy ..which i might add was set by a republican president and republican dominated congress...all of which i am working to change. I am shocked that you misintrepret how the system works for the oil prices..its almost all federal driven...dont accuse me of hyprocrisy when i understand the system and you dont.

BRubenstein said...

Rush Knows Said...certainly amongst the dems there is an anger which translated into an historic 43% turnout..if the trend continues both Rell and Lieberman will have a problem...lets be honest, no one was prepared for this kind of turnout.The dems in the legislature who are leaders will not face the same problem that Joe did..and does..since we dont know as of yet if the R's are angry and prepared to turnout in record numbers like the d's did a few days ago.

If the r's come out in record numbers like the D's did then id say more D's will have a problem..but as of right now there is no evidence one way or we will all wait and see..

BRubenstein said...

Chris Mc...I do think you are on too something here..I think higher educated folks tended to vote for Malloy and a first glance they were struck by Malloy's chrisma and command of the stump and noted his supurb speaking style and came to know his policies were well thought out and intelligent.As to Lamont...folks found out about his excellent education at Harvard and Yale and decided after the debate that he handled himself credibly and would make a good Senator...his wealth no one cared about except for Joe and his staffers..and one assumes they were/are jealous of him.

In sum, both Malloy and Lamont presented lost and one won..

Chris MC said...

OK, as far as it goes, Bruce.

I am suggesting there are strategic implications revealed by the primary results. This was one of my arguments on behalf of Malloy during the campaign, and I point out that the results - that is, the facts - support my assertions (i.e. it wasn't mere "spin").

Anyone referring back to the arguments I put forward on behalf of Malloy will find that they were not only substantive, but commensurate as evaluations and strategy...

As I always do, I'll be working hard on behalf of my Party's nominee. In fact I started on Thursday.

Gary Holder-Winfield said...

Joe's latest ad is so inspirational

Anonymous said...

Tom Swan should be fired for his Waterbury remarks I know If someone for Lieberman had said that you all would be yelling for them to go.

Send Tom Swan Home!!!!!

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Bruce, I'm not impressed with the Lamont credentialing either way. It's easy to get into Harvard when your family's name is on the library. Joe's ascent to the Ivy League in the early 1960s is much more noteworthy.

Not important, but since you dropped it in, I'd want to get it straight. Ned's pedigree does not impress me as much as his ability to parlay family wealth into a real business.

Anonymous said...

BR - Anon. 2:22 here. I was responding to your post wherein you stated that "JDS and Lamont have a great chance to win, especially if oil and utility prices stabilize or go up...the war remains..and busines slumps.."

If these are all federal issues, as you claim - obviously the war is - (although Malloy did try to inject it into the Gov. primary by stating that people against the war should vote for him) then why would JDS stand to benefit as you claim? Even if the anti-Congressional incumbent sentiment brings out larger number of D voters, do you think that they will blame Rell for these issues or that they will simply vote the party line? I truly believe that the average CT voter is far more sophisticated and more willing to vote the person not the party.

Further, your candidate JDS has stated and made claims that a "business slump", high gas and utility prices are the Gov.s fault and that he could do better. Have you been listening?

Last point of my rebuttal: do you honestly believe that the money spent played no role in the turn out? Really? C'mon.

Anonymous said...

ghw: like him or not, it is a very good ad that will resonate among unaffiliated voters.

Anonymous said...


Two requests:

1) Can you start a thread on what the Lamont win means for the rest of the ticket? Do people think this is good for Rs or Ds running for Congress and General Assembly?

2) Can you update your General Assembly races to watch? Seems like some have become more or less competitive over time.

Chris MC said...

I truly believe that the average CT voter is far more sophisticated and more willing to vote the person not the party.

This is the strategic aspect I was alluding to as well.

Anonymous said...

While I agree DeStefano is a long shot, I wouldn't count him out completely, and here's why. A lot more Dems than Republicans will be voting in November for 2 reasons: 1. There are more registered Dems than Republicans, and 2. Most of them now have a vested interest in the Senate race. I would have to imagine that a huge majority of people that voted in the primary will be voting in the general, unless either Lieberman or Lamont completely runs away with the race. I think this bodes well for DeStefano as long as he can prove to his base that he can beat Rell. If the last Rasmussen polls are at all accurate (down only 22% compared to 40% last month), then he definitely has a shot.

Anonymous said...

Tom Swan must GO!!! It is really terrible what he said about Waterbury and its people.

If this is the kind of person That Ned Lamont wants around him then I am voting for Lieberman.

I guarantee if someone on Lieberman's staff said anything bad You all would be calling on them to quit.

Ned is just being cocky and arrogant like his whole team is by not asking for Swan to quit.