Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Conspiracy Theories

The Lieberman campaign's attack blog is sounding a little defensive.
There is no better barometer of the increasing desperation of the Lamont campaign than the reaction of Ned 's biggest blogger boosters to yesterday's debate.

Instead of touting Ned's performance -- which would have been a challenge for the even the best spinmasters --the usually Republican-hating keyboard jockeys spent an inordinate amount of their hype on Alan Schlesinger.

The reason for this sudden turnabout could not be more transparent. The bloggers know that Negative Ned' s message of blame and blather has totally failed to resonate with voters outside his anti-war base, and that Lamont's only hope in this race now is to try to peel away Republican voters from Joe Lieberman's broad-based coalition.

Seems pretty clear to us this cynical tactic is part of a coordinated strategy -- and that it will fall as flat as the rest of Ned 's general election campaign.

At this point, several left-wing blogs are quoted praising Schlesinger's performance.

This is an interesting wrinkle. The Lieberman campaign has something of a point: Lamont supporters like Schlesinger because he takes votes from Lieberman. That's not hard to figure out. Schlesinger is a road to victory. He isn't the only road, but at this point he's probably the easiest.

But they also like Schlesinger because he smacked Lieberman around yesterday, and that's something they can get behind. Joe Lieberman has been counting on half-hearted support from Republicans and conservative independents to carry him across the finish line against Lamont, and it's refreshing to see a representative of those voters repudiate him.

The post also mentions something about a "coordinated strategy," and even goes as far as to suggest that Lamont's "wealthy friends" will start funnelling money to Schlesinger. It also, in a twist of irony, accuses Lamont's campaign of deep cynicism.

It's posts like this one that remind me of the defensive, nasty and paranoid Lieberman campaign that crashed and burned so dramatically this summer: not least of all because the Lieberman campaign suddenly has something to be paranoid about.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

Since ethics is a big issue this year are any of these three running for US Senate going to call for an investigation of Harry Reid? Land deals, now improper campaign expenditures. Wait , whoops he's a Democrat...must have been an honest mistake!!!

Anonymous said...

http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17333102&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6

Ned will be getting swiftboated and the connection goes to Karl Rove.

cgg said...

GC:But they also like Schlesinger because he smacked Lieberman around yesterday, and that's something they can get behind.

That's part of the fun. Schlesinger actually foreced Lieberman to defend the infamous "lock box" of 2000. Lieberman only had 17 minutes total, and he found himself having to waste time on that. He was completely unprepared for Schlesinger.

I don't see that happening again. Expect angry Joe to come out swinging at the nex two debates.

Anonymous said...

As far as Joe is concerned everybody is on the attack but him. What a hypocritical fool this man is.

Anonymous said...

Jeepers, I'm not sure what debate you all watched, but the one I saw had a boring, but respectful Senator, A bug eyed business man, and a crazy guy.

The CW is that Alan stole the show...well maybe...but I'm not sure the crazy man is going to garner more votes.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 3:29

I find the new focus by Republicans on Reid amusing. Do you even bother to read what Reid's actually done wrong?

1) Land deal: He and his co-investor/friend transferred their ownership in a property to an LLC (likely to limit their liability) and later sold it. This is not unlike almost any commercial real estate transaction in America. The only wrinkle here is that he reported it in his filings as personal income rather than business income (FYI, note LLCs are usually not taxed at the corporate level - so not wholly unreasonable). There was nothing wrong about the transaction itself (non-market selling price (Rowland), votes or earmarks used to try to make the land more valuable (Hastert)), just how he reported it. Shocking, I know.

2) Slightly more serious is his use of $3500 of campaign funds to give xmas presents to individuals at his apartment complex to thank them. He states that "his lawyer approved of the gifts" and that "the gifts were tied to his role in the senate through the extra work that goes into protecting the senate minority leader." Reid has subsequently paid back the money, all whopping $3500 of it. Was it a little shady, certainly, but come on...

If the Republicans want to compare Reid's minor transgressions against Rowland, Ney, Foley, Hastert, Burns, Abramoff, Cunningham, Weldon, and others that committed serious transgressions, which in many cases were criminal, that shows nothing more than complete desperation. Reid is not a "scandal." Anon 3:29 you should be more critical regarding what you read.

Anonymous said...

Lieberman was hardly respectful to anyone. He talked over his time limit, attempted to patronize both his opponents and lied about the fiscal condidtion of Social Security to everyone listening. The only people who might see Alan as crazy are the Rowland - Rell Republicanleftovers and granted there are plenty of them around.

Anonymous said...

The Joe haters really need to get a life. Go to Church, read a book, relax. Your hatred is driving you mad.

justavoter said...

There is also a Republican Blog in Connecticut that is telling Republicans to support Alan.

So its not just Liberal blogs.

Alan will pick up alot of Republicans which will in the end hurt Lieberman and he knows this.

turfgrrl said...

anonymous 3:50-- You and I saw the same debate. And CGG, the social security lock box was a good question for Schlesinger to bring up and Lieberman to defend by pointing out that under the Clinton administration we had a surplus, not a federal budget deficit, and that it is the Republican administration who has spent recklessly and eliminated the surplus. Too bad Lamont couldn't get off his prepared talking points to jump on the fiscal recklessness of Republicans in Congress.

Anonymous said...

Lieberman was for being against privatizing Social Security before he wasn't against it. Or was he for it all along? Or did he never run as Al Gore's running mate?

Anonymous said...

What were the ratings of the debate? Probably low-very low.

WTIC had been playing sound bites from all 3 candidates...and Alan sounds completely crazed...lockboxes...checks...voice inflecting at odd times...

But it's good seeing the Nedheads cheering the crazy guy on, points out the utter bankruptcy of their own candidate.

brickbat said...

Anonymous isn't sure the "crazy man", i.e., Schlesinger, "is going to garner more votes" as a result of the debate.

I think he will, at least to the extent that people out there actually watched it (always a questionable proposition).

Schlesinger threw red meat to the most conservative voters, those who would have defaulted to Lieberman, but who may be given pause by AS's jeremiads on social security (which was, at best, confused), immigration and black pols (an outrageous job of race baiting done even as he condemned Jackson and Sharpton for race baiting themselves).

He won't get moderates, the
"CT Republicans", but he'll get a chunk of the hard core right wing. Sure, he's crazy, but so are they.

If he picks up 5-10% and it all comes from Lieberman, Joe's toast.

ctblogger said...

turfgrrl,

Did you think that up or did you get those talking points from Lynn or from your mayor.

Can't wait to start follwoing Norwalk politics after this election is over. There is a Norwalk DTC chairman who REALLY wants to talk to me...

Anonymous said...

Attack, attack, attack....that's all we ever hear from the Lieberman campers. All you Republicans need to vote for Joe because Alan is crazy....Great smear job Joe but Alan's too intelligent for people to buy it. Unlike you and even Ned he got a real businees education at Wharton and you can't take that away him but try as you might.

Anonymous said...

you also have to remember that Joe has his neo-con foreign policy agenda going on that the traditional foriegn policy conservatives aren't buying into. it will be interesting if Iraq comes up to listen to Alan. he's a lot smarter on the issue than he was back in the spring.

Anonymous said...

Just like in the primary debate, Lieberman seemed incapable of hiding the fact that he is personally insulted that anyone has the temerity to try and take "his" Senate seat. Same with his hypersensitivity to criticism, which he labels "attacks." I do not loathe the man as many on this site do, but he doesn't seem to be able to help himself from revealing a most unattractive side of his personality.

Anonymous said...

Neo Con Foreign policy agenda....

Is that code or something???

Oh wait---Joe's Jewish!!!! Thanks for clearing that up!!!

Jim said...

I missed the debate, but I understand that the torture bill that Lieberman voted for, and that his pal Georgie signed into official infamy today, didn't come up? nor the Supreme Court, our last bulwark against this abomination and others that George and Joe and their friends can cook up in the future.

I'd like to hear how Schlessinger would respond to that question. He doesn't strike me as a "maverick" type. Would he just roll over for Rove?

Did abortion come up? Whee's Schlessinger on that issue?

Anonymous said...

Schlesinger is a Jew just like Lieberman but he doesn't but into the neo-con foreign policy agenda, never has and never will when you listen to the guy,

turfgrrl said...

ctblogger said: Did you think that up or did you get those talking points from Lynn or from your mayor.

Can't wait to start follwoing Norwalk politics after this election is over. There is a Norwalk DTC chairman who REALLY wants to talk to me...


Well I look forward to your covering the Norwalk DTC, throw some light on the inept leadership there, maybe they'll get focused on winning elections and turning out the votes instead of intra party bickering. But I doubt it. Next time you're in Norwalk let me know.

Anonymous said...

Schlesinger and Lieberman share the same religion but Schlesinger ain't a neo-con on foreign policy.

Anonymous said...

That Moses guy was one of the most partisan guys in history.No way he would ever cross the nile and make a deal with the Egyptians.

If only Moses wasn't part of the "partisan frenzy" in Egypt we Jews would still be happily making bricks in Egypt.

Shadow said...

It's ridiculous to say that Lamont is so cynical that he will form some sort of secret alliance with Schlesinger, he's clearly not that cynical; in fact lacking that kind of cynicism is Lamont's whole appeal to the moderates he has gotten thus far, and he has his own campaign to focus on. The ironic thing is that the only person counting on an alliance with Schlesinger was Lieberman himself at the beginning of the debate, and that illusion was quickly shattered.

More ironic still is the fact that Lieberman is the one who lost the majority of Democratic support and is counting on the majority of Republican support, yet he's suddenly accusing Lamont of conspiring with the Republican candidate.

Genghis is right, Joe's campaign smells of desperation making these kinds of claims; he talks about how everyone should act more bipartisan, then when the Democratic candidate in the race says something respectful and positive to the Republican candidate, Lieberman immediately accuses them both of conspiring against him. Priceless.

Shadow said...

Lieberman sees himself as Caesar when he is but Macbeth.

Fuzzy Turtle said...

Alan Schlesinger was a pip.. he would be the life of the party. But that doesn't mean I'd vote for him.

he's pretty likeable though. Maybe we can carpool to Mohegan together next road trip.

oops that's right I hate gambling it bores me.

Anonymous said...

Based on his undyiing support for Bush's failed war in Iraq, Joe has presumed the majority of CT Republicans' support.

But to quote Alan Schlesinger, Joe Lieberman boasted throughout the primary how he voted with Democratic Leadership 90% of the time!

Anonymous said...

does anybody know when the swiftboat ads come to our tv screens later this month, will they say they are paid for by a republican comittee.

Just a Resident said...

Bottom line......2 days ago you werent even talking about Alan.

Blue Turned Red said...

Good to see Joe's campaign fighting back and calling a spade a spade. It is obvious that Lamont has no real hope of broadening his appeal. It's all about tearing down Joe, and now they feel they have recruited a new ally in Alan Schlesinger. It's the only hope Ned and his liberal candidacy has any chance of winning.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Lieberman's sure paying a lot of people to astroturf these days.

pseudonymous in NC said...

There's obvious reason, even beyond political math, for Lamont supporters to like Schlesinger: less than six months ago, they were backing the underdog in the primary.

Alan's been abandoned by his national party, and he's chosen not to take it lying down. He followed the rules and got screwed, and if Lieberman had chosen to respect the wishes of primary voters, the GOP's official candidate (as opposed to its unofficial one today) might have had a genuine shot at the seat.

Anonymous said...

Lamont is going to lose despite all you liberals praising him Because Lieberman is just the better Candidate than your anti american anti war icon oh i mean moron.