Very BAD news for Lamont

[bigdarryl]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/October%202006/ConnecticutSenate.htm

[fooj]

1. I don't believe it. I just don't believe it.

[MrCoffee]

19. Why not? Schlesinger is at 6%. Pukes are hopping on for Joementum.

[Critters2]

54. The he should be honest, and call himself a Repug

But honestly has never been Joe's strong suit.

[keta11]

2. What a shame!

[FrenchieCat]

3. You mean bad news for Democrats, hey?

Still 31 days to go....

We'll just have to wait and see!

[Vinca]

4. There's always hope. Maybe Joe will continue his undying

support of the Grand Old Perverts through their trying times.

[peacetalksforall]

5. Not all of us want to link when we don't know what it'sbout - can

you entice us a little?

[bananas]

28. I hate it when people do that.

Here's the first three paragraphs.
It's all I read, so I don't know what's in the rest of the article:

Senator Joseph Lieberman (I) has increased his margin over Democrat Ned Lamont by eight points. He now leads the antiwar candidate 50% to 40% (see crosstabs).

Thirty-nine percent (39%) are certain of their Lieberman vote, while 30% definitely expect to pull the lever for Lamont.

GOP nominee Alan Schlesinger now attracts 6% of all voters.

[nickinSTL]

44. "increased his margin...by eight points"?

:wtf:

Something smells...

[Larkspur]

6. As my mentor at Notre Dame would say,

"This is a character building moment."

Ned needs to get a series of good TV ads going up immediately to counter Lieber-bushes air campaign. This poll, while bad, shows that Ned can still turn his election chances around if he gets moving on creating ads to present his side of the story.

[Doctor_J]

26. A Dem from Notre Dame?

You must have felt like a rose in a pasture full of shit.

[Larkspur]

50. My mentor and his family were Democrats

And so were some of my friends. The faculty was also mostly progressive.

[tk2kewl]

7. Is there a breakdown by party?

[marmar]

8. It's Rasmussen, so it's not really double digits...

But EVERY Repug is supporting Lieberman - it's like there's not even a Repug candidate in the field. I hope every Democrat in Connecticut takes notice of this and asks "why?" Lieberman is poisonous.

[liberalhistorian]

9. Shit! Shit shit shit

shit shit shit shit shit shit shit shit! Come ON, CT, WTF is WRONG with you?

And where in the hell is Lamont's campaign-they seemed to have dropped off the face of the earth right after the primary. Come ON, guys, get it together!!!!!

[Arugula Latte]

20. I know -- I had the same impression.

I don't get it. There was so much energy going into the primary. What happened?

[AX10]

21. I am voting for Ned Lamont. The Repugs are backing Joe.

That is one of the main problems. Second, 1/3rd of the Democrats still back this SOB.

[bunkerbuster1]

51. I'll fix your spelling

It should read:

1/3 of the "Democrats" still back this SOB.

[CTyankee]

52. You need to remember that this was a very long shot from the

beginning. I know, I was there. What Ned did was incredible.

It was the energy and the vision of the activist, progressives in the Democratic Party that drove Ned's campaign. We were up against terrible odds but we got him as our Democratic candidate.

The way I see it is that we haven't brought around enough of the CT Independents who are not particularly progressive but are certainly not RW Republicans. They are just mostly not as involved as we are. They see Joe as "reaching across party lines" which we know is a crock but they don't. A lot of Republicans are also happy with Joe since he isn't a RW lunatic. Add to this the fact that JOe hasn't had a major scandal erupt in his face (yes, I know his backing Bush in the war is a scandal itself but you know what I mean). Joe's ads are now emphasizing his "experience" and Ned's lack of it. They don't do ads unless they have focused tested the ad's theme. THAT is where Joe must be resonating with so many CT voters.

The war issue is going to get resolved without Ned if this trend continues. Support for the war is so low and the Republicans are in such deep shit over so much, not just the war, that I foresee a halting stumble of our forces out of Iraq sooner rather than later. The tipping point will be if we take both the House and the Senate this November. The Dems will have subpoena power and start the investigation/oversight process. Political support for the war will evaporate and Congress will cut off funding. I lived this scenario during Vietnam. I see it coming.

[Ian David]

10. Anyone know if LIEberman has an pages working for him? n/t

[fooj]

18. I know that he started a college group with Lyn Cheney in 1995.

That was enough for me.

[cmkramer]

36. That lie has been debunked from here to Sunday

This is the text of a letter (it was printed in THE NATION, not exactly a hotbed of Lieberman support so I can't imagine they didn't vet it for accuracy):

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020128/lieberman20020117

December 18, 2001



Jerry Martin
President
American Council of Trustees and Alumni
1726 M Street NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036-4525


Dear Jerry:

I am writing in regards to the Council's recent report, Defending Civilization: How Our Universities Are Failing America and What Can Be Done About It.

In the past, the Council has often sent me advanced copies of its publications before they have been released and asked for my support. In this case, though, I was never given the opportunity to review the Defending Civilization report before it was made public. I first learned of it through a call to my office from a reporter in Connecticut about a controversy the report had stirred at Wesleyan University.

If I had been given an advanced copy, I would have objected to its content and methodology and asked you either to revise it or make clear that I had no involvement with it. But because that did not happen, and because I have been incorrectly listed on your website as a co-founder of the Council, a number of news accounts and commentaries have associated me with the report and incorrectly asserted or implied that I endorse it.

This letter is meant to set the record straight about my disapproval of this report, which I consider unfair and inconsistent for an organization devoted to promoting academic freedom. To avoid any future confusion, I would ask you to remove any reference to me as a "co-founder" of ACTA from your website or other Council documents. And I would ask that you note in any future public statements that I do not support this specific report. Thank you.



Joe Lieberman

[fooj]

43. Joe's word is good enough for you?

Actions speak MUCH louder than words. He's a PROVEN liar. Enough said.

[terip64]

11. I hate to tell you that my mom is voting for lieberman

It is KILLING me. :banghead:

I keep telling her that he is republican but she says that people don't like that Lamont is so rich. Such bullshit I can't stand it.

kick and recommend for awareness and hopefully a change in Lamont's campaign to make something happen!

[terip64]

12. kick

[Awsi Dooger]

13. That's what the math has always figured

Lieberman by high single digits. I posted that on primary night while others were assuming Lamont would zoom into the poll lead. There was no such thing as momentum among indies and Republicans, who did not figure in the primary.

I am happy that the progressive blogs have not been prioritizing this race above all the others, which is what I feared.

Lamont needs to get into debates including with Schlesinger ASAP. I can't believe he hasn't been insisting on that for weeks. Lamont's only chance is to get Schlesinger into double digits, maybe 15%, but so far no threat of that.

[madfloridian]

14. Here are some of the Dems backing Lieberman still.

"The Moose applauds the brave Democrats who are standing with Joe. Roll Call reports,

"Democratic Congressional leaders may be keeping their distance from Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) since he opted to seek re-election as an Independent, but a group of more than 50 former Senators, House Members and Clinton administration officials will proudly announce the creation of "Dems for Joe" today...

"Other founding members include former Sens. David Boren (Okla.), Bob Kerrey (Neb.), John Breaux (La.) and Dennis DeConcini (Ariz.); former Reps. Mel Levine (Calif.) and Leon Panetta (Calif.), who served as chief of staff to President Bill Clinton; former Clinton Agriculture Secretary and former Rep. Mike Espy (Miss.); and former Clinton CIA Director James Woolsey.

"They join a much smaller group of incumbent Democratic Senators who have endorsed Lieberman in the general election. Sens. Tom Carper (Del.), Ken Salazar (Colo), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Mary Landrieu (La.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.) all have decided to stick by Lieberman."

Tammy Sun, Joe's spokesperson, put it best,

"Although we no longer have a party apparatus to count on, we're glad to know that Joe Lieberman can still count on good people who believe, as he does, that the best way forward is not by demonizing each other but by working together to find common solutions to common problems"

http://bullmooseblogger.blogspot.com/2006/09/catch-magic.html

[windbreeze]

34. Well, for some of those...it's sure no surprise

Carper, Salazar Landrieu, Ben Nelson....no surprise at all...cut off our noses...to spite our face every time...
wb

[ShortnFiery]

15. Bullshit! I think this is Bogus to get us to give up. Nope, Ned will win

This is Corporate hype to freak us out.

Don't give up! Remember, God hates a quitter. ;)

[fooj]

17. Didn't one of the big unions in CT switch their support to Lamont?

That is HUGE! I'm with you. I think these #'s are bogus bullshit!

[cali]

31. Think for a minute.

Not only in Lieberman still attracting a sizable number of dems, he's got almost all the repuke vote. Of course this poll makes sense. why is that so hard to believe?

[liberalhistorian]

42. THAT is the crux of the matter, that

repukes are all supporting Holy Joe instead of their own candidate. While that should tell the CT Dems who are voting for LIEberman something, it obviously doesn't. And repukes, of course, didn't vote in the August primary, making Lamont's victory seem bigger than it was and at the time it didn't matter which candidate they supported.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[otohara]

22. I Thought CT Was Ultra Liberal

and full of smart people. Wassup CT?

[onenote]

37. you thought wrong

repub governor. 3 out of 5 members of the House are repub. 44 percent voted for chimpy in 2004.

[AX10]

46. We are a moderate state that has a strong distrust of the far right wing.

[AtomicKitten]

23. Maybe Lieberman cyber-diddled some pages.

Hey, we can hope.

[tom22]

24. I live in CT. Voted for Ned in the primary,

will vote for him in the general. But I don't think his ad campaign has been very effective so far. Needs a lot of money, needs a lot better commercials.

[AtomicKitten]

25. I just sent him some more $$$ for TV ads.

He should come out with a TV ad slamming the GOP for the cover-up of the Foley matter and dare Lieberman to do the same. Rumors are rampant that Lieberman may switch parties after the election (I have no idea if they are true or not) but this will certainly put Lieberman on the hot seat.

I would suggest using the CPSAN clip described below that shows the GOP booing Nancy Pelosi's efforts to get an investigation of the cover-up.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2856516

[Catchawave]

27. This Should Rally the Lamont Base !

Go Lamont Team Go !

Oy, I'm living in Virginia where 43% still like George MacacAllen. Who ARE these 43% :cry:

[AtomicKitten]

29. he probably doesn't get

the macaca vote

[Tom Rinaldo]

30. Clark will be campaigning in CT with Lamont tomorrow

It is way, way too early to lose hope for this race.

[wisteria]

32. It remains to be seen if these Republicans come out and vote.

If they are angry at their party why make the effort to vote?

Lamont does however, need to reach out to Independents in CT. It is not enough to be the anti- Lieberman candidate.

Damn, I just know Lieberman is going to screw us if he gets back in. I can see the Senate being 50/50 and Lieberman changing parties if he doesn't get on the committees he wants or things don't go his way. If he gets back in he will have more clout than ever.

[leesa]

33. True. If Joe is a true Dem as he insists, why would a Republican

want to vote for him? I think they will have a hard time pulling that lever (or whatever they do)

[PATRICK]

48. Especially since he sided with Hastert

on a really repulsive issue. He has dumbly linked himself to vote depressing fortunes AND negative impressions. Considering the make-up of the GOp vote he might have thought himself forced to do that all positions except somehow playing it safe losing him votes. Lamont was perfectly correct to hammer him on it but he needs to garner turnout and the Democrats in a large majority. In doing that close work that is also the best opportunity to dispel the inserted slants against him. Numbers-wise this is the same for any Democrat trying to unseat an incumbent. The inertia and loyalty factor of the uneducated voter fatally tuned into the soothing mis-perceptions of the media has to be overcome along with the any other automatic edge.

Going the other way. Getting that free media publicity by slamming Joe properly works to overcome the edge but not all the bad perceptions also media delivered. He should have made the statement in faded jeans working alongside some farmers or factory workers or something. This is the sensational attack tactic of the struggling challenger. Sometimes it works and this time it is more than legitimate and linked crucially to everything else about the challenge.

Without the backing of the Dem establishment this could turn into a nail biter yet for Joe. Sometimes knowing the repugnant candidate, even the GOP one, is going to win has the establishment people quietly surrendering and helping. Has THAT been happening as Joe has been calling for support among Dems? I can't imagine any local GOP enthusiasm for Joe. I suppose the dilemma for Lamont has been to attack Joe instead of presenting a positive local state issue image to the GOP. Joe is shielded by GOP loyalty issues among the leaderless local GOP and past loyalty from Dem voters. Going either way can hurt Lamont too. I would go simply for the integrity thing very strongly and bread and butter local issues in a very caring involved way. If things change it will be Joe on the desperate attack he does so poorly. Things can turn around very easily as election approaches.

[beyurslf]

35. Joe will win. I am used ot seeing candidates who have 90+% support

on the DU end up losing. The DU is not representative of the country as a whole.

[Tatiana]

38. Lamont has a number of obstacles to overcome.

Namely, Joe Lieberman's name recognition. He needs to be more clearly define himself and articule the differences between what voters will get with a Senator Lamont versus Senator Lieberman.

[GetTheRightVote]

39. I for one do not believe it, are they leading up to stealing the elections

in that state ? Sure does have the pinnings of one.

:kick:

[opihimoimoi]

40. VERY BAD NEWS FOR AMERICA.....Joe does not think of what is best

for the NATION....

He is thinking very selfishly at the moment.....too selfishly IMHO

[No Exit]

41. Rape victims, mount your gurneys.

According to firedoglake, Bush-enabler Lieberman said that if Catholic hospitals didn't want to perform abortions, it would just be fine if they turned away rape victims and trucked said victims (presumably on gurneys) to some other hospital.

Jane Hamsher found this a bit cold, and gave Lieberman the name "Rape-Gurney Joe."

Some people criticized her for being insensitive. I applauded her. If a politician can't take criticism--even raw criticism--he shouldn't be in politics.

As for me: Lieberman loves war and I hate war. Therefore, I wouldn't vote for Lieberman. That's my opinion, to which I have a right.

[samsingh]

45. this poll still holds out hope

most of joe's support is from the other party. many may not even bother to actually vote.

who are the dems supporting joe? he's going to switch to the gop if he wins.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

47. Rasmussen? That means they're tied.

Time to push a little harder.

[lonehalf]

49. It's early

Don't think things won't change

Hell, by the 7th people may even have forgot about Foley.

[AzDar]

53. Very bad news for the Country I'd think. If it were TRUE.... n/t