Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Primary Day

Hello, world.

Welcome to Connecticut.

For your information, Connecticut is a small state located in the heavily-populated northeastern United States. We have about 3.5 million people, living in 4,844 sq mi. (12,545 sq km) of land. Our capital city is Hartford, and our largest city is Bridgeport.

The land here varies from urban centers like Hartford and New Haven, to large stretches of suburbia in the Connecticut River valley and Fairfield County, which is near New York City, to more rural country in the east and northwest.

It's a great place. I wouldn't live anywhere else.

But you don't care about that. You want to know about Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont.

We'll keep you up to date. Check in on this site for updates throughout the day and into the night. We will have reports from each of the four major campaign headquarters. Check these other great sites for more information as the day proceeds. Connecticut has a vibrant and creative blogosphere: we won't disappoint you.

My Left Nutmeg
Lamont Blog (unofficial)
Connecticut Bob
CT Weblogs (aggregator of Connecticut RSS feeds)

For more online (non-blog) news, keep an eye on CT News Junkie and the New Haven Independent.

Welcome. It's going to be a great day in Connecticut.


BRubenstein said...

i can almost taste the bacon and french toast now

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

For those of you reading this blog from out-of-state, this primary's electorate is to the State of Connecticut as the Upper West Side is to whole of the State of New York.

Read your tea leaves with caution.

Anonymous said...

Geez, for someone who claims to be bipartisan, your list of CT blogs is decidedly bias liberal. There are conservative/right-leaning blogs, and there is at least one good/popular one.

Genghis Conn said...

For this (Democratic) primary, the sources I've listed are the best ones.

ken krayeske said...

Both Lamont and Lieberman Support Israel's bombing of Lebanon.


The cold arithmetic of blood
By Meirav Arlosoroff

Exactly 100 years ago, Theodore Roosevelt received the Nobel Peace Prize for bringing the two sides in the Russian-Japanese war to the negotiating table. Besides the fact that the teddy bear is named after him, Roosevelt is also remembered as being an outstanding American president. A century ago, he coined one of his many famous sayings: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

Roosevelt's approach is not alien to Israel. The historical Mapai party adopted it, and it also inspired David Ben-Gurion when he shaped Israel's security outlook during the War of Independence, as well as during the retaliatory operations taken by the elite Unit 101 and in the Sinai campaign (in the last case, unsuccessfully). In fact, Israelis express this sentiment intuitively when declaring, quite frequently, that they won't be anyone's sucker.

Roosevelt's approach has been put to the test now, too, in the battles Israel is waging in Lebanon, which are apparently about to end. Let there be no mistake: The war in Lebanon has not been about the return of two abducted soldiers. It is a war for Israel's deterrent power. This is a war that is being waged over the question of whether Israel will be able to retain the message that having to defend its home front is taboo, and that anyone that dares to violate that taboo will pay an unbearable price.


Hezbollah is not the strategic threat posed to Israel at present. The real threat lies in Syria, which is arming itself with thousands of missiles with various and sundry warheads, and in Iran, which is only a heartbeat away from attaining nuclear weapons. The war in Lebanon, therefore, is not only a war against Hezbollah and its ability to continue to attack Israel. It is a war against Iran and Syria, which clearly have the ability to attack Israel. The only question is whether they will dare.

The achievements in Lebanon will have crucial implications vis-a-vis this question. From this point of view, the extended fighting there is not a campaign. Nor is it a war of "no alternative." It is an existential war, one of the most important ever fought by Israel. It is a war intended to ensure that the real strategic threat to Israel, the one from Iran and Syria, will be cut down to a minimum, thanks to Israel's ability to maintain its deterrence. And it is also a war that can affect the peace process with the Palestinians: Israel's ability to maintain its deterrence is the best way to convince them to come to the negotiating table, just as Israel's ability to maintain its deterrence during the Yom Kippur War prompted Egypt to sign a peace agreement with Israel.

This is an existential war and Israel should be fighting it as one. It is a war in which every possible military effort should be invested, exposing the country to the dangers of an all-out war - of soldiers being captured, of becoming embroiled in difficult battles, and of facing such perils as opening of a second front and incurring very large numbers of losses. Coping with these dangers is essential despite the fact that doing so does not guarantee achievements.

A war is not an insurance policy. Taking risks is not a sufficient condition for victory in such circumstances, but it is certainly a necessary condition - because only those who dare will succeed. Only those who are willing to dare can truly threaten the other side.

Israel cannot promise that the Hezbollah will pay an intolerable price for breaking the taboo by attacking the country's home front. It can promise to be willing to pay a very high price in order to make Hezbollah pay a far higher one. This promise could have been the basis for its deterrence.

Israel's willingness to fight to the death to protect its home front is the only way to make those considering attacking that front in the future think twice. To put it bluntly: Israel's willingness to absorb hundreds of losses can prevent the deaths of thousands, and perhaps even more, in the future. This is a cold and cruel arithmetic of blood, but it is the one that will be determined in this war. And it is doubtful whether Israel has fulfilled its part in it.

Anonymous said...

GC's true colors have shown the last couple of weeks....

Anonymous said...

my stomach allmonthe hassays that lamont peakedtwo weeks too early - that thereal democrats will not discard 18 years of solid service by Joe - he's the real deal - who knows waht NED is all about - be real a year agohe was acard carrying republican - he could be the realsheep inwolves clothing and you are depending on the wild and unpredictabel t swan for verification ---- i dont think so I am voting for the sure thing - J lieberman there is no other option - hes got the clout to make things happen.... vote Joe today.

GMR said...

The New Republic editor slams Lamont in a WSJ Op-Ed piece.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

If you want to track turnout, check on Willington, which has about 900 registered Dems.

Camp out with a bag of Doritos and a counter and then run your turn-out models.

Given that the Willington DTC was not happy with Joe, put about 12-20 votes in the Lamont column.

Running the regression, using the last 20 years of data for an incumbency-based model, here's how you can use Willington turnout to project the total election results

y = incumbent vote %
T = Willington turnout

SF (shoreline factor) = Temperature differential in Willington at 5pm EDT. Subtract Willington temp from average of New Haven, Bridgeport, Hartford temps (Celsius), use of National Weather Service Data

L = Traffic Load on I-84, Vernon marker (cars / second)

y = -.08T + .02SF + .012L + .48

You can see that it really hinges on turnout. Weather and turn-out have a covariance, so I threw in the "hot shoreline" analysis.

Nunzie Calamari said...

I got an automated phone call from Billy Ciotto asking me to vote for Dan Malloy. I wonder how all the Goomba's in Middletown feel about getting a call from the guy who organized the Italian-American legislative caucus and was always telling his Italian stories asking people not to support DeStefano. I guess when you're not up for re-election you can so some strange things.

Don Pesci said...

Well, liberal blog sites are the olnt ones mentioned here, for sure. Apparently in the great state of Connecticut the political stump is reserved only for liberals and progressives. My definition of a regressive: a liberal on crack. Nevermind, out-of-staters are savvy enough to find alternative routes.

Gabe said...

If you are unsure of your polling place, Ned Lamont's blog has teh tools.


Off to the polls!

Anonymous said...

GOOD MORNING! Coming at you from the front line - currently standing at a local poll handing out literature. All quiet now. Only 2 voters so far.

TrueBlueCT said...

Joe Lieberman is wrong on Defense. Bad for America, Bad for Israel, Bad for the world. It's time to say good-bye to him, and all of his Neo-Con buddies!

Anonymous said...

watch the results from places like Newington and South Windsor.

Joe's gonna need a big voe in raised-ranch land to offset the Saab Socialists in W. Htfd.

Anonymous said...

Nunzie: Billy Ciotto is all about beating the team of Jodi Rell/Lisa Moody and knows Dan Malloy has the much better chance. Billy is loyal to his friends but remembers his enemy’s and the arrogant Governor and Co-Governor made a mistake when they stole the Democrats transportation plan and didn’t even bother to include the Senate transportation Chairman. That really speaks to their gross incompetence. Billy will bring a lot of votes to the Malloy line in his Senate district.

cgg said...

Post-Primary we'll probably see much more coverage on Republican candidates and issues. Right now Lamont/Lieberman is the story though.

Chris MC said...

LMAO Fat Guy!

You are obviously a SENIOR Operative with many years of experience in statewide campains. We quake in your presence.

Offering any wagers on the outcome?

So good, I read it twice....

Anonymous said...

Annon 8:02: You want the Governor to consult with Ciotto? You've got to be kidding us. Do you really expect the Governor to bow down to that little bafoon? You can do better than that.

enufalready said...

Well, it's starting already. Trouble with voting machines in New Haven. Funny how JD's name is on 1A instead of Malloy's. I guess he is much more afraid of losing than anyone thought.

Gabe said...

Genghis - Do you hear that? The masses are clamoring for you to link to a non-liberal/progressive blog that is closely following this race!

There not being one is not an excuse. Create one!


Anonymous said...

Let’s be honest annon 8:22. Billy was always one of the most revered Senators up until he decided not to support a guy with a drinking problem for his seat. Let’s move on.

Anonymous said...


Just got a call from a friend in New Haven and heard that as well. Theyre shutting down a poll because DeStefano's name was on both lines. Unfrigginbelievable. He said the word was the entire line wasnt copied either, it was DeStefano with Lieberman on A, and DeStefano with Lamont on B.

Anonymous said...

"there not being one is no excuse"

gabe what are you talking about? there is at least on that gets traffic near the levels of ct local politics (ct conservative) and a few other (don pesci, for example) that are not far behind.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous is just scaremongering and spreading rumours that aren't true. There was problems with some machines in New Haven and that's it....happens every election.

The Malloy people want you to believe that the "big scary political machine" in New Haven is rigging it against their guy. Not true.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 8:02 - Do you know anything about the legislature? You talk a good game, but you are clueless. Ciotto, as a long time chairman of the transportation committee, NEVER proposed a long term funding plan ala Rell & Amann. He also was against the TSB until he saw the tidal wave coming and joined. He wasn't mad at Rell - he was mad at Amann and his House co-Chair (who he does not like). He doesn't like DeStefano - so what? But I'll tell you this, he gets along with Rell better than he gets along with Malloy - just like he got along with JGR.

Gabe said...

Anon - nice out of context quotation. The rest was "that is closely following this race"...

Anonymous said...

As a Middletown Democrat, can I say that Billy Ciotto is the dumbest, least effective State Senator to come down the pike? I honestly can't think of a single legislative accomplishment of his, unless you consider helping Tomasso Bros. et. al. to be an accomplishment.

Anonymous is right -- he has been a marginally corrupt, do-nothing committee chair, and it'll be nice to get a Democrat in charge who actually believes in transporation.

BRubenstein said...

Don Pesci..the blog is also home to leftists too..

Anonymous said...

As the same Middletown Dem who posted above, I should say for the record that I ignored Ciotto's call and voted for JDS, not that it's going to matter come November.

TrueBlueCT said...

Just got back from visiting 13 out of New Haven's 30 precincts. Had been worried to death, (got only 3 hours sleep last night), but no longer. Joe isn't holding New Haven, and if he isn't winning in the cities, he's a goner, 'cause the towns were always breaking towards Ned.

I say this after visiting all the precincts in Fair Haven, East Rock, Newhallville, and Dixwell. At many of the polling places, Joe has no presence at all. I mean none.

And the Joe's Gotta Go street team kicked his ass. Lamont everywhere, and very little Lieberman to be seen. No leg up here.

Lamont photos here. Any blogger can use what they like, no need to credit me.

FatGuyinMiddleSeat said...

Chris MC-

I'll model out the 5th for ya. The problem is weather data. Those hills are tricky.

As far as my background, I've advised clients a thousand times not to buy the type of ridiculous product I was demonstrating.

Why study turnout when you could be busy figuring out ways to drive it

Don Pesci said...

Brubenstein -- "Don Pesci..the blog is also home to leftists too.."

Note the context of the remark. A regressive is a progressive who is moving backwards; i.e. denying people the political stump after they have seized power. I don't mind leftists, as you might guess from reading my last posting; click the name. But you guys are something else. When you take over the congress, can we expect to see a guillotine in the well of the senate?

Chris MC said...

Fat Guy -

I hear you on the hills, but you have to take into account the numerous microclimates in the context of the prevailing weather patterns, allowing (of course!) for sunspots.

And the levels of Lakes Lillonah, Zoar, and Candlewood relative to the two year rolling average (comparing off-year elections only, needless to say [LOL]) and factoring for mean snow melt in the immediately preceeding three springs.

Now, I was visiting with some folks up in West Hartford recently, and they told me - and this is strictly off the record - that some practicioners of long experience currently residing there have done some very interesting work on correlations between turnout and performance at the precinct level with lightning strikes and microbursts in the preceeding three months.

Fascinating stuff, but a bit out of my league, I'll have to acknowledge.

I've had to be satisfied with the simple life of issues, talking with people, and getting out the vote. Mundane, I grant, but I'm happy with my lot.

Well, off I go again!

Vote Malloy.