GOP to Pour Money into Congressional Races

No big surprise here:

House Republicans have reserved more than $40 million worth of television advertising time for the fall, most of it aimed at holding seats they control, particularly in the Midwest and Northeast.

Republican incumbents in the Philadelphia area - Reps. Jim Gerlach, Curt Weldon and Mike Fitzpatrick - as well as Connecticut Reps. Rob Simmons and Nancy Johnson are slated to get roughly $10 million combined in party advertising. (AP)

Simmons and Johnson are facing very tough challengers this year in the form of Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy.

Interestingly, it seems like Chris Shays isn't among those receiving money.

Also, no advertising dollars are slated so far to help GOP Rep. Christopher Shays keep his Connecticut district even though Democrats have reserved $2 million to try to unseat him. His district in the southern part of the state watches television from the New York City media market that's among the most expensive in the country. (AP)

Both Simmons and Johnson are outraising their opponents by significant margins so far: only Shays is not. He has been outraised by Farrell in both of the last quarters, and she is neck-and-neck with him in cash on hand.

So either Shays is going to get some significant funds later on, the GOP is cutting him loose, or they don't believe Farrell is as big a threat as she's made out to be.

Source
"House GOP plans $40M ad push." Associated Press 16 August, 2006.

Open Forum

Schlesinger goes on Hardball. It's not pretty.

Molly Ivins and Susan Campbell write about the Lamont-Lieberman race, while Ned Lamont pens a piece for the Wall Street Journal.

Colin McEnroe explores election irregularities.

And, most importantly, I really hope Xena gets to be a planet. I think that makes me a nerd.

What else is going on?

Connecticut Economic Outlook Mixed

DeStefano Attacks Rell over Job Numbers

The DeStefano campaign today attacked Gov. Rell over job figures in a new report on the Connecticut economy released by the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis:

Saying that “Governor Rell offers false optimism, but no new ideas or leadership to stop Connecticut’s worsening jobs loss,” John DeStefano, Democratic candidate for Governor, today responded to the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis’s (CCEA) new Economic Outlook concerning the uncertain future of Connecticut’s job growth.
...
The report predicts that Connecticut’s anemic job growth shows no signs of improving and in fact will get worse over the new few years. According to the Outlook, economic growth, wages and job growth will all decline between now and 2008. Connecticut’s job growth rate, already about half the national average, will drop again in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Fred Carstensen, director of the CCEA, stressed that “State leaders must strengthen investments” in developing industries and educational programs to create jobs. (DeStefano)

The report itself offers a mixed view of the Connecticut economy:

...The CCEA Outlook anticipates real growth continuing through 2008, at modestly lowered rates, falling from 3.5% in 2006 to 2.8% in 2007 and 2.6% in 2008...

Following the national pattern, the CCEA Outlook sees growth in employment lagging growth in output as increasing productivity continues to undermine the need to hire significantly more employees. Even so, the CCEA Outlook forecasts Connecticut employment continuing modest growth, falling from the 0.8% rate of 2005 to 0.6% in 2006, 0.5% in 2007 and 0.4% in 2006... The picture that the CCEA Outlook provides emphasizes the continuing challenge to Connecticut of building its competitiveness so its economy will generate sufficient jobs for its own citizens. (CCEA)

The report stresses that, while the economy isn't exactly booming, it is healthier than it was in 2003, when there was no economic growth at all.

Still, the picture painted is that of a listless, albeit not lifeless, economy. By 2008, the report forecasts, Connecticut employment will have regained the record levels of 2001, although growth continues to be slow. The report also emphasizes the ties Connecticut's economy has to events beyond our control, such as hostilities in the Middle East and disruptions to the flow of petroleum.

It is DeStefano's charge that Rell has not taken economic leadership of the state, despite the fact that the economy has generally improved (albeit slowly) on her watch. According to DeStefano, "With strong leadership, creative ideas, and a smart hard-working labor force, there is no reason why Connecticut should not be a top 10 job growth state so our children can find jobs here."

However, without a serious economic crisis brewing, DeStefano's argument has yet to resonate with voters.

Sources

"DeStefano: Rell offers false optimism, but no new ideas or leadership to stop Connecticut's job loss." DeStefano for Connecticut. Press Release. 15 August, 2006.

UCONN/CCEA Connecticut Economic Outlook: State Gross Product Breaks $200 Billion; Employment Continues Sloooooow Recovery. Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis: 2006.

Something About a Party

I read this in the Journal-Inquirer yesterday:

Connecticut is about to see what it is when most party leaders are friends with an independent candidate who wants only to rejoin them and there is no Republican threat.

Yes, 40 years ago it would have been unthinkable in Connecticut for someone holding any special position in a party to support an independent candidate. But Connecticut's parties have disintegrated a lot since then. (Powell)

The entire piece is well worth a read (some nice history about former Speaker Richard Balducci, who was from my old hometown of Newington, Lowell Weicker and Tom Dodd), but the upshot, that party endorsements really don’t help at all in an age of party disintegration, is pretty accurate.

Which means that the endorsement of Bill Clinton, which didn’t help Lieberman at all, probably won’t help Lamont either. It also means that the endorsement of Jim Amann, who I guarantee you a majority of Connecticut voters have never even heard of, will mean nothing as well.

Politics today seems to be more about individual loyalty instead of party loyalty. And why not? What good are the parties? The Democratic Party in Connecticut is an aging, creaking conglomeration of competing interests, haphazardly cobbled together into a body that is impressively large, but ultimately non-functional. The state Republican Party is a mere rump of its former glory, without even the strength to rid itself of a stubborn and doomed Senate candidate.

Neither has anything approaching the unity or discipline seen regularly in the days of Henry Roraback or John Bailey. This is also true on the national level, although the Republicans are a little more unified than the Democrats. Really, though, personal loyalty seems very able to trump party, especially where Joe Lieberman is concerned. That's why the Republicans aren't pushing for Schlesinger's removal. That's why Karl Rove can call the Lieberman campaign with offers of support, despite the fact that he's a Democrat. There's loyalty there. Same thing with Amann.

Which makes efforts like this and this pretty interesting. The Democratic Party's membership, or at least a small (but, following Lamont's win, newly powerful) part of it, is trying to enforce a discipline that hasn't existed for decades--if it ever existed at all--on the leadership. To them, partisanship is not an obstacle, but something to be strived for, as they persue a return to power for their party and an effective block against the Bush Administration.

The bonds of individual loyalty are still very strong, though. It's likely that Jim Amann won't change his mind, and that he won't suffer any consequences for his endorsement of Lieberman.

At least for now.

Source
Powell, Chris. "Democrats' party loyalty show for Lamont was a charade." Journal-Inquirer 14 August, 2006.

Clinton Parts Ways with Joe

So much for "the hug."

Lieberman has characterized his loss - and the need for his subsequent independent run - as liberals in the party purging those with the Lieberman-Clinton position of progressiveness in domestic politics and strong national security credentials.

"Well, if I were Joe and I was running as an independent, that's what I'd say, too," [former President Bill] Clinton said.

"But that's not quite right. That is, there were almost no Democrats who agreed with his position, which was, 'I want to attack Iraq whether or not they have weapons of mass destruction.'"

"His position is the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld position, which was, 'Does it matter if they have weapons? None of this matters. ... This is a big, important priority, and 9/11 gives us the way of attacking and deposing Saddam.'"

Clinton said that a vote for Lamont was not, as Lieberman had implied, a vote against the country's security. (ABC News)

Clinton also said that he had campaigned for Lieberman because of their long friendship. I wonder if he'll return to Connecticut to campaign for Lamont?

Source
"Clinton Sounds Off on Terror, Republicans." ABC News 15 August, 2006.

Update: I just noticed that both tparty at LamontBlog and I, entirely without meaning to, basically made the same post. Same opening zing and everything.

I will add that a ton of Lieberman supporters at his HQ on election night were wearing those buttons. Not sure how they feel about Clinton turning on Joe...

Not so Swift

Republicans and Republican-linked groups continue to express support for Sen. Joe Lieberman's independent bid, including a group that brings back memories of 2004:

Connecticut's U.S. Senate race continued Monday along its unpredictable way: The White House declined to endorse the nominee of state Republicans - and a new "Vets for Freedom" group with ties to the GOP advertised its backing of incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman, who is waging an independent campaign for re-election after losing last week's Democratic primary.

The group's full-page ad Monday in The Courant created an immediate stir: Former Democratic State Chairman George Jepsen, a top adviser to Democratic primary winner Ned Lamont, said the ad showed that "national Republicans, in their effort to help Joe Lieberman, clearly have a well-laid-out strategy to attack Ned Lamont."
...
[George] Jepsen, a senior Lamont campaign adviser, said he saw a similarity between the 2004 Swift Boat Veterans effort and Monday's ad by the Vets for Freedom.

"So, the swift-boating begins," he said. (Lender)

The Lieberman campaign, of course, said that they had nothing to do with the ad, and the veterans' group claims that they are the ones being smeared--by a paranoid Lamont campaign.

So. This ad really isn't "swift-boating," which seems to mean character assassination on a grand and audacious scale, but parallels between the 2006 Senate campaign and the 2004 presidential campaign do exist. In fact, they've existed for a while. A lot of the same themes keep bubbling to the surface, and many of the charges hurled and positions taken are like those of Bush and Kerry. Lieberman has attacked Lamont for flip-flopping on Iraq, and not having a clear position, while portraying himself as resolute and tough on terror. The fact that Lieberman's attacks have lately been supported by a Republican echo chamber makes the parallels that much stronger. Lamont, on the other hand, has done all he can to tie Lieberman to the Administration and its failures in Iraq.

To put it another way, Ned Lamont has to a degree been running against George Bush. Joe Lieberman is currently running as George Bush.

It isn't hard, then, to see why Lamont supporters would be a little jumpy about GOP-linked veterans' groups taking out full-page ads. Who knows where it could go next?

Source
Lender, Jon. "`Vets For Freedom' Creates Stir." Hartford Courant 15 August, 2006.

Two Takes on Lieberman and Foreign Policy

Two interesting editorials today on Lieberman and his foreign policy views:

First, Spencer Ackerman of (the normally Lieberman-supporting) The New Republic, writing in the American Prospect, takes Senator Lieberman's reputation as a foreign policy expert to task:

Leave aside Lieberman's unseemly eagerness to paint his opponent as a jihadist cat's-paw. There's a bigger problem with his pitch: Lieberman isn't strong on defense at all.
...
But belligerence isn't the same thing as wisdom -- and hawkishness does not always lead to a safer America. Lieberman has, of course, been the most vigorous Democratic defender of the Iraq quagmire, which has laid waste to U.S. defense capabilities in a way that not even Vietnam was able to. Many have asked why Lieberman has been the lone Democratic hawk to face a vigorous liberal primary challenge, and the answer is surely complex. But part of it may be that while other Democratic hawks emphasize the risks of withdrawal, Lieberman is unique among Democrats in defending the wisdom of the invasion itself, a position so inexplicable as to be nearly insane. Indeed, Lieberman's judgment on defense questions is like that of a stopped clock: the hawkish position, applied consistently, has to be right sooner or later. What Lieberman is asking Connecticut -- and the Democratic Party, and the country -- to accept is that the only secure America is a bellicose America. And that position is a guarantee of future Iraqs.

Also, the Courant has an editorial from Frank Harris, III, the chairman of the Journalism Department at Southern Connecticut State University, who wonders why Senator Lieberman is comfortable condemning the lies of Presidents about sex but not about war:

Eight years ago, the senator righteously called out Clinton for his moral indiscretion and his lies regarding Monica Lewinsky - the sex lies; yet since the Iraq war, the senator has remained silent regarding the lies of George W. -the war lies.

For those who may have forgotten, amid the troops coming home in body bags and bandages, not to mention the thousands of civilian casualties and the further destabilization of the Middle East - George W. and his administration have, in effect, looked into the eyes of the American people and lied about the reasons for going to war in Iraq.

Remember the weapons of mass destruction and the assertion that Iraq was complicit in the terrorism of Sept. 11, 2001, and that there was indisputable proof?

If Lieberman were consistent in applying moral outrage to immoral, disgraceful behavior that damages the country - as he did with Bill about Monica - he would find gaping holes in the Bush administration's war in Iraq.

Amann Sticks with Lieberman

Jim Amann is backing Joe Lieberman. Why?

Connecticut House Speaker James Amman of Milford is sticking by Lieberman. He says Lieberman has called him three times since last Tuesday's primary asking him for support. Amman says he has not heard anything from Ned Lamont, the Greenwich businessman who won the primary. (AP)

He just wanted to feel appreciated. Is that too much to ask?

Source
"House speaker stands by Lieberman." Associated Press 14 August, 2006.

Bush Won't Back Schlesinger

PoliticalWire reports Another setback for Alan Schlesinger:

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said this morning that President Bush will not endorse Connecticut U.S. Senate candidate Alan Schlesinger (R) over Sen. Joe Lieberman even though he's the Republican nominee.

And this after Schlesinger was pretty much the only Republican in Connecticut not desperately trying to distance himself from Bush:

I am one Republican who does not run away from the president," said Schlesinger, adding that he would welcome a chance to campaign in Connecticut with Bush.

All this for Joe Lieberman? Or is all this just to create as much discord in the Democratic ranks as possible?

Open Forum

Lieberman 46%, Lamont 41%. Could be good or bad, depending on how you look at it.

Malloy thinks about the future. At least his doesn't involve being crushed by Jodi Rell.

Slightly old news, but Elissa Wright in Groton won her race when someone flipped a coin. Can we decide Lieberman-Lamont that way, too?

Congressional Races Update

We're done with our Democratic primary, but our neighbors to the north are just getting started with theirs, which is scheduled for next month.

What else is happening?

"Red Ned"

Never say bad things about Waterbury:

As The New York Times reported Aug. 3: "Mr. Lamont prefers not to talk about his background. 'I've been blessed,' he will say, but beyond that he can turn testy." Ordinarily, such cantankerousness would raise suspicions among inquisitive reporters -- "What's he hiding?" But liberal journalists adore him because they share his world view on abortion, homosexual marriage, universal health care, racial quotas, loopy environmentalism and especially the war against Islamic terrorism.

They are blood brothers, or more accurately, fellow travelers. Just as journalism has become a hornet's nest of socialism (communism not yet perfected), if you shake Mr. Lamont's family tree, a lot of Red apples will fall.
...
Ned Lamont, in turn, has surrounded himself with people who may be characterized fairly as dedicated socialists and borderline communists.
...
Corliss Lamont was the only Lamont unashamed to declare his communist sympathies and beliefs publicly, but that doesn't make Thomas, Ted and Ned any less Marxist. Red Ned may label himself a progressive, but when he espouses goals shared by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, et al., he gives away his true color. ("Ned")

Multi-millionaire business owners for the society-wide redistribution of wealth? I guess so.

The lesson here is that one's campaign manager should always say that Waterbury is a very, very nice city, indeed.

Hat tip to an anonymous poster in this thread

Source

"Ned Lamont's true colors." Waterbury Republican-American 13 August, 2006.

Congressional Races Update

Now that the primaries are over, Connecticut's congressional races are starting to creak and groan back to life.

1st District (map)

Scott MacLean won the Republican primary, defeating Miriam Masullo by a wide margin. Incumbent John Larson, whose website is currently a lovely shade of blue-green (and nothing else), has yet to really get his campaign underway. Given the wide advantage Democrats enjoy in the district, he probably won't need to do anything until Halloween.

2nd District (map)

Joe Courtney (D) and Rob Simmons (R) continue to run hard and raise money. Robocalls from independent groups either defending or slamming Rob Simmons have been plaguing 2nd District households since spring, there was a anti-Courtney push poll a few weeks ago, and yesterday I got a glossy "legislative update" from Simmons, but otherwise very little seems to be happening here.

Expect the campaign to kick into high gear sooner rather than later. This is one of the most-watched races in the country (again). Simmons is doing his best to claim the center, which has been a successful strategy for him. His website shows him with Jodi Rell and John McCain, two Republicans who are very well-liked in these parts (remember that McCain won the presidential primary here in 2000). Simmons has also expressed support for Joe Lieberman's independent bid. Courtney seems to be focused on tying Simmons to the excesses of the Republican-led House. This was unsucessful in 2002 and 2004, but may work better this year.

3rd District (map)

Incumbent Rosa DeLauro faces Republican Joseph Vollano and Green Party candidate Daniel Sumrall. The Greens have had a ballot line in the 3rd District since 2002, and so didn't need to petition their way on this time.

However, in this heavily-Democratic district, the impact of both challengers to the popular DeLauro is expected to be slight. Vollano, like MacLean, doesn't seem to be getting much in the way of official Republican support.

4th District (map)

Rep. Chris Shays (R), Diane Farrell (D) and Richard Duffee (G) are facing off in the hotly-contested 4th District. Farrell has spent a lot of her time attacking Shays's position on Iraq, which was basically her strategy in 2004, when she lost to Shays by a very narrow margin. She has also been doing what all three Democratic challengers are doing this year: trying to tie a moderate Republican to the conservative leadership in Washington.

Shays was one of the first Republicans to openly support Joe Lieberman's bid for re-election, and is working hard to retain his image as a maverick. This, too, is a race which will shortly become a lot more visible.

5th District (map)

This is going to be the nastiest race of the year--barring possibly Lieberman-Lamont II. Nancy Johnson (R)) is facing Chris Murphy (D) in a tight race that has already taken to the airwaves.

Johnson has released a series of television ads attacking Murphy. She has also released an ad in which a 9/11 widow talks about Johnson's comforting words at the funeral. Both were powerful pieces, prompting a quick response from the Murphy campaign.

This race is going to be very tight, and both candidates seem well aware of it. The fact that Nancy Johnson was running attack ads in July shows just how seriously she is taking this race, which may be her most competitive since 1996. Certainly one to watch.

We'll be trying to focus on congressional races more as the campaign season really gets underway.

The Man in the Middle

In trying to whip up support for his independent run, Joe Lieberman has been reaching out to voters from out-of-state:

"If you're disappointed with the ugly tone of our politics, if you're fed up with the nasty partisanship in Washington, then I ask your help too," said Lieberman, looking into the television cameras.

Lieberman called on Americans to visit his Web site and send ideas "on how we can build this new politics of unity and purpose." He also hit them up for campaign contributions.(AP)

What is he up to? Suddenly, this isn't even remotely about Connecticut anymore, is it? It isn't about Joe clinging desperately to a single Senate seat.

This is about the White House.

Joe Lieberman was a few hundred votes from becoming Vice President in 2000, and ran for his party's presidential nomination in 2004. He believes he ought to be President of the United States--and now he's hit on a way to get himself there.

"I'm looking for people from outside of Connecticut to help me with their support, by coming to Connecticut to help, and by contributing money if they want," Lieberman said Thursday. "This is saying to a lot of people across the country, who I know are as fed up as I am with the partisanship in Washington that stops our government from doing anything about the big problems that average people face." (AP)

He's trying to start a national campaign against "partisanship," which he has on many occasions helped to fan the flames of (remember his attacks on Wesley Clark for being too recent a Democrat?), and he's enlisting the support of people from all across the country. To what end? First and foremost, he wants to win his seat back. But then what? If he can manage to defeat Lamont, he will spin his victory as moderation triumphing over extremism, the center defeating the fringe. The public will take notice.

Lieberman is a long way from winning his party's nomination. In fact, he will probably never be able to win a Democratic primary. But he may be exactly who these guys are looking for:

For most of the 20th Century, the contest for the U.S. presidency was waged over those “in the middle.” Recent Presidential elections, however, have not been focused on the middle but on the turnout of each party’s special interest groups – with each party’s “base” representing barely ten percent of the American people.

We believe that, while the leaders of both major parties are well intentioned people, they are trapped in a flawed system – and that the two major parties are today simply neither relevant to the issues and challenges of the 21st Century nor effective in addressing them.

As a result, most Americans have not been enthusiastic about the choices for President in recent elections, the key issues they ran on, or the manner in which the campaigns were conducted.

Therefore Unity08 will act to assure that an alternative ticket is presented to the American voters in 2008.

Imagine that the choices for president in 2008 are John Edwards, George Allen... and Joe Lieberman. How far out of the question is it?

He's starting now. He is trying to appeal to all Americans, not just to people from Connecticut. His message is a simple one: enough partisan bickering. It could wind up being very compelling. If he's successful in getting past Lamont... the sky may be the limit for Lieberman.

Source

"Lieberman looks outside state for help with independent run." Associated Press 12 August, 2006.

Our Beliefs, Our Goals & Why We'll Succeed." Unity08. http://www.unity08.com/believe, accessed 12 August 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:

• U.S. Senate Democratic Primary Map
• Democratic Gubernatorial Primary Map
• Democratic Lt. Governor Primary Map

What else is happening today?

Democratic Lt. Governor Primary Map

Dan Malloy must wish his map looked like this. Mary Glassman picked up votes beyond those cast for Dan Malloy absolutely everywhere except for West Hartford. Her dominance of Litchfield and Fairfield Counties was total. Many, many towns that went for DeStefano also went for her. North Branford, FYI, is blank because the vote there was tied.

This is a decisive win by Glassman. It's puzzling why it didn't help Malloy more.

Democratic Gubernatorial Primary Map

This map has a definite geographical theme. Dan Malloy was very strong in Fairfield and Litchfield Counties, while John DeStefano had patchy but consistent support across the rest of the state. DeStefano did best in the Naugatuck Valley, Greater New Haven and parts of Tolland and Windham Counties. The Naugatuck Valley support shows the impact of the unions. Without it, and them, he would have lost.

There's one more map I'll make for this election: the Lt. Governor vote. Either late today or tomorrow.

Orchulli About to Enter Race?

Could be.

Orchulli told us late yesterday that he's already been approached by state Republicans about replacing the hapless Alan Schlesinger as the G.O.P. nominee in the Connecticut Senate Race -- and that he'd "make himself available" to do it.

"Should the party decide that they want me, and should Mr. Schlesinger decide that he wants to step aside, I would make myself available to them," said Mr.Orchulli. "If I was in it, it would undercut the perception that Mr. Lieberman has the Republicans, and it would change the dynamic of this whole race."

Orchulli would be a much more viable candidate than Schlesinger, although just how much better remains to be seen. His entry into the race could spell doom for Joe Lieberman, though.

Hat tip to Ken Krayeske.

U.S. Senate Democratic Primary Map

Here it is: the first map of the 2006 election season (click to enlarge):

There's a really interesting pattern here. Notice that most of the state is blue (Lamont). The dark blue (Lamont by more than 10%) is especially visible. This is because Lamont's strongest support came from smaller towns in Litchfield, Tolland and Windham Counties, like Salisbury, Cornwall, Stafford, Union, North Canaan, Scotland and others. Most of these towns, if you compare them to the 2004 presidential map on the sidebar, went for Bush or only barely for Kerry in 2004. They are conservative.

So why did they go for Lamont? For one, these towns have proportionally small but often much more liberal Democratic parties than the older, larger cities and suburbs where Lieberman was successful. They are not connected to the party machine, and they owe Joe Lieberman nothing. A lot of these Democrats are probably transplants from other areas.

The towns that went for Lieberman (purple) tended to be older and bigger. Aging industial areas like the Naugatuck Valley, Greater New Haven, New Britain and Enfield voted for Lieberman. There are more Democrats here, and they tend to be somewhat more conservative than their counterparts in the small towns.

The problem for Lamont is that there is no way he can replicate this feat in the general election. He won't win a third of the towns in November that he he won on Tuesday. Their overwhelming majority of Republicans and independents will vote for Lieberman or Schlesinger. Lamont needs support in the cities. Luckily, he actually did manage to win Hartford and New Haven, although by a small margin in each case, so he may get it. Lieberman, on the other hand, will hold on to his base in the Naugatuck Valley and the inner suburbs, and expand to the small towns.

This map was based on unofficial results as reported in the Courant.

I will try to have a map of the gubernatorial election tomorrow or the next day.

Senator Lieberman On The Offensive

Less than 48 hours after his primary defeat to Ned Lamont, Senator Joe Lieberman is on the offensive attacking Mr. Lamont’s position on national security following the overnight terror arrests in the United Kingdom. At a luncheon in Waterbury today, Senator Lieberman stated:

“If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England . . . It will strengthen them and they will strike again.”

Mr. Lamont’s campaign manager, Tom Swan, responded (without any substance) to Senator Lieberman’s comments by stating:

“Did Karl Rove write this attack line for Joe?”

Senator Lieberman went on to say:

“How the heck can we be in a battle in which we are fighting as Democrats and Republicans against each other, when these terrorists certainly don’t distinguish based on our party affiliation? They want to kill any and all of us.”

The Lamont campaign might want to take notice of this and, in particular, Mr. Lamont might want to reconsider what it is that the people of Connecticut (not just primary night Democrats, but all voters) want. Today, I think most citizens want to feel safe when we board an airplane or train, cross a bridge, or travel through an underground tunnel. If I am mistaken, and these things don’t matter to you, by all means continue to support Mr. Lamont, who would rather see our troops come whom on a date certain and allow Iraq to become an unofficiated terrorist-breeding ground. But then again, those terrorists wouldn't come after us, as Americans, if we leave Iraq like they want us to right, Mr. Lamont?

Source

Healy, Patrick and Medina, Jennifer, New York Times, August 10, 2006, Lieberman Seizes on Terror Arrests to Attack Rival

UPDATE: In fairness to the Lamont campaign, I did receive this press release after I posted the article. Mr. Lamont's statement is in the link below:

Ned Lamont’s Statement on Terror Arrests

Rasmussen: Lieberman Lead 3%

This is pretty impressive for Lamont:

Rasmussen Reports began polling the Ned Lamont-Joe Lieberman general election match-up last night. After 375 interviews, preliminary numbers show Lieberman ahead of Lamont by 3 percentage points. Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger is a non-factor in the single digits.

Remember, this is just preliminary. But if that trend holds up, this could be a much tighter race than the pundits are saying, right now.

DeStefano vs. Rell

Remember the governor's race? Dan Malloy lost a close one. John DeStefano somehow survived.

How? Why?

Newspapers are saying that DeStefano’s labor support helped to put him over the top, but it’s worth pointing out that DeStefano had the lion’s share of the unions. Malloy, on the other hand, had almost no union support—but still came within 4,000 votes of DeStefano. Republicans are arguing that this means the unions’ power is waning. It’s more likely that without such strong union support, DeStefano would have lost by 10,000 or more—so they still matter.

That doesn’t bode well for the general election. Union support matters a lot less in November than it does in Democratic primaries.

Mary Glassman’s surprising victory—the most decisive win out of all the statewide races—is probably the best thing to happen to the Democrats on Tuesday. DeStefano’s candidacy is much enhanced by her presence. How to explain it? Glassman won by a significant margin in almost every town in Connecticut. Maybe women voters were sending a message to the Democratic Party, or maybe this really was Audrey Blondin’s revenge. Then again, maybe people just didn’t like Scott Slifka. There’s probably some truth to all three, although the first may have been the biggest factor. Regardless, DeStefano/Glassman is a more viable ticket than DeStefano/Slifka.

Of course, that ticket will now have to deal with Jodi Rell (and her LG pick, what’s-his-name), who is still a popular governor after two years. Voters like Rell, and not just because she isn’t John Rowland. DeStefano will have to convince voters that the state is in the middle of all kinds of crises that Rell is doing nothing about in order to win. Luckily for Rell, that’s not actually true. Connecticut isn’t doing great—but neither are things as bad as they were in 1990. The biggest catastrophe that could have befallen the state—the closure of the Groton Sub Base—was averted in large part because of the efforts of Rell and other Republicans like Rob Simmons. There has also been significant campaign finance reform, again largely thanks to Rell. Without her support and constant pushing, I seriously doubt the Democrat-led General Assembly would have passed such a strong bill. Rell has disappointed on several fronts, to be sure, including serious property tax reform, health care and ethics. But by and large, voters think she’s doing a good job. DeStefano has been trying to convince them for two years that she’s a failure as a governor. His message has yet to catch on—and, with only three months to go and not a lot of money to play with, it may never.

Then again, Connecticut politics over the past few years has been all about the impossible coming to pass (remember Jarjura?). I’m not ruling out a DeStefano win. But he’s going to have to work hard, and his campaign will have to be a lot better for the general election than it was for the primary.

Awkward Moments

From a Bristol Press report on yesterday's Democratic Unity event:

"I am supporting Joe Lieberman," Blumenthal began and then stopped in embarrassment. "I am supporting Ned Lamont as ardently as I supported Joe Lieberman," he added. (Hladky)

Look for more of these sorts of uncomfortable moments in the future. Like this:

[CHRIS DODD is eating in the Senate cafeteria. JOE LIEBERMAN comes up with his tray]

LIEBERMAN: Hi, Chris! Uh. Mind if I sit down?

[A pause. Dodd looks around. No one is nearby]

DODD: [mumbles, doesn't look at Lieberman] Sure, I guess. Have a seat.

LIEBERMAN: [sits, waits expectantly] So how's things?

DODD: Okay. You?

LIEBERMAN: Oh, fine. Never better. [they both look down at their trays]

DODD: ...Yeah. Er... Good.

LIEBERMAN: So.

DODD: ...So. [the pause lengthens]

LIEBERMAN: Um. Nice work on the floor, today.

DODD: Oh, thanks. Thanks. Uh. You, too.

LIEBERMAN: Thanks! I thought Trent Lott looked drunk again, didn't you?

DODD: [pause] Mm.

LIEBERMAN: Boy, I can't wait till we retake the Senate. Can you? It's going to be great. Right?

DODD: [hastily takes a bite of sandwich, indicates that his mouth is full]

LIEBERMAN: [picks at his lunch] These freedom fries are always soggy. Don't you think they're soggy, Chris?

DODD: [forces a laugh] Soggy. Yeah.

LIEBERMAN: ...So...

DODD: ...Right.

LIEBERMAN: Been back home?

DODD: Oh, yeah, I was there last Wednesday, for-- for an event.

LIEBERMAN: With--

DODD: [quickly] Yeah. You know. How it is.

LIEBERMAN: [looks away] Yeah. I know. Look, I better go.

DODD: You don't have to.

LIEBERMAN: No. I should. I, uh, have some paperwork. You know this place. Paperwork. [gets up and hurriedly walks away]

DODD: Geez. [sighs, goes back to eating his lunch]

Best Theory Yet

Thank you Joe Lieberman, but our Democratic Nomination is in another castle.

So the next time there's a Lieberman-Lamont debate, someone needs to yell "Mortal Kombat!!!!"

Open Forum

Three cheers for the British police!

Joe Lieberman is becoming the de facto Republican candidate in this race, as GOP leaders and candidates have nothing but praise (and endorsements) for him, while Democrats urge him to drop out. Think Jodi Rell will campaign for him?

One sealed ballot is the key to an election in Groton.

I'm working on the Senate primary map. Yes, I saw the one in the Courant this morning.

What else is happening this morning?

Everything Must Be Right in the World

The war in Iraq must have ended peacefully and with minimal loss of life. Ditto Afghanistan - the Taliban must have been driven out. Lebanon must have retreated from the brink of WW III or Armageddon (depending on who you ask). I must have dreamed paying $48 to fill a 15 gallon tank this morning - the energy dependence crisis must have been averted. I guess my property taxes didn't really increase drastically this year and the local school boards must be getting all the money they need to fund the mandates created by NCLB. Medicare probably isn't on the verge of running out of money and the debt must have been eradicated.

My evidence for this?

The (Republican) White House had the time and inclination to issue a press release blasting Connecticut Democrats for rejecting Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary:

he White House accused the Democratic Party on Wednesday of catering to the extreme left after Connecticut voters defeated Sen. Joe Lieberman in a primary election over his support of the Iraq war.
...
"I think instead it's a defining moment for the Democratic Party whose national leaders now have made it clear that if you disagree with the extreme left in their party, they're going to come after you," [Tony Snow] said.

Forget for a second the absurdity of the quoted line (national leaders of the Democratic Party didn't "come after" Senator Lieberman until he declared his willingness to disregard the will of Connecticut Democrats and the "extreme left" seems to agree with 60% of America on the defining issue of the campaign). I'm just glad that they managed to get everything done above "comment on the Connecticut primary" on the old To-Do list...

Update: From Ken Krayeske in the comments:

Today's White House Press Briefing:

One of the interesting things that happened in this Connecticut race, by the way, was there appeared to be some buyer's remorse as election day approached. Maybe the polls were rigged; maybe the polls were bad. But at least the lead that Mr. Lamont had went from 13 points to six to four on election day. That indicates that even in a fairly liberal state like Connecticut, where this is the one issue, where you had a well-financed candidate who had more money than the incumbent, that you still had a 50-50 split more or less within the Democratic Party on this issue.

Ken hits both points right on target:

1. Tony Snow is either claiming that the drop in Lamont's support in the Q-Poll from 13 to 6 in a week represents buyer's remorse or that the Q-Poll is rigged. Either view is utterly unsupported by evidence (the Q-Poll is rigged? Projection much? Also, rarely will campaigns rig a poll so that it appears that they lost half their support in a week. Its absurd on its face.). The evidence supports the proposition that the 13 point poll is an outlier. The 6 point poll is more reflective of what the Lamont campaign's internals showed (no link, it was told to me verbally).

2. While Lamont was well-financed for a challenger of an 18 year incumbent in a primary, to say that he had more money than Lieberman is laughable. As of about a week before the primary (final numbers are not yet available), Lieberman had out raised Lamont by a factor of 2-1. By Tony Snow's standards, I have more money than Bill Gates. If he says it from the podium, it must be true.

Three Pictures

Just a few more pictures from Lieberman HQ last night that I wanted to share.


This picture shows a crowd of Lieberman supporters looking visibly nervous as the reports got worse and worse for him. It illustrates the tense mood of the place pretty well.

Lieberman's "concession" speech, which was anything but conciliatory, started off as a somber moment, but morphed into a rally for a campaign that had been reborn. Here is where the crowd could finally release all that pent-up energy cheering their hero on.

As for Lieberman himself, he looks like he's aged a decade. I thought to myself more than once that this must be like torture for him. But maybe it wasn't. Maybe he's finally running the race he wants to run.

Lieberman Fires Staff

Not surprising:

On Wednesday, he filed petitions to run in November as an independent and dismissed his campaign staff because he hadn't been aggressive enough in countering Lamont during the primary. (AP)

I have to wonder who will step up to replace them.

Updat 8:00pm: The Lieberman campaign has announced that Sherry Brown will be the new campaign manager, and Dan Gerstein the new communications director. Both are old Lieberman hands.

In other news, it looks like Diana Urban is withdrawing her bid for the Senate.

Source

"The day after, Joe Lieberman starts his independent bid." Associated Press 9 August, 2006.

Letters to Joe Part II

Wes Clark chimes in:

You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no "antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party.

Why, oh why, won't Democrats like 4 star general (Retired) Wes Clark be strong on national defense?

The site gives you the ability to forward a personal message to the Senator...

Comments Back

Phew.

An Open Letter to Ken Mehlman, Love, Connecticut Democrats

Ken Mehlman in Ohio this morning:

But like the proud history of so many Democrats before him, Joe Lieberman believed in a strong national defense.

And for that, he was purged from his Party.

I have three major problems with this:

1. First of all, mind your own business. You don't see Democrats moaning and complaining about what conservatives are attempting to do to Chafee in his primary in Rhode Island. They are attempting to take out a respected thorn in their side and replace him with someone whose backers want to shrink the government until democracy can be strangled in a bathtub, or eliminate the Department of Education, or whatever the Club for Growth is up to these days. Ken, before you start giving unsolicited lectures on Democratic primaries, you might want to spend a moment getting your own house in order.

2. Words have meanings. When talking about governments, purging has a very specific meaning. No one here was persecuted, no one sent to the firing squad, no one was forcibly resettled, and no one will be sent to a gulag (although the rest of Sean Smith's career may feel like one). And no one got an ice axe in the head.

Instead, we had an election. And one guy lost.

Ken, as the head of a political party, you might recognize elections as events that we have every year to decide who gets to represent us in office. Yesterday, we decided. So sorry. You would not recognize a purge, because we live in America.

3. I understand its your job to make the other side look bad so your side wins elections, but do you have to imply that we don't love our country at the same time? No one thinks we should have a weak national defense. In fact, most Americans would disagree that your party, this president, and your war are giving us a strong national defense. When looking at Connecticut, you would be wise to bet the over.

One last thing...

Joe Lieberman is a well-liked ... Senator

In America, we have this mechanism for determining whether a politician is well liked called "elections"... Oh, never mind.

What They've Always Suspected

George Stephanopolis reports that Karl Rove and George W. Bush are reaching out to the Lieberman campaign:

ccording to a close Lieberman adviser, the President's political guru, Karl Rove, has reached out to the Lieberman camp with a message straight from the Oval Office: "The boss wants to help. Whatever we can do, we will do."

Reminds me of all the mailers and phone messages I got from the Lieberman campaign telling me how Joe was a tried-and-true Democrat who always stood up to the Bush Administration, while Lamont was secretly some sort of Republican shill.

It's good to see that Bush and Rove are willing to go to bat for a guy who was, at least according to his campaign literature, their mortal enemy.

Letters to Joe

The Lamont campaign has created a website asking Senator Lieberman to respect the wishes of his party's primary voters and not run as an independent in November.

The link allows visitors to leave a personalized note asking Senator Lieberman to drop his independent run and support the Democratic nominee.

The campaign will deliver the notes to the Senator periodically and post the notes on their website. I don't think there is a number that will convince Senator Lieberman to drop out, but it will be interesting to see just how many signers this letter attracts statewide.

Also, in addition to the Connecticut bigwigs unity conference today, Senators Reid and Schumer (Senate Minority Leader and Chair of the DSCC respectively) have called on Senator Lieberman to end his bid:

Both senators issued a joint statement this morning on the Connecticut Senate race, saying, in part, "The Democratic voters of Connecticut have spoken and chosen Ned Lamont as their nominee. Both we and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) fully support Mr. Lamont's candidacy. Congratulations to Ned on his victory and on a race well run."

Rahm Emanuel (DCCC) got on board as well.

On the other side, mass confusion:

U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman had just reached down from the Goodwin Hotel atrium stage to shake Jim Diamond's hand about 11:20 p.m. Tuesday.

"People like me are going to be in a tough spot," said Diamond, a Stamford Democratic Party official.
...
Was Diamond concerned, as a party official, about damage to the Democrats' November chances as the result of the independent candidacy that Lieberman vowed to carry on?

"I am concerned," Diamond said.

How would he act on that concern?

"I'd prefer not to comment," he said.

"I think we need to get going," said his fellow Stamford Democrat and Lieberman supporter, David Stein.

A few minutes later, a conversation with Lieberman's adult son, Matt, ended much the same way. Talking to a knot of reporters at the end of a night of awaiting results that turned out badly, he - like his father - put forward the best spin possible, saying the Lieberman camp is "energized for an important campaign going forward to November."

He added: "And it's going to be about unity and purpose ... "

It was pointed out to him that many Democrats think his father's plan is the opposite of "unity."

"I gotta go, though," he said, and he turned away.

Expect prominent supporters in Connecticut (although, I would imagine, not his son) to leave the ship in droves in the coming days until only Jim Amman and Eddie Perez are left.

Comments

Comments are down. It's a Blogger issue... hopefully they will be back soon.

The Independent Democrat

Connecticut for Lieberman is off and running. Lieberman is billing his campaign as a crusade against partisanship. Voters, on the other hand, aren't so hot about his decision to run as an independent.

What do you think?

Do you support Joe Lieberman's decision to run as an independent?
	Yes - I'll always support Joe
	Yes - He has the right to run
	Yes - Someone needs to stop Lamont
	No - He's weakening the Democratic Party
	No - He lost, fair and square
	No - I hate everything Joe does
Free polls from Pollhost.com

A Wild Night

There's a lot to digest from last night. Here's a quick run-down:

U.S. Senate: Take Two

Ned Lamont defeated three-term incumbent Joe Lieberman 52%-48%, in a race that was watched all over the country. Lieberman, during what was not really a concession speech, declared that he would fight on as an independent.

The margin was slimmer than recent polls have suggested, but it was a remarkable victory for political newcomer Lamont nonetheless.

Governor: Unions Swing Election to DeStefano

John DeStefano won by a very slim margin (about 4,000 votes). His victory was attributed to stronger union support.

He will face a rested and popular Gov. Jodi Rell.

Lt. Governor: The Revenge of Audrey Blondin

DeStefano's running mate, Scott Slifka, lost to Malloy's running mate, Mary Glassman by a wide margin (57%-43%), despite the fact that DeStefano himself was narrowly victorious.

This has never happened before that I know of. But I will look into it.

Other Primaries

Scott MacLean won (63%-27%) in the 1st Congressional District.

Apparently Rita Schmidt in the 41st House District has won by a single vote.
Incumbent State Reps. Kosta Diamantis and Lydia Martinez have both lost their respective primaries.

Turnout for Democrats statewide broke 40% for the governor's race, and was about 43% for the U.S. Senate race. These are record numbers for a statewide primary. Democracy in Connecticut is alive and well!

Click here for a rundown of all the other races.

What a night! Thanks to everyone who contributed.

Governor Rell Ready For A Spirited Campaign

Governor Jodi Rell's campaign has issued a very short press release congratulating New Haven Mayor John DeStefano on his primary election victory this evening. The press release states:

"Congratulations to Mayor DeStefano on his victory tonight in the Democratic primary for Governor. I look forward to a spirited campaign based on the issues."

Is it too early to call the November election for Governor Rell?

Lieberman Concedes, Vows to Run as Independent

Senator Lieberman just condeded the primary, but he has not conceded the race.

Claiming that his 4% loss to Ned Lamont was better than any of the pundits predicted, and was in fact a victory of sorts, Lieberman vowed to go on to November, to the roaring acclaim of his supporters.

Lieberman, perhaps, finally found his voice in this campaign when he called for a "new politics of unity and purpose," free of partisanship and attack politics. It's time, he said, for a "new campaign to unite the people of Connecticut," no matter their party.

"If you're disappointed with the ugly tone of politics," he said, "Go to my website... when it's un-hacked." The crowd laughed. "Are you with me?"

And of course, the crowd was. Well: most of them. I spied not a few worried faces on my way out of the hall. But by and large, they were there for him.

So tonight, a loss became a victory for Joe Lieberman. He won his way free of a party that has rejected him. And what will he do, now that he doesn't have to claim that he's really a Democrat any more?

"Tomorrow," Lieberman said, "is a brand new day."

No Tie For Second...

Joe Packs it in!!! Congratulates Lamont...

And announces independent bid...

Talks about how saddened he was by the partisanship of the primary... Partisanship? It was a party primary. Or so we thought.

Makes remark about the (alleged) hacking. Still with little to no evidence.

He apparently just asked out of staters for campaign contributions... Odd.

Ned will speak in 20 minutes

The rumor is that Joe will announce an independent run rather than concede.
CGG

Wall to Wall Results

Governor:

Getting close to a call... 2,000 vote spread with ~4,000 votes left to count. Still 50-50...

More Results

Senate: 93% Reporting, 4% lead
Gov: 50-50 still a 2klead

Update from Lieberman via the TV (3):

"Alot of people are waiting, mostly reporters." Fun...

87% Reporting
125k Lamont
116k Lieberman

They just showed Lieberman's HQ on tv... I am sad now.

84% Reporting
121k Lamont
112k Lieberman

Gov: 50-50, DeStefano has a ~2k lead

NO PRECIENCTS FROM HARTFORD HAVE REPORTED!

Drudge Calls it for Lamont

Drudge makes it as official as Drudge can make it (which isn't that official).

Hit tip to the eagle-eyed Brent J in the comments below...

Governor's Race Very Close

About 600 votes separate DeStefano and Malloy, with 80% of precincts reporting.

Mary Glassman, however, is winning handily. DeStefano/Glassman is a very real possibility. Wild.

To Drudge or not to Drudge...

Drudge at 10:10 reported that Lamont had won.

Later, not so much...

Thank you to Brent J - This post makes no sense and should no longer exist. But it still does...

Results Update

Update
581 Reporting
Lamont 123k
Lieberman 109k

Gov Update
81% Reporting
50-50

Update from the Ballroom
80% Reporting
Lamont 117,000
Lieberman 103,000

Update from WTIC
50% Reporting
Lamont 52,000
Lieberman 48,0000

45% Reporting

Lamont 76k
Lieberman 66k

WTIC: SecState on the radio complaining that out of state hits crashed the website.

Most Absetee ballots have already arrived and are being counted now...

Lamont Dog...

Watching TV

The best source of information here at Lieberman HQ is the television. Supporters, staff and reporters clusters around one of four television sets set to a local channel.

The mood is still not happy, but the narrowing race has given some cause for hope. I spoke to a man wearing a Lieberman t-shirt who said that a 4% loss "is perfect for an independent run." He desperately wants Lieberman to run as an independent, because he is a Republican and couldn't bear to support Joe if he remained a Democrat.

Interesting.

The young volunteers are getting drunk. There is an aroma of stale beer in the atrium, now.

Back downstairs I go...

Hope at Lieberman HQ

There was a brief moment of joy at Lieberman HQ, when the television flashed numbers showing Lieberman ahead of rival Ned Lamont. The numbers were inaccurate (apparently the TV channel switched the pictures), but the joy remained. The race is tightening up.

Lieberman 48%
Lamont 52%

54% of precincts reporting.

Fun With Cameras

Action shot of the excitement:



Governor Weicker doing an interview with Alan Colmes (sans spine) in the foreground.



Spazeboy interviewing Jim Dean of the DFA.

Small Towns

A lot of the small towns are coming in first--and they will probably go pretty heavily for Lamont. Some examples:

Bethlehem: 136 (Lieberman) 197 (Lamont)
Hampton: 72 (Lieberman) 158 (Lamont)
Middlefield: 215 (Lieberman) 300 (Lamont)

Not surprising. A lot of the smaller towns went for Lamont at the convention. Lieberman is stronger in the large cities, although at least one Hartford precinct did go for Lamont.

Update from Lamont HQ

Update
246 Precincts Reporting - 10,000 vote spread in favor of Lamont

They just announced that all but 2 precincts of Bridgeport have reported and Lamont has a lead.

WTIC reported that Lieberman is "praying". Of course it was radio, so he could of been "preying", no reports on whom...

Update from the TV 55% to 45% advantage Lamont

Update
208 Precincts Reporting
47,000 Lamont
39,0000 Lieeberman


194 Precincts Reporting
Lamont 44,000+
Lieberman 39,000+

CGG

Breakin' The Law?

Blogswarm checks in to speculate that, if the DoS attack allegations are 100% debunked, Sean Smith may have broken the law by the scattershot reporting to every law enforcement organization east of the Rockies...

FYI - I am officially done with this story for the night.

Early Returns...

They're calm here at Lieberman HQ. Early returns, no big deal. That'll change, they say.

A weird result is that Dan Malloy is slightly ahead of John DeStefano, but Mary Glassman is WAY ahead of Scott Slifka. Huh.

Update 8:53: The mood here is growing a little worse. Lamont is ahead by about 5,000 votes. There aren't that many people in the hall--and a lot of them are media.

And...

Malloy is still just ahead of DeStefano. We'll see how long that lasts.

First Results

No link - I saw it on TV and can't find it online:

1% reported
Lamont 57%
Lieberman 43%

Still 1%
Lamont 60%
Lieberman 40%

Update from CGG:
2%
Lamont 60%
Lieberman 40%

Update 2 from CGG
4%, no change

Update #4 Lieberman loses his own precinct. Hat tip to Branford Boy.


Update from CGG 7%
Lamont 56%
Lieberman 44&

Update 11%
Lamont 56%
Lieberman 44%

Pictures from Lieberman HQ

Polls Closed

It's 8:00pm. The polls are closed in Connecticut.

Blogging with the Reverand

Jesse Jackson just came in to the Bloggers' Room to meet the bloggers and is now giving an impromptu press conference. He is devestating when talking about the war. I will post links to the video from CtBob and Spazeboy as soon as it is available. CGG's pics are below!

Report from the Lieberman Campaign: Part 2

All right, now I feel stupid.

I found my way, eventually, up to the media filing center on the second floor, where I managed to find a space among the other (actual) journalists. There is a significant media presence here (I think that's Candy Crowley over there), but I still think the lion's share of media attention will be focused on Lamont tonight.

Remember to check in with the Secretary of the State's site for up-to-the-minute election results, updated as they come in.

About half an hour until the polls close in Connecticut.

Report from the Lieberman Campaign: Part 1

I'm here.

It was hard to miss the place. News trucks lined up outside all down Pearl St., and around the corner next to the Goodwin. I parked a discreet distance away.

The Lieberman event itself is being held in the foyer of the Goodwin Hotel in Hartford. It is at once ostentatious and surprisingly cramped. The foyer itself is long and narrow. At the front is a large American flag, in front of which is a podium that says "Joe Lieberman: Fighting for Connecticut" on it. The media is confined in a little area behind the risers. If many more of us show up, it's going to get very tight. I can't actually see anything.

They moved this event several times. I don't quite know why.

I talked with a Hillary Clinton supporter who was here to both drum up support for Hillary in 2008, and to support Lieberman. He believed that a Lieberman loss would be devestating for Hillary. He told me of all the anti-Semitism beneath the surface of the Lamont campaign, and how only Lieberman--and possibly Hillary could deal with something like the current situation in the Middle East.

Staff are hard to find, right now. I also have the feeling that the big media personalities are all at the Lamont campaign.

But tonight, as there, history will take place. I'll keep you updated as the night unfolds.

Website Update II...

FDL has two great posts up:

Explaining the incompetence involved in "buying cheap" when you go looking for hosting services.

Snarky look at the possibility of Joe asking for the election results to be invalidated because they sat on their hands their website was down for over 24 hours.

Emboldened has two as well (snark factor - 10):

Diving in soccer, diving in politics...

Dan Gerstein in interpretive videos...

From the "You Get What You Pay For" Department

Lieberman's campaign pays $15 dollars per month for their web hosting. Lamont's campaign pays $1,500 per month.

Website Update...

24+ hours and counting and the Lieberman website is still not functioning. There is no way restoring the site should be taking this long. This is either incompetence of staggering proportions, or they are milking this issue for all the news value its worth...

Matt Stoller at MyDD has an interesting post up questioning the press reports that there actually was a hacking, or if it was in fact just a bandwidth issue (either way, the messaging that appeared on their site seemed to be an automatic message that would appear with a bandwidth issue or a DoS attack).

robzr at DailyKos has a great (and technical - beware) post explaining the security (or lack thereof) that the site employed (Hat tip to Charles Gaba in the comments. Charles, please email me if you see this - gaber205 at aol dot com - thanks).

Also, to the claim that the Lieberman campaign, specifically Sean Smith, has made that they have no ability to send and receive email since the attack, I have an email sent from the Lieberman campaign this morning that would seem to give lie to that.

MeetNed.com, infamously introduced by turfgrrl, is hosted by the same server as joe2006.com with the same IP address, and is up and running. If there was a DoS attack, that site should be down.

Lamont Internet Communication Director Tim Tagaris is on Colin, making the some of the points above and Colin mentioned that he received an email from Dan Gerstein claiming that they had no email access. Zing. Check the archives...

UPDATE: Via Ned Lamont's site, the Google cache of joe2006.com is available (the cache site is not perfect, but should be able to be used to get the site back up and running). There is no reason they could not have had the site back up by (last) midnight. Well, none that does not involve the news cycle.

Record Turnout Predicted

Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz, on Colin McEnroe's radio show, just predicted record (for a statewide primary) turnout of between 40 and upwards of 50 percent. I was driving, not typing, so I am paraphrasing from memory, but apparently Bridgeport's turnout has already eclipsed the 1994 primary turnout and we have 3 hours + to go...

I will take the over!

(updated the percentage)

SOTS Sets Up Election Returns Site

If you needed a site to obsessively reload tonight, this is it:

Live election updates from the Secretary of the State.

The updates will start after the polls close. A ton of credit goes to Susan Bysiewicz and her staff for this idea.

Update: Speaking of, apparently Bysiewicz is predicting 50%-55% turnout.

Wow.

H4xor Pwns Joe

In the end, I don't think the hacking of Lieberman's website is going to matter either way.

I did just get word that Lieberman has cancelled his last two events of the day, which were supposed to be in Waterbury and Bristol.

There are reports of pretty decent turnout coming in from all over the state. Could be as high as 30% by the end of the day, or higher.

Lamont's Offer

I just spoke with the Lamont campaign. It seems that they have offered the Lieberman campaign the use of a tech person to fix their servers. They have not responded.

Also, will the more tech savvy than me please chime in below... Any campaign has all their code stored someplace, just in case something (like this) happens. How long would it take to put the website up on another server? Ten minutes? An hour? Surely less than 24 hours, right?

It seems that the news story has more value than their website, because they are not taking the steps necessary to get it back up as soon as possible.

Also, why aren't the mainstream media people asking the tech writers/correspondents at their own outlet? They should be able to answer these questions...

UPDATE:

Charles Gaba in the comments (in full, because he said it better than I could have):

I'm a web developer, not an actual sys admin, but I can tell you this much: the Lieberman campaign SHOULD have a full backup of the site, the database, redundant servers and power supplies. They SHOULD have several alternate domain names to redirect the primary domain towards, and each of those domains should be set up on a different server with at least a "bare bones" version of the website (the static stuff at least).

For that matter, I'm a bit stunned that a campaign as large and expensive as this one is doesn't have their web server in-house in the first place (instead of using an external 3rd-party hosting company). That's the sort of thing I'd expect from someone running for state house or city council, not the United States Senate (especially an incumbant!). I have no idea whether the Lamont campaign site is hosted in-house or not but I'd be pretty surprised if it isn't.

The bulk of the Lieberman campaign's static content (positions, photos, media files, etc) should have already been hosted on at least one backup site, hosted separately, at (for example) lieberman2006.com or something like that. In that situation, all they would have to do would be to change the name servers to repoint towards the alternate site--or, at worst, put a "this site has moved HERE" link on joe2006.com, just like you'd see on the simplest mom & pop site.

None of this is meant to forgive whoever took it down, but it shows a stunningly sloppy IT team at the Lieberman camp IMHO.

The Lieberman campaign sloppy? Couldn't be...

Lamont Responds...

I just spoke to Tim Tagaris and he unequivocally stated to me that the Lamont campaign had no part in any hack attack. Here is the campaign's full statement:

Apparently the Lieberman campaign is pushing a story that we have coordinated an attack against their website. Not a chance. Here'’s the unqualified statement Sean Smith has called for.

If Senator Lieberman's website was indeed hacked, we had absolutely no part in it, denounce the action, and urge whoever is responsible cease and desist immediately. It is our sincerest wish that everyone planning to vote for Ned Lamont or Joe Lieberman does so today.

Tim Tagaris
Internet Communications Director
Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate

Sean Smith Denounces Attack on Lieberman Website

Hoo, boy.

STATEMENT FROM SEAN SMITH:

"For the past 24 hours the Friends for Joe Lieberman’s website and email has been totally disrupted and disabled, we believe that this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents. The campaign has notified the US Attorney and the Connecticut Chief State's Attorney and the campaign will be filing a formal complaint reflecting our concerns. The campaign has also notified the State Attorney General Dick Blumenthal for his review."

"We call on Ned Lamont to make an unqualified statement denouncing this kind of dirty campaign trick and to demand whoever is responsible to cease and desist immediately. Any attempt to suppress voter participation and undermine the voting process on Election Day is deplorable and has no place in our democracy."

Update: See a message from Dan Geary in the comments. He's right. Whoever is doing this should cut it out.

Exit Polling Hamden

I just spent some time with CTBob conducting the least scientific exit poll of all time. I will let him put up the results (here sometime soon), but my impression was that both of these races will come down to the wire (based on Hamden). Oh, and, in case any one is wondering, the average age of people who voted between 10 and 12 at Spring Glen School? Maybe 10,000.

And, correcting myself from before, turnout is very heavy (that's why you don't stay at a poll from 6-7, then come home and say turnout seemed light). A town Democratic official who was going from polling place to polling place collecting turnout numbers told me that the turn out was very near 30%. At 11:30AM. Interesting.

Good Turnout?

Maybe. It's a beautiful day for an election, that's for sure. I don't know if that's better for Lamont or Lieberman.

It's almost lunchtime, which is one of the times people tend to get out and vote.

What's it like out there?

Primary Day II

Here's the list of primaries happening today, to the best of my knowledge:

Governor (D)

Lt. Governor (D)

U.S. Senate (D)

1st Congressional District (R)

State Senate

Senate District 2 (D-possible) - Bloomfield (part), Hartford (part), Windsor (part)

State House of Representatives:

House District 3 (D) - Hartford (part)

House District 4 (D) - Hartford (part)

House District 53 (D) - Ashford, Tolland, Willington

House District 72 (D) - Waterbury (part)

House District 73 (D) - Waterbury (part)

House District 79 (D) - Bristol (part)

House District 89 (R) - Bethany, Cheshire (part), Prospect

House District 93 (D) - New Haven (part)

House District 127 (D) - Bridgeport (part)

House District 140 (D) - Norwalk (part)

Also, there's a report out of New Haven that some voting machines were showing DeStefano's name on line A and line B. Anyone know anything about that? Update 10:55am: Confirmed, the Malloy campaign has filed a complaint asking for the votes from that machine from before the problem was discovered to be declared invalid. Apparently, only one vote was cast on the machine. Story here.

Turnout seems light so far this morning.

Poll Confusion

Emblematic of what I am sure is a statewide phenomenon, voters in Hamden this morning have been showing up to the wrong polling place (due to a switch in advance of this election). I was at the polls for 90 minutes this morning and I witnessed 5 voters get sent to their proper polling place (which does compare favorably to the 20 or so people who drove in the exit).

Let's stop this madness. Ned Lamont's website has a tool that allows you to find your polling place simply by entering your name. Of course, this is available to all registered Democrats in Connecticut!

Turnout seemed light in Hamden - more later...

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.

ConnecticutBLOG
My Left Nutmeg
Lamont Blog (unofficial)
Connecticut Bob
Spazeboy
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.

Lieberman Omitted Line in Speech

On Sunday, he was supposed to say, at the end of his closing argument speech:

"If after hearing the truth about where I stand on Iraq, you still want to cast your vote solely on that one issue, then I respect your decision."

This line was in the prepared text sent to the media. According to Hotline on Call, however, he didn't actually say it.

28,886 New Democrats

Some numbers from the Secretary of the State's office:

Unaffiliated to Democrat, May 1 to deadline today .......14,506
Newly registered Democrats since May 1 ......................14,380
TOTAL NEW DEMS .......................................................28,886

Compare with:

Unaffiliated to Republican, 5/1 to deadline today..............521
Newly registered Rs since 5/1.........................................3,878
TOTAL NEW REPUBLICANS............................................4,399

Total Active Dems Eligible For Tomorrow................652,936
Total Inactive (can still vote if they show up).............43,887
TOTAL REGISTERED DEMS......................................696,823

This is a major surge. How many are for Lamont? How many for Lieberman? The new Democrats could be decisive.

Open Forum

Polls suggest two close races tomorrow. It should be a blast. Here are some recent articles to chew on.

• Timeline of the Lieberman-Lamont Primary
• Primary Narrows
• More on My Least Favorite Ad
• How Do You Know You Are Losing Without A Poll?
• Lieberman Switches Focus from GOTV to Media
• Lieberman Makes "Closing Argument"
• NE Magazine Covers the Senate Primary
• Lieberman Petition Drive in Enfield
• Giant Bananas for Lieberman
• Left Wing Lunatics

Lots more to come, I'm sure.

Something Up in Stamford?

Secret service, D.C. plates, a bus, Joe Lieberman... Is this some sort of Monday surprise? Could be nothing... but who knows? This can only get weirder.

Update: Oops, looks like it was House Majority Leader John Boehner, whose name needs to be pronounced very carefully, sneaking into town to campaign with Rep. Shays.

I think we've all had a bit too much Lieberman-Lamont.

Timeline of the Lieberman-Lamont Primary

Part One - November to mid-March

Part Two - Mid-March to May 19th (Convention)

Part Three - The Convention to Primary Day

What is this? A chronology of the major events of this primary, broken into three parts. It begins in late November, 2005, and stretches until the present day.

Where do the links go? To stories on this site or other blogs, like My Left Nutmeg. I didn't reference news articles, because they disappear from the Web quickly. My pages usually have citations to specific news articles in them.

Primary Narrows

WTIC and the AP are reporting that the gap between Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont has closed to 6%.

Link to Quinnipiac Poll here.

Lamont............51% (54%)
Lieberman.......45% (41%)
Undecided.........4% (5%)

Lieberman has still not broken 50%, and Lamont is still above it. But the trend seems to favor Lieberman. Undecideds may be breaking his way. 90% of respondants say their minds are made up.

Also, the gubernatorial primary shows Malloy gaining, although the move isn't as dramatic as Malloy himself predicted.

DeStefano........48% (48%)
Malloy.............41% (38%)
Undecided.......10%

Source

"Lieberman Cuts Into Lamont's Lead." Associated Press 7 August, 2006.

Quinnipiac Poll. 7 August, 2006.