Lieberman About to Lose Demoratric Primary, but...

By: Lowell
Published On: 7/20/2006 8:22:03 AM

With just over two weeks to go, it is looking increasingly likely that Sen. Joe Lieberman (D...er, I, CT) is about to lose the Democratic primary to challenger Ned Lamont.  Check out the lastest poll, which has Lamont up by 4 points, 51%-47%.  Wow. 

On the other hand, Lieberman leads strongly (51%-27% over Lamont as an Independent heading into November.  More evidence that the Democratic activist base and the "netroots" is not in sync with the general public?  Actually, I've been saying this for a LONG time, often to the great anger of that "activist base," but the evidence just keeps mounting that this is, indeed, the case. 

An exception to the rule?  Right here in Virginia, where the "netroots" helped encourage a war hero, Jacksonian populist and former Reagan Administration official to run as a Democrat for U.S. Senate against George "97% Bush Rubber Stamp" Allen.  Something tells me, this story is going to have a quite different ending than Connecticut.


Comments



We are not out of touch with the general public (pitin - 7/20/2006 9:01:23 AM)
According to this very poll, we are in touch with the Connecticut Democrats and out of touch with the Connecticut Republicans and Independents that are merely saying they would vote for a long term Senator whose name they recognize.

Once Lamont wins the primary and he gets some press, his numbers will jump by leaps and bounds in general election polls.

I've given him some loot, and recommend that others do to.  You can Donate Here



Spot-on. (I.Publius - 7/20/2006 9:22:11 AM)
If Lamont can beat Lieberman in a primary, he can win the general election.  At this point, it's all about name recognition.


Do they use Diebold machines? (Rebecca - 7/20/2006 9:30:52 AM)
This is so close it is perfect candidate for a voting machine to flip the results. I checked out several of the special elections where netroots candidates lost to  traditional Dems or Dinos in special elections and the results were all 47% to 51%. This was the case in three races. I didn't check beyond that because I was convinced by then that this is too much of a coincidence to be attributed to chance.

You'd think they would at least not use the same program every time.



On rivalry between Dems and netroots (Rebecca - 7/20/2006 9:37:35 AM)
This is one of those areas where there seems to be a kind of rule that says "Don't ask, don't tell." Don't ask if they like the netroots. Don't tell if you hate the netroots. The truth is there is a rivalry and even animosity in some cases. Its obvious to me.

Of course one would expect the Dems who helped us get into Iraq and other terrible situations to want to keep doing the same old thing. Truth be told, the Dems aren't going anywhere without the netroots. The netroots are to the Dems like a transfusion to a dying patient.



Who is out of touch? (David Campbell - 7/20/2006 9:52:46 AM)
It is Lieberman who is out of touch with the Democratic voters in Connecticut.  The netroots merely recognized this fact and cheered Lamont from the sidelines.  The Republicans will abandon Lieberman in the general election.  They see it as a pickup opportunity.


Correction to contests with the same percentage difference (Rebecca - 7/20/2006 10:38:16 AM)
Some of the contests where I noticed that the percentages were the same in the results were Dems vs. Republicans. One thing is for sure. Its easier to rig a close election.

Lieberman is in tune with the leadership of the Republican party and some of the Democratic leadership as well. One thing is evident as we watch events unfolding in the Middle East. We need to avoiding being an agent of Zionists (Notice I'm not saying Jews or Israel.). Zionists are the far right wing (politically) of the Christian and Jewish faiths as well as the neo-con imperialists. Zionism gives the neo-con dominionists a quasi-religious cover for their dirty deeds.



WEBB WEBB WEBB (DukieDem - 7/20/2006 12:53:22 PM)
I'm not going to try and convince anyone here about supporting Lieberman, but I would say that every dollar that you give to Lamont is one you can't give to Webb. Would you rather have Ned Lamont and George Allen or Joe Lieberman and Jim Webb? I don't think anyone here wouldn't choose the latter, so please, GIVE TO WEBB UNTIL IT HURTS! DEMOCRATS IN CONNECTICUT CAN HELP LAMONT, WEBB NEEDS EVERY OUNCE OF SUPPORT WE CAN GET HERE!!!


This is a tricky one (Nick Stump - 7/20/2006 2:55:12 PM)
I'm not sure which way the CT race is gonna go.  I don't place a lot of faith in the idea where Lamont gets name recognition and wins it all.  That just seems a little more difficult to pull off than it looks.  Let's face it, Lamont is no Jim Webb.
I like Lamont's politics fine, but there's a danger here. We can end up with Lieberman in the Senate as an Independent, or worse.  Sometimes in politics 2 plus 2 equals 9. 

I've certainly cursed Lieberman in the past, but I suspect if he runs as an independent, he may very well win.  If he's gonna win, I'd rather have him sitting in Washngton with a D behind his name.  I'm all for netroots--but for me, the netroots activity is a way for me to help get Democratic candidates elected.  Lamont will have a couple of hoops to jump through.

I used to only work for candidates in Kentucky.  Paul Hackett was the guy I first worked for outside my state.  I knew Jim Webb's work before he started running and thought he was a natural guy for me to support, but I'm still uncertain about the CT election and sometimes I worry about getting myself carried away with netroots fever and giving here and giving there, frittering my donation money away.

I'm going to stay out of the CT race.  I'm concentrating on the one race I think is a must win for the country.  That race is the Webb Allen race. In a week or so, I'll have the money to donate a decent sum to to someone and it all goes to Jim Webb.  We lose this one, Virgina and the whole damn country loses big time.  I look at Jim Webb and I see him as the potentially one of the finest Senators I'll see in my lifetime.  As I have no heart for any candidate in Kentucky and as I see the VA race as the most important one in the country--Webb gets all my money this fall.  It's fun to play around and feel like I'm changing things for the better all over the country, but I keep remembering Allen is no pushover. He's won elections in VA before and a lot of those voters who didn't vote in the primary are Allen voters and they are used to voting for him. I believe Jim is the rare Democrat who can actually bring those Reagan Dems back to the fold, but it's gonna take the money to do it.

  The VA primary was a great victory for the  netroots community, but remember how low your turnout was in VA.  There's a lot of voters out there who are not getting their information from the internet.  Jim needs hard cash to get his message out those voters and that still means TV ads and nice looking mail pieces in every voters mailboxes. 

We are seeing the ascendancy of the internet as a true power  in politics, but we're not all there yet.  Take a good look at the money Webb and Allen have.  Like the above poster, I say let's not take our eye off the ball.  Jim Webb still needs big money and I'm saving mine for him. 

In the Andrew Horne race here in Kentucky, there was a certain glee in the thought we were going to win.  How could we not?  Andrew would bring out the Reagan Dems from the south-end of Louisville.  There was a lot of national dem support.  Kos was writing about him. He was on Hardball and Air America.  He was a combat vet, and war hero.  He was ramrod straight, well loved by the unions and the guy looked like he could be presidential material.  We even won the blog wars.  We had twice as many yard signs. We had a rabid group of volunteers.  Guess what happened?  We had our ass handed to us.  John Yarmuth won by 20 points.  Why did we lose?  We didn't have the money to reach into the South End and get those Reagan Democrats to come out and we were rolled over with a bunch of TV ads we couldn't afford to compete with.  But the real loss came when we didn't have the money to get the name recognition up.  Oh, there were mistakes made, but not enough to lose the race by the twenty points. 

Name recognition may not be sexy business, but it's at the heart of a lot of wins in the political arena.  My advice is hold on to your money and save it for Jim.

I've overmade my point here, but I'm a still a bit raw from losing a race we should have won.

This is off-subject, but I just spent 4 days in lovely Southwest Virgina on a farm near Coeburn.  As Louisville feels like New Orleans in the summer, I was glad to be in the cool clean air of the beautiful Virgina countryside. 
For those of you who don't spent much time in the Mountains, I hope you go up there and talk to voters.  The folks I met up there don't know a lot about Webb, but as they're sending a lot of sons and daughter to this war, a lot of them are looking for change.  When you have some time off, take a trip to Southwest Va and knock on some door.  There are fine folks up there.  It's the area where my people and Jim Webb's people come from.  They'll invite to in to drink tea and be glad to talk some politics.  Also, as little news.  I'll be playing at Wise County fair this fall with the Music of Coal Show.  Come on up and say hello.

Nick 



cult of personality (mr science - 7/21/2006 2:18:10 AM)
On the other hand, Lieberman leads strongly (51%-27% over Lamont as an Independent heading into November.  More evidence that the Democratic activist base and the "netroots" is not in sync with the general public?

I think this is a rush to judgment. If you were to do a poll on the issues, my guess is that the Democratic activist base are more in sync with the so-called ''general public" than this poll would indicate. The differnce here has more to do with candidate preference. When you poll the general public on that, we find that it becomes much more a "cult of personality" than anything. The netroots are paying a lot more attention to this primary than anyone else. They like Lamont.