|
I have copied below Kos' analysis from Dailykos today on the CT Senate race. The big problem with his analysis is that it assumes that the Republicans in CT are really dumb and really weak. Neither of those assumptions is correct. Kos assumes first (at least implicitly) that the Republicans are dumb enough to retain their present US Senate candidate, Schlesinger, who was revealed this week to have bounced checks on payment of gambling debts in Atlantic City. What I am told the Republicans will in fact likely do is wait until after the August 8 primary and if Lamont wins they will replace Schlesinger with a moderate Republican like State Senator John McKinney of Fairfield, who is known because he is the son of popular former US Representative Stewart McKinney and has a very engaging personality.
Second, Kos assumes incorrectly that CT Republicans are really weak and that there are "not enough" of them. Kos ignores conveniently the fact that CT's Republican governor, Jodi Rell, will win election this year with 65-70 percent of the vote and that Republicans will have won the governorship for 4 straight elections (16 years). More importantly, Kos misses entirely the crucial fact that if Lamont is the Democratic nominee, 1/3 of the Democrats will very likely remain loyal to Lieberman and will vote for Lieberman over Lamont in the general election. This 1/3 of the Dems in CT is not liberal and will vote for Lieberman because they agree largely with his positions. They have voted in the past for Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush I. More on point, in 1970, this 1/3 of the Dems voted in the general election for the pro-Vietnam War Senator Tom Dodd, who (like Lieberman) ran as an independent, over the anti-Vietnam War Democratic party candidate Joe Duffy. The result was that with the Democratic vote divided, Republican Lowell Weicker won the Senate seat and remained there for 18 years until he was beaten by Lieberman in 1988.
To illustrate the above consider my family's town of Westport, CT, which although fairly affluent has voted pretty much consistently with the rest of the state over the past three decades for president, senator, governor, and so forth. In the August 8 primary, Lamont will very likely beat Lieberman in Westport by a 60-40 percent margin (or even an greater margin). However, about 1/3 of Westport Dems (and independents) will very likely not shift over to Lamont in the general election. The result will be that in the general election the combined vote for Lamont and Lieberman may exceed the vote for the Republican who replaces Schlesinger, but that the Republican's vote total will exceed the votes for Lamont and Lieberman separately. If John McKinney replaces Schlesinger as the Republican nominee, he may even win an outright majority of the vote in Westport and other Democratic-trending towns and cities because his father was very popular in Fairfield County.
A moderate Republican running against a divided Democratic party will also make it harder for the Democrats to win any of the three closely contested US House seats in CT, which the Dems need to win at least two of to help with their chances on winning controla of the US House.
In sum, Kos and his colleagues do not understand how the Dem party voters in CT function. A significant minority of those voters are blue collar, ethnic voters who are not liberal and who basically agree with Lieberman. They will not vote for Lamont in the general election regardless of how much money Lamont spends. The likely result will be a Republican senator and the demise of whatever chances the Dems have of winning control of the US Senate this year. I do not consider this result worth any potential benefit of getting rid of Lieberman.
--Doug
Kos' analysis:
The challenge for Lamont isn't just to win the primary, which looks increasingly likely, but to crush Lieberman. A small victory, while better than a loss, would fuel Lieberman's claims that the primary was decided by a bunch of people not representative of the state's electorate. A good turnout and a crushing defeat (as in Tester's win in Montana) would send a different signal -- that Lieberman has utterly lost the state's rank and file Democrats.
Given the incredible press a solid Lamont victory would generate, what little support Lieberman had would evaporate. No one wants to back a huge loser. Well, except, perhaps, Connecticut Republicans. But there aren't enough of those and they'd be just as likely to back their candidate in the hopes of stealing a seat in this safe, blue state.
With such a vote of no-confidence hanging over Lieberman's head, party elders would be more motivated to lean on Lieberman heavily to exit the race.
So polls showing the race swinging in Lamont's favor shouldn't be a sign to slack off. It should be a sign to throw Lieberman an anchor. If you have family, friends, or neighbors in Connecticut, help get the word to them about Lamont. It doesn't cost anything. And as always, please help however you can, whether it's volunteering (preferred) or contributing.
|