Lieberman Expanding Lead
The AP reports that Joe Lieberman is expanding his lead on Ned Lamont and Alan Schlesinger. A poll released one month ago, gave Lieberman and 10-point lead. Today’s poll gives him a 17-point lead.
Schlesinger: 6%
Lamont: 35%
Lieberman: 52%
The debate between Lieberman and Lamont on Monday was their first since the August primary. Among those in the poll who watched the debate or read or heard about it, only 3 percent said it changed their minds.“Ned Lamont needed to score a knockout in the debates to catch Sen. Joseph Lieberman, but he apparently didn’t lay a glove on him,” poll director Douglas Schwartz said.
The poll suggested that Lieberman’s support among Republicans and independent voters was substantial.
Lieberman leads Lamont 70 percent to 9 percent among likely Republican voters, with 18 percent for Schlesinger, and 58-36 among likely independent voters. Likely Democratic voters back Lamont, 55 percent to 36 percent.
In other words, no matter what certain elements of the Democratic party might think of it, the majority of Connecticut’s (likely) voters still seem to favor Lieberman. If Lieberman, indeed, wins the election in Connecticut, it is the ultimate proof that his decision to run as an Independent was right.
MyDD isn’t exactly happy with the results of this poll, yet not ‘upset’ either:
Ok. So why am I not really upset? Politics is emotional for me, and I go up and down as much as anyone, though I try to keep my analysis accurate. Well there are a couple of reasons. One, I’ve developed a kean respect for Senator Lieberman over the past few months. The man is completely brilliant, probably the best politician I’ve ever seen up close. When he wants something, he goes and gets it. He’s not just a great politician, he’s an extremely skilled sociopathic charmer, able to appeal to one’s worst instincts while making you feel like he’s helping create resolute moral tone.
Ahhh, personal attacks never fail, right?
17 Responses to “Lieberman Expanding Lead”
One day people might be able to discuss issues without getting
personal, but that would create community…something the “elite”
don’t want.
If Lieberman, indeed, wins the election in Connecticut, it is the ultimate proof that his decision to run as an Independent was right.
If by right you mean a majority of voters prefer Lieberman to be their Senator then I suppose you are correct. Having said that, I don’t see what is right about ignoring the choice of Democratic primary voters. If Lieberman wanted to be an independent candidate he should have had the guts to pull out of the Dem primary. Instead he gave the Dems a choice and then ignored their collective decision. I don’t see anything right about that. In fact, some states think such things are wrong enough to actually pass a law against doing them. Maybe CT voters will pass a sore loser law in the next election. They need one.
No they don’t. I consider such laws to be undemocratic. If the majority of Democrats do not favor a specific candidate, does that mean that afore mentioned candidate has to accept that and ignore the potential wish of the majority of general voters? Of course not. Utter nonsense.
If the majority of Democrats do not favor a specific candidate, does that mean that afore mentioned candidate has to accept that and ignore the potential wish of the majority of general voters?
If a candidate has no intention of abiding by the decision of the primary voters then he shouldn’t run in the primary. It costs money to hold primaries. If their results don’t matter then why should they be held at all?
Well, you could look at it as a non-binding referendum.
Well, like I said previously, Republicans weren’t going to buy into that whole “Schlesinger is your man” con from Lamont supporters. Sclesinger doesn’t look any better today than he did prior to the debate.
Lamont could still be saved. Maybe the nutroots can catch Lieberman in a page sex scandal. Maybe, Mike Rogers will out him.
Otherwise, it is another Kos “Kiss of Death” for Lamont.
I kinda agree with Blue Neaponset. It might be right personally, but its wrong morally I guess. I know I’ve harped on this point before, but it wouldn’t be such a big deal in my mind if we had better voting laws. This situation isn’t that bad because there was no strong republican candidate, but if there had been, Leiberman would be splitting the democratic vote and actually benefiting the Republicans. Its only in our @$$ backwards system where more candidates actually HURT the democratic process.
Then do not demand of people not to run, demand a change of system.
You could, but that’s the point of a sore loser law, to make it binding. A candidate knows ahead of time that he has two choices. He can:
1) Enter the party primary and abide by the results, or
2) Not enter the primary and run on his own
I recognize how you can argue that this is undemocratic. A candidate (who may have a large amount of support) can be excluded from the ballot just because someone else in his party may have even more support.
BUT, being a party nominee has its advantages. For one thing, you get the (D) next to your name. In most states, party candidates also get automatic ballot access which independants must jump through hoops. Therefore, the state can impose a sore loser law as part of a quid pro quo.
I am not fond of engaging in speculatuion, but I do wonder this: it seems quite possible that Bush will feel forced to replace Rumsfeld in the near future. There’s been talk about Lieberman as Sec. of Defense. If Bush asked Lieberman to be his Sec of Defense and Lieberman wins in CT, then what happens? Is there a 3-way special election where each party puts up a candidate? Do Independents in CT nominate someone?
denisedh, I would guess the (likely) R Gov would appoint someone, after which there would be an election in ’08.
I predicted that JL would be rejected over time, and it looks like I was overly influenced by some wishful thinking in the blogosphere.
I can only hope GWB keeps mention JL as a victim of radical Dems.
It isn’t only about JL’s position on Iraq. His tepid campaigning as Veep in ’00 combined with his running for reelection as Senator at the same time gave him the appearance of something of a Judas, which he has reinforced on a number of other occasions.
But for a man of relatively limited accomplishments as a legislator to be as popular as he is on the Washington pundit circuit bespeaks his skills as a pol. He has served himself very well.
Shoot I could care less about that I have my own state (Pennsylvania) to worry about! heheh
Prediction:
The Dems win the House and the Senate next month, holding the Senate by only one vote.
Joe switches parties, thereby giving the Senate back to the Republicans.
100% plausible, right?
In all seriousness, if the majority in either house is held by only one or two seats, the pressure for someone to defect will be enormous.
Joe is a democrat. You look at his voting record he should be gold with the party. Instead he stood up and voted his conscience on “one” issue and basically was “kicked” out. He was a sitting senator with a good record for the party but wanted to be more than a party shill so he was sandbagged. So know he should just go home? Talk about disfranchising the voters.
Eric,
That is why we call the “Big Tent” Party. Step out of line on the wrong issue and your finished.
JL is indeed a wonderful Dem. All the goopers tell us so.
Yes, but in the event of a strong Republican candidate, it would be Lamont who would be the spoiler with no real chance to win, and the Democratic Party which would be the fringe third party.
The way to fix that problem is to have runoffs; require a majority to win. Most democratic systems do so.
Requiring loyalty instead to an ideologically extreme party is not a democratic solution. Parties exist in order to endorse candidates, not the other way around.
PING:
TITLE: A Bit More On The Senate
BLOG NAME: The Kudzu Files
Michael van der Galien at The Moderate Voice writes that Joe Lieberman has opened a 17-point lead in Connecticut, according to one poll. When you look at the balance of power in the Senate, you have to figure that if…