Election 2006,  Politics

Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Lieberman Leads Lamont 53 – 41 Among Likely Connecticut Voters

August 17, 2006 /

liebermanaugust17aweb

Connecticut House Speaker James Amann, D-Milford, announces he will continue to support U.S. Sen Joe Lieberman at a news conference in the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, Conn., Monday, Aug. 14, 2006.

AP: New poll shows Lieberman leading Lamont

Ned Lamont, whose anti-war campaign rattled the political landscape by toppling Sen. Joe Lieberman in Connecticut’s Democratic primary, is gaining support among voters — but Lieberman still has an edge, according to a poll released Thursday.

The Quinnipiac University poll has Lieberman leading Lamont among registered voters 49 percent to 38 percent. Republican Alan Schlesinger gets support from 4 percent. Among likely voters, Lieberman was supported by 53 percent, compared to Lamont’s 41 percent and Schlesinger’s 4 percent.

Lieberman’s advantage in the general election comes from broad support among unaffiliated and Republican voters. Fifty-three percent of likely voters polled said he deserves to be re-elected, and nearly half doubted that Lamont, a political novice who founded a company that wires college campuses for cable television, has enough experience to be senator.

Senator JoeMentum Lieberman is showing some true electoral and polling MOMENTUM. This is bad news for Ned Lamont.

Lieberman’s long time colleagues in the United States Senate and Connecticut politics are not apt to throw Joe overboard if he is showing early polling stength. Moreover, the Washington based PACS will keep the campaign money flowing.

The GOP nominee, Alan Schlesinger, is a laugher/moron with gambling debts and problems (card counting bans from Indian casinos) and will poll less than zero on election day. The GOP will save its resources for Lieberman – if he needs any help.

The national Democrat Party will be neutralized because of the fear that Lieberman could switch to the GOP after the election or decide later as an independent elected senator to vote for organizational purposes with the Republicans.

Now, everyone knows why Lamont and the Nutroot Left were calling for Lieberman to stand down immediately after the Democrat primary.

Their polling shows Lamont as a LOSER.

“Senator Lieberman’s support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing. It more than offsets what he has lost among Democrats,” poll director Douglas Schwartz said. “As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans, while holding a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran senator will be hard to beat.”

Stay tuned…..

liebermanjuly3kweb600

Reactions from the Left:

MyDD folks are relieved and think Lamont’s numbers look good:

Unlike many people, I am actually quite relieved by the new Q-poll on Connecticut. The three-way trend lines look good: (1,319 RVs, MoE 2.7, 8/10-8/14, July 13-18 numbers in parenthesis)

Lieberman: 49 (51)
Lamont: 38 (27)
Schlesinger: 4 (9)

Ummmmm  Sadly NO……

Firedoglake thinks it is political malpractice what some Democrats are doing to Lamont.

This is political malpractice of the highest order.  I repeat: why is supporting Joe Lieberman more important than winning back the House?  Let’s also not forget the effect of Joe’s GOP GOTV on the governer’s race, where DeStephano needs help against Republican governor Jodi Rell.

The elected official wing of the Party must take away any claim Joe has to being a Democrat, and do so dramatically.  Lamont’s numbers among Dems in the Quinnipiac poll must and will rise, even as he broadens his support among independents, as in his approach through his WSJ op-ed yesterday (online subscription required).  But this effort also requires active Party involvement:  there’s no room for wiggling any longer.

It is the centrists (independent voters) and the GOP that will decide this race.  There are not enough anti-JoMentum folks in Connecticut to beat him.

Watch the money……

Previous:

Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Richie Rich and the Two Anti-Semites

Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Latest Rasmussen Poll Has Lieberman Beating Lamont

Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Karl Rove Called Lieberman On Primary Election Day To Wish Him Well

Senator Joe Lieberman Watch: Lieberman Kicks Off Independent Campaign

Technorati Tags: ,

7 Comments

  • Tyler

    August 17, 2006 at 11:37 am

    Hi Flap –

    Hope you are enjoying your summer.

    Thought I would point out something from a previous conversation we had regarding the NSA wiretapping program, which I asserted was illegal and possibly unconstitutional, and you disagreed.

    from the AP:
    A federal judge ruled Thursday that the government’s warrantless wiretapping program is unconstitutional and ordered an immediate halt to it.

    U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit became the first judge to strike down the National Security Agency’s program, which she says violates the rights to free speech and privacy as well as the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.

    So of course there will be an appeal, and the decision might get overturned, it might not. Now can we mutually entertain the possibility that the NSA illegal wiretapping might violate our civil liberties and be unconstitutional?

    Regarding this Lieberman/Lamont article – the article says “Ned Lamont… is gaining support among voters”, and you say Lieberman is the one with Momentum. Which is it?

    Cheers,
    Tyler

  • Flap

    August 17, 2006 at 12:08 pm

    Hi there Tyler,

    Yes I am enjoying the now cooler weather and have settled into end of summer days. And you?

    I may blog a piece later in the day or tomorrow on the NSA ruling. Actually, this will be an issue ultimately settled by SCOTUS – if it gets that far. An opinion by a lefty Carter appointee to the federal district court of Detroit does not worry ol’ Flap. The 6th Circuit will more than likely reverse it but then the appeal will go to the Supremes.

    I am sure the Bush Administration Justice Department are working on a stay of her ruling as I type this.

    The question I have for you is: If the NSA program is ruled unconstitutional will America be more or less safe from terrorism?

    My answer is less safe and that is what the polls show a majority of Americans think.

    Now on to JoeMentum.

    Senator Leiberman just lost an election and a lead in the polls as an independent shows good things ahead for him.

    Lamont is doing better than the last Lieberman as an independent poll, but, after having just won the Democrat Primary it is apparent he has lost the LaMontum. What Lamont needed to do was knockout Lieberman in the primary but a 4 point win was not enough.

    Joe has the Mo…..all the way to the polls in November.

    Also, Conrad Burns has evened himself with Jon Tester in the Montana polls and George Allen even with Macacca is wiping the floor with Jim Webb. but, these races could turn upside down. But, the Senate more than likely will stay GOP after November. House right now is up in the air.

  • Tyler

    August 17, 2006 at 12:32 pm

    Hi Flap –

    Yup, enjoying perfect weather up here in Ojai.

    re: If the NSA program is ruled unconstitutional will America be more or less safe from terrorism?

    I think that there are enough legal mechanisms for conducting national security, without having secretive unconstitutional programs. Case in point is the disruption of the UK plot, which was completely above-board and within the law in terms of surveillance, wiretapping, etc. Laws didn’t need to be broken to do an effective job of protecting the British people.

    Let’s say that the illegal part of the NSA program is shut down and theoretically that makes us some degree less safe. I would argue that it absolutely pales in comparison to the Iraq War, which has inflamed hostilities, polarized the entire middle east, is now a hotbed for terrorism training and operations and has wasted $300 billion, and has completely distracted the administration from addressing core national security issues which are sorely lacking for funds and attention, such as port security, transportation security, nuclear and chemical plant security and more.

    So my question back is: If we had not gone into Iraq, would America have been more or less safe from terrorism?

    regarding CT –

    in the latest Q Poll,
    http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Connecticut-Senate.html

    On July 20, Lamont “trailed Lieberman 51 percent to 27 percent with Schlesinger getting 9 percent.”

    Now: “Lieberman leading Lamont among registered voters 49 percent to 38 percent.”

    So there is a 13 point swing towards Lamont in just over three weeks.

    Further, “likely Democratic voters back Lamont 63 – 35 percent”, which is a 24 point swing towards Lamont since the primary.

    So my guess is 60/40 Lamont pulls it out. Looking forward to revisiting this with you in a few months.

    Burns-Tester will be very interesting – it’s a clear case where there is a referendum on incumbency in Washington. And what was George Allen thinking? Geez…

    Best,
    Tyler

  • Tyler

    August 23, 2006 at 10:12 am

    Hi Flap –

    I agree with Gleen Greenwald who said “That’s all this little outburst is, of course — the latest prong in the effort to throw as much personal bile as possible at Judge Taylor in order to undermine her ruling and to distract attention from the fact that we have a President who has seized the power to break the law. Look at any individual over the last five years who has prominently and aggressively criticized the Leader, and see if you can find one who has not been the target of vicious, personal assaults designed to destroy their reputation and credibility.”

    The fact is, we have a President and Vice President intent on consolidating power in the unitary executive, bypassing Congress (who is not doing their job of oversight) at every turn. They have made horrible incompetent (in)decisions on everything from Iraq to Katrina to important national security issues like port security, public transportation security, nuclear and chemical facility security and more. Virtually every single appointee is a crony, often totally unprepared and unqualified to hold the job they are given in exchange for being a Pioneer or Ranger or general brown-noser.

    This president is an unmitigated disaster, and I’m tired of debating the little points. I don’t trust him to be competent in anything he does, I don’t trust him to make a decision that is good for EVERY American, not just his base, and I don’t believe that the country is better in any way, shape or form from six years ago, let alone what its going to be like two years from now.

    On top of all this is this week’s press conference, where a reporter asked him – what was the connection between 9/11 and Iraq. He replied, NOTHING. So why are we in Iraq? No one can answer that question. It’s not a “question for historians to answer”. There is no good reason, unless you’re on the board of Halliburton or Exxon or Blackwater.

    Defenders of the possibly unconstitutional NSA program are AFRAID. It comes down to the question of FEAR of terrorists vs. civil liberties. I, along with Patrick Henry, choose the latter.

    Let me ask you one thing, Flap. Can I assume you voted for Bush both times? How can you critize people, calling them MORONS and IDIOTS constantly, while defending your vote for the worst president ever? I’m not going to call you either of those names, because you are not, but you use those names to attack people who are critical of this administration, people who saw what this president truly is (and isn’t) long before the rest of the nation started waking up to the incompetence and cronyism that will leave a black stain on America for decades.

    Best regards,
    Tyler