Ok... convince me that Lamont can win a 3-way race....

[UDenver20]

Polls consistently show Lieberman with an easy lead on a 3 way race...

We're going to look very stupid if we lose control of the senate over this...

I mean, I like the guy (Lamont) and all - a lot - but I don't think defeating Lieberman is worth the control of the Senate.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. I'm with you.

This situation, frankly, disgusts me. I've defended Lieberman in the past - not because I liked him, but because he was an elected Democrat that served his constituents. This charade, however, is indefensible. I understand it, but I don't like it one bit.

[Celica Toyota]

33. Lieberman is going to lose. Lamont's the only choice to beat Republicans

It's important to understand where the voters are coming from and why they won't vote in a general election for Lieberman.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

34. Interesting you'd say that from California.

It certainly doesn't look like Lamont is the only choice though, given all the evidence that shows Lieberman will overwhelmingly win a three man race.

[MarkDevin]

62. What evidence?

The most recent poll shows Lieberman and Lamont tied for 40% in a three-way race. How does that support your claim that "Lieberman will overwhelmingly win a three man race?"

As a CT native, I am so-o-o-o goddamn tired of out-of-staters sticking their noses into our business! Can't you people find anything to concentrate on in your own damn states?

[Bretttido]

90. He's been hearing the DLC talking points probably

:shrug:

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. If Lamont wins the primary

It will be Lieberman who is the spoiler in a three way race, as Lamont will be the duly appointed nominee. But, from what you are saying, a win by the Repugs would still be Lamont's fault. Why, exactly?

[UDenver20]

23. GOP trails behind both Lamont and Lieberman in a 3-way

I'm not insinuating anything associated with lamont being a spoiler...

I'm saying that Lieberman isn't going to align as an independent with a party that gave him the boot.

won't change number of GOP "wins" - but might affect "DEM" and "DEM-ALIGNED" for purpose of establishing a majority.

[karynnj]

81. It would seem that the question of which party he

would align with would be one of the more important questions he would be asked if he loses and runs as an independent.

So,
if he says, Democrat - he splits the Democratic vote - but the Republican is so bad, the Republican likely will lose to one of them.

if he says, Republican - he splits the Republican vote. However, the other candidate is so bad, it could reduce his vote to near zero, giving Lieberman more of the Republican vote, but losing him much of the residual vote.

I am not from CT, and have no information on where independents stand and it would seem they hold the key.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

35. I don't think he's saying it'd be Lamont's fault.

But we'd still look frickin dumb either way, regardless of fault, if we fumble a Senate seat.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. the polls are a slice of now, not then.

The dynamics will change radically.
First, all the dems on the fence or supporting the incumbent, will have to come out for Lamont.
Second, Joe won't be able to help himself. He will spew some really stupid statements about "ungrateful, netroot jerks, antisemites, and idiots" and will piss off a great number of potential supporters.
Third, Iraq will continue to grow worse, and Joe's idiotic posturing on that one issue will kill him.
Lastly, never forget that the GOP candidate sleeps with the worms. If the GOP sees a chance, they will poor resources into this race, not because they want to, but because they will be beaten up in so many other states. Forget a pseudoDem like Joe, they will jump at ANY CHANCE to pick up a seat, even here.

When it comes to decision time, I do not believe that Joe in a 3d party has a rat's chance in snowball-filled hell.

[davhill]

4. Most Republicans will support Lieberman

But that doesn't mean any Democrats should.

[UDenver20]

24. I guess one should consider the # of GOP Voters who are also...

considering whether they should jump ship on their party candidate or vote for what they'd see as the "lesser of two evils"

[JerseygirlCT]

32. They won't have much trouble voting Lieberman

They generally like him very much. More than the GOP candidate, for sure.

[Finder]

5. I doubt Lamont will win the primary...n/t

[Zynx]

6. There is no evidence a Republican would win so how do we lose control

? This is a canard.

[LynzM]

10. Because IF Lieberman were to win

He would take a seat as an independent, not a Dem, thereby losing us a seat in the senate.

[On the Road]

12. Actually, He Could Do a Jim Jeffords

and caucus with the Democrats. IIRC, that would have the same effect on retaking the majority as being a Democrat.

[Zynx]

16. And that's what he said he'd do.

[gasperc]

14. if lieberman votes for a republican as majority leader

then all those jackass democrats that have supported him with his insuarance independent bid should all get throw out on their asses

[Zynx]

15. No. He said he would caucus with the Dems.

Case closed.

[Benhurst]

18. Independent Senator Jim Jeffords joined with the Democrats on

the organization of the Senate.

Surely, that great Democrat Joe Lieberman would do the same.

If not, all the more reason to get rid of him.

[UDenver20]

26. First, we don't have it yet...

Second, its not about the number of senators they have, its about the number of DEM and DEM aligned senators we can muster.

If we give the dude the boot, how likely is he to align with us? I'd tell us to go jump off a cliff.

If we end up 49 GOP + 1 LIEBERMAN and 49 DEM + JEFFORDS, then the VP breaks the tie and contol remains with the GOP.

Or, if we end up 49 GOP and 49 DEM + JEFFORDS and 1 pissed of Independent who refuses to align with either party, then I believe the chair (VPOTUS) could technically cast a vote for tie and split control between the two parties....

Procedure varies from body to body, but many bodies allow the chair to cast a vote MAKING a tie under the same logic that they use to justify his casting a vote to BREAK a tie. Again, procedures vary from body to body - but something to be concerned about.

Does anyone know if the Rules of Congressional Procedure allow the chair to cast FOR a tie?

Welcome to 3-party politics. Its about frigging time.

[Ken Burch]

85. Uh, Jeffords won't be involved with this. It'll be Bernie Sanders.

nt.

[Capn Sunshine]

7. I can't believe you have to ask

such statements are naive to the nth degree.

[boolean]

8. FUCK THE FUCKING POLLS!

Enough with this shit! Stop letting the media decide your vote! Is Lamont the better candidate? If so, vote for him, regardless of whether "he can win" or not.

You want to be convinced? Vote for him even though you think he's going to lose. If everyone does that, guess what? He'll win!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

36. Uhm, no, he won't.

Try putting down the crack pipe, taking off the tin-foil hat, and join us in reality, hmm?

Furthermore, it's a Quinnipiac UNIVERSITY poll. NOT the media.

[Bretttido]

91. Stop fooling yourself, Lamont is going to destroy Lieberman

[MarkDevin]

69. Uhh.... Lamont is ahead in the polls.

And the Quinnipiac Uiversity poll is highly respected. So why do you say, "Fuck the polls?" :shrug:

[Bretttido]

92. I think he's upset and WANTS Lamont to lose..

[boolean]

93. HELL no

I want Lamont to win. What I'm saying is that the person who started this thread is implying that because the polls say Lamont can't win in a 3 way race, you should vote for Lieberman. I'm saying FUCK the polls and just vote for the liberal.

[Bretttido]

95. Sorry boolean, I meant to reply to Vash the Stampede above

[wyldwolf]

9. If Lamont wins the primary, the only way he loses a 3-way...

...is if Republicans abandon their guy to vote for Lieberman. I'm not even sure they can do that in CT.

[welshTerrier2]

11. easy lead in a 3-way? nope ...

here's a poll that does not show Lieberman with an easy lead in a 3-way race ... plus, it seems to me the trend strongly favors Lamont ... and Lamont seems to be getting more and more effective as he learns the ropes of campaigning ...

check this poll: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/July%202006/connecticutSenateJuly.htm

[gasperc]

13. If Lieberman loses, his support will plunge

who in their right mind will continue to support a loser???? The polls are skewed by a hypothetical and as bollean so eloquently put it, fuck the fucking polls

[welshTerrier2]

17. i agree ...

the bottom line: Lieberman is toast and he knows it ...

i'll be very surprised if he runs as an Indie ...

[calico1]

20. Agree.

This poll was taken with people knowing Lieberman is the sitting Senator. The dynamic changes if he loses the primary because he will be the challenger to the Democratic party. The Democratic party is not going to back Lieberman if he bolts. The party machine gets behind Lamont. Lamont gets a lot more coverage, support, etc. Lieberman, who is already mean and nasty now will go into total meltdown and really look like a loon as he tries to hold on.

[Stinky The Clown]

21. Here is the sister poll to that one - about the Lieberman/Lamont Primary

July 23, 2006
Connecticut Senate Primary: Lieberman Lagging
Lieberman (D) 41% Lamont (D) 51%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/July%202006/connecticutPrimaryJuly.htm

Lamont has been trending upward for a few weeks now, as Joe has been dropping with typical Joementum. I suspect Lamont is (by luck or by plan) peaking at exactly the right time.

[Rose Siding]

19. The last poll has them *tied* in a 3-way, at 40% each for Ned and Joe

The repub gets 13%. Here's a link-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2750039

If Ned wins the primary, and gains all the party backing, Joe's third party candidacy is going to look like a real dog and his numbers will drop even further. The taint of losing clings.

[LynneSin]

22. As long as tit's not the republican I'll be happy

I mean, I prefer that the DEMOCRATIC candidate wins the election (whomever that might be), but I think if it was Lamont-Leiberman-and the repuke crap then as long as it's not the republican we can help get the majority (with the hope that Lieberman will align with the democrats - but I suppose it's not safe to hold your breath on that one if Lieberman wins as an independant)

[MarkDevin]

77. Lynne, there's no way CT's next senator will be a Republican.

Alan Schlessinger was polling at 13% BEFORE his gambling addiction became public knowledge. It's safe to assume that the next senator my state send to Washington will either be Joe Lieberman or (I hope) Ned Lamont.

[leesa]

25. And that would be a very GOP thing for Joe to do, wouldn't it?

Don't you see why Joe needs to go?

[walkon]

27. Look

If Lieberman is a Democrat (questionable - current, not historical) and he LOSES the DEMOCRATIC primary he should thank his supporters and pledge to support the DEMOCRATIC candidate. If he does anything else then it is clear to me that he is a fraud. Who could vote for that other than nut cases and Repugs?

[xkenx]

28. Here's how

I do not live in CT, but my gut says that, this is the year that the electorate in a state like that will punish the Iraq War perpetrators and enablers. I believe that Lamont will handily win the Dem. primary. I believe that, in the general election, most Dems. will then vote for the true Dem., Lamont---they won't want to send Lieberman, (in their view the "war-loving near Republican") back to the Senate. I believe that enough moderates who would like to send a message about the stench from the Iraq misadvanture, will also vote for Lamont. If CT is 55% Dem. and 80% vote for Lamont over the war issue or the "Lieberman is a turncoat" issue, and Lamont gets NO other votes, then he gets 44% MINIMUM, with Lieberman and the R dividing the rest.

[MarkDevin]

71. God, I hope you're right!

And next Tuesday, I'll go to the polls and do my best to prove you right! :hi:

[LSK]

29. Cuz Joementum will lose momentum when he looses the primary

And the GOP has NO CHANCE of winning in Conn. The Repuke running there has like 15% support in current polls.

[Orangepeel]

30. Or what?

1) Lieberman may win the primary. He would have won if he wasn't such an idiot and hadn't tried to hedge his bets

2) there has been at least one well known poll (Zogby) that had Lieberman and Lamont tied at 40% in a three way race

3) if Lamont loses in a three way race, he'd lose to Lieberman, not the republican. So, as long as Lieberman caucused with the Democrats like Jeffords does, it doesn't matter

4) If Lieberman loses the primary and runs as an independent, he'd be the one making it a 3-way race and making "us" looks very stupid. So talk to him about it.

[JerseygirlCT]

31. The thing is, unless the GOP switches candidates

(which I suppose could still happen), it will be either Lieberman or Lamont. The state's Republicans will vote in strong numbers for Lieberman, as will a good number of independents.

The real question, to me, is whether Lieberman chooses to run as an I, if he is soundly beaten next week. If it's close, I don't doubt he'll go for it. If it's not though... I wonder.

[MrBenchley]

37. I doubt he can....

And remember, six months ago this was one of the safest seats the Democrats had....but the far left HATES Democrats.

[ISUGRADIA]

38. 6 Months ago, yes. Two months ago Lieberman was ahead by a landslide

margain. Now it's tied or he's behind. So Lamont as Dem nominee and winner in November is not out of the question.

The Republican is NOT going anywhere people. He's raised $30,000 or so. That's it.

[MrBenchley]

39. So instead of targeting actual Republicans

the far left has managed to throw one of the Democrats' safest seats into doubt. What a bunch of useless fuckups!

[Telly Savalas]

41. So you're suggesting that where we have Democratic incumbents

we should abolish primaries?

If we do that wouldn't "Democratic" be a rather inappropriate name for the party?

[MrBenchley]

42. I'm suggesting that the far left has demonstrated again

what a cancer on the party they are.

And it's noticeable they aren't making a similar effort to unseat any ACTUAL Republicans.

[Telly Savalas]

43. Are ACTUAL Republicans running in any Democratic primaries?

You're insinuating that Lieberman should have the right to run in the primary unopposed. How is that democratic?

[MrBenchley]

44. They're sure as shit running for re-election in November

unmolested by the far left. Hell, they're even actively working for Santorum in PA.

[Telly Savalas]

45. It's still primary season.

And since you're unwilling to answer my question, we'll have to assume that you support the undemocratic principle of uncontested incumbency. Some Democrat you are.

[MrBenchley]

48. Not everywhere...

It's very noticeable that the far left is shooting its wad to defeat a Democrat, not trying to defeat a Republican.

And don't try to draw too much from me ignoring your question--I don't bother with anybody's horseshit questions.

[Telly Savalas]

50. So what's a horseshit question?

One that makes you look bad if you answer?

You have 2 answers:

No, we shouldn't contest incumbents. You can't give that answer, because it makes you an obvious opponent of democracy.

Yes, we should contest incumbents. But you can't give that answer either, because then you look pretty fucking stupid for berating people for exercising this right.

You're the fucking cancer here. I've had enough of your bullshit. Welcome to my ignore list.

[MrBenchley]

53. Guess.

"Welcome to my ignore list."
And the downside for me is nil.

[JanusAscending]

73. Which candidate in Ct. are you voting for?

How dare you call us names because we choose not to have DINO's represent us! And where is the documentation that "far leftwingers" are working to support Santorum?? Do you just pull these fact out of thin air, much like the neocon's do???? Sir, You "don't have a nickel in this quarter", so why don't you get off your high horse??

[MrBenchley]

75. Another brainiac heard from....(snicker)

[Crunchy Frog]

119. He's equating members of the Green party

with Democrats in CT who support Lamont. The Republicans in PA are evidently supporting Green party candidates in an effort to split the votes against Santorum, and the Greens are evidently going along. What this has to do with the Democratic primary in CT, only MrBenchley knows. :shrug:

[JanusAscending]

120. Thanks, I realized that, but it makes" no nevermind" to me,

as I've put him on ignore. I don't do well with people who think they know it all, when in fact they are talking out of their asses! He can insult me all he wants now, as long as I don't have to be subjected to it!! They say ignorance is bliss, so I'll see if it's in fact true. He couldn't back up an argument if his life depended on it, cause he's right all the time, don't ya know?:sarcasm:

[dsc]

56. So why aren't you mad at Johnson?

He is taking on McKinney who has never lost to a Republican in her career. Johnson is putting a safe seat in jeopardy just as much as Lamont is. Incidently the Republican was polling at 13% before he was exposed as a lying gambling addict who has been sued repeatedly.

[MrBenchley]

61. Why would I be?

"He is taking on McKinney who"
is a public disgrace and a cancer on the Democratic party.

"Johnson is putting a safe seat in jeopardy"
Not even close to true.

[CTLawGuy]

64. cause Johnson is CONSERVATIVE

why is he not mad about Ed Case challenging Akaka in HI? because Ed Case is CONSERVATIVE

why is he furious about the Dem party backing Bernie Sanders, but saying nothing about Lieberman running as an Indy? Cause Sanders is LIBERAL and Lieberman is CONSERVATIVE.

See the pattern here?

Isn't this supposed to be a liberal website?

[MrBenchley]

76. Not even close to true, darboy...

But when you're way out there on the fringe, EVERYBODY seems conservative.

"Isn't this supposed to be a liberal website?"
Nope. It's a Democratic website.

[CTLawGuy]

80. why aren't you upset about Lieberman running as an Indy?

if it's bad to support Sanders, why is it not bad that Lieberman is running as an Indy?

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CTLawGuy]

103. well he WAS going to give it up

if he won the vice-presidency in 2000. He was fine with running for his senate seat as well as VP, so that if he were to win, a REPUBLICAN governor would appoint a REPUBLICAN senator.

What did you think of THAT?

[MrBenchley]

104. So what?

I think there's nothing as funny as Darboy pissing and moaining about how horrible it wouyld have been if Al Gore had won.

[CTLawGuy]

105. when its a CONSERVATIVE, then you say "so what"

but Bernie Sanders... INTOLERABLE!

So I have you on record as not caring that Lieberman would have handed a seat right to the Republicans rather than risk not having a political office to go back to?

Nothing is as fun as exposing benchley as a conservative.

Also, FYI I worked for Gore in both the primary and the general election.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CTLawGuy]

107. I am saying substantive things and you are making ad hominem

attacks. Sad.

[MrBenchley]

108. No, you're asking half-assed leading questions...

and then you're pouting because I give them the dismissals they deserve.

[CTLawGuy]

109. no, you're ducking the question becuase it puts you in an untenable

position.

The fact is Lieberman is guilty of the very thing you hate, helping republicans.

He would have let a Republican senator replace him rather than step aside and show some confidence in his presidential ticket by allowing a Dem to replace him.

He's going to split the vote this time if he loses the primary. November is when dems are supposed to be unified, not refighting a lost primary.

[MrBenchley]

110. Pout louder, darboy....maybe you'll convince yourself

"He's going to split the vote this time if he loses the primary."
If that's all that worries you, perhaps you shouldn't have joined in the far left's idiotic crusade of character assassination.

[CTLawGuy]

111. any split vote is SQUARELY on the shoulders of Lieberman

replace Lieberman with Kucnich/Feingold/Kennedy in this scenario and you would agree with me.

[MrBenchley]

112. Yeah, surrrrrrrrre....

[CTLawGuy]

114. I accept your admission of defeat

NT

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CTLawGuy]

116. oh man

you're making me cry :eyes:

[tkmorris]

113. What you call "silly posturing"

Most of us in the real world call "logic".

He's got you nailed Benchley. It is hypocritical to argue that challenging Lieberman puts a safe seat in jeopardy, but challenging a more liberal Dem does not.

[MrBenchley]

117. What you call "logic" is more like pathology

than real logic....

What's hypocritical is trying to pretend that Lieberman is beyond the pale, but that an antiSemitic loony like McKinney is the ideal for Democrats. In fact, she's a twisted piece of shit that the Republicans just LOVE.

[UDenver20]

84. because she's a NUT-JOB....n/t

[Crunchy Frog]

118. Are you stating that anyone who supports Ned Lamont

is a member of the "far left" and therefore a "cancer" on the party? Isn't that just a little bit of a sweeping generalization? A tad hyperbolic?

[union_maid]

49. This one is not all about the far left

Bloggers didn't do this. The far left didn't do it either. Liberal, Democratic activists helped, but they didn't do it. Lamont decided to run. More and more Connecticut voters have decided to support him. Connecticut has more than its share of highly educated, informed voters. They're just not that impressionable, or given to extremism of any kind. Lieberman's support of Bush, not just the war, leaves Connecticut Democrats feeling unrepresented. I'm not sure I'm glad the whole thing happened. Just like with a lot of self-styled centrist Democrats, I feel you get a lot more good votes out of Lieberman than you would any Republican. I'm not sure I would have upset the apple cart. But I'm not from Connecticut. I just think this meme that Lamont's success is all about the far left is ridiculous. It's coming from Democrats in Lieberman's state.

[MrBenchley]

51. It sure as shit is....

The far left was pimping for Lowell Weicker until he decided not to run. Then they dredged up the Unknown Millionaire.

[union_maid]

54. Connecticut voters are just not that simple

The left, not necessarily so very far left, might well have wanted to see someone run against Lieberman. The fact remains, a significant portion of CT Dems feel unrepresented by Lieberman, something he didn't seem to mind at all. I'm really not for shaking things up when it comes to a safe seat, but when you're the Republicans' favorite Democrat, you're doing something wrong.

[MrBenchley]

55. The fact remains

that the far left spends a lot motre energy and venom attacking Lieberman and other Democrats (usually Democrats cruising toward re-election) than they do any Republicans. No such effort among them exists toward unseating Santorum or Allen; the effort there is coming from moderate Democrats (of the sort the far left despises).

and it's somewhat disingenuous to pretend that only Connecticut Democrats are behind this mess.

[dsc]

57. That is a flat out lie

I get mail all the time trying to unseat Santorum and I live in NC. Admittedly I haven't recieved much about Allen but that race is considered a very long shot and Webb is anti gay (I get mostly far left gay mailings).

[MrBenchley]

59. No, it's not

as a glance around the internet reveals.

And you'll notice none of the posters trying to deflect, distort or otherwise spin away the Greens' finacial arrangement with Santorum are moderates.

[union_maid]

58. I'm not pretending that

It's just that the premise that a few far left bloggers could have influenced things to this degree in a state like CT is pretty disingenuous as well. I keep hearing it and it's ridulous. Lieberman insisted that his principles required that he support, not just the war in Iraq, which the majority of the country no longer does, but also the president who has come to be regarded as the worst in our history. That was his choice. The idea that the voters might not react to that choice is kind of foolish.

I've had some of the same thoughts. Let's focus on Republican. Plenty of targets there is one thing I think often. All I'm saying is that Lieberman was so far off the reservation that he was just asking for it. The fact that he's getting a run for his money is his fault at the end of the day.

[MrBenchley]

65. In fact, Connecticut voters shun extremism

and there are more independents and Republicans in the state than there are Democrats.

The result is that instead of Connecticut's Democrats having coattails to follow as they try to unseat a GOP governor, they've got a good shot at losing both the State House and the Senate seat. And the rest of the country is supposed to follow their lead? Ha!

[MarkDevin]

67. You're trying to reason with a DLCer.

You might as well try making grasshoppers fly out of your butt the next time you fart.

[lojasmo]

86. Or perhaps an RNC-er....EOM

[Telly Savalas]

52. But anybody who opposes Mr. Benchley's chosen favourites

must be "far left". That's his definition of "far left."

[Telly Savalas]

40. It still is one of the safest seats the Democrats have

If Lieberman wins the primary, he'll easily win in November.

If Lamont wins the primary, he'll easily win in November unless he's subverted by a spoiler bid for re-election by Lieberman. Setting your non-sequiters about the "far left" aside, do you think Lieberman HATES Democrats enough to try to defeat a properly nominated Democratic candidate?

[Telly Savalas]

46. Chirp.

[Bretttido]

94. The far left hates democrats?

Umm no, Ned is a democrat. They hate wanna-be republicans that smooch up to * and the GOP.

[Ken Burch]

123. "hate Democrats" is Benchley Auto-Smear#4

usually followed by "pout louder" and "peddle it walking". Benchley knows perfectly well that nobody here hates all Democrats, but he won't stop saying it because he enjoys being pointlessly annoying.

[Ken Burch]

122. We've PROVEN that opposing Lieberman ISN'T hating Democrats

And can you now assure us that, when Lamont wins the primary (as he is now almost certain to do)you will support him AGAINST HolyWarJoe is Lieberman runs as a conservative independent?

Remember, you stop being a Democrat if you won't.

[CK_John]

47. Real World Events (RWE) will decide Lamont's fate next week.

The new war has made the Iraq war seems like a has been. Next week this new war seems to favor old Joe. Lamont better get his troops out and prepare for a tough new GOP candidate if he wins next Tuesday. If old Joe loses I hope he doesn't file his petitions on Wednesday, else we are toast, nobody gives a loser a second chance.

[MarkDevin]

63. Trust me, plenty of folks in CT still care about Iraq.

And the GOP candidate is a scandal-tainted nobody named Alan Schlessinger. There's no way in hell that guy will be my state's next junior senator!

[CK_John]

70. Schlessinger will be replaced if Lamont wins, the GOP will not

miss a chance to pickup a seat. Who will the replacement be, is the question?

Will it be Shays or old Joe?

[MarkDevin]

72. As disgusted as I am with Lieberman...

...I can't bring myself to believe that he would ever run as a Republican. Perhaps I'm being naive. :shrug:

[Crunchy Frog]

68. I don't think Joe is going to be too tough of a GOP candidate. :)

[MarkDevin]

60. Unlees you live in CT, what *you* think doesn't matter.

I live in CT and I'm voting for Ned Lamont. Any out-of-stater who doesn't like it can pound sand!

[Crunchy Frog]

66. All the Republicans are lining up behind Lieberman.

The guy with the "R" after his name hasn't got a shot.

Don't worry, after Lieberman loses the primary, you won't be allowed to post in support of him on DU anymore.

[GAPeace]

74. We will look stupid for exercising Democracy?

By seriously challenging an incumbent Dem who is way to the right of his constituents, we are doing a powerful thing. A POWERFUL thing. We are sending a clear message to our leaders: if you don't do what we want, we WILL fire you.

That makes it more than worth it.

[madfloridian]

78. Tom DeLay endorsed Lieberman on Fox News today.

And College Republicans are endorsing him.

[MarkDevin]

79. Holy crap!

Congratulations, Joe! You've officially hit bottom. :wow:

[lojasmo]

87. Bwahaha! Thanks, MF. Hannity, Tweety, etc..etc...

Some grand democrat Lieberman is...

[wyldwolf]

82. if the new poll numbers for Lamont are accurate, he wins 3-way easy

... supposed to be released at 11AM.

[skipos]

83. You are WRONG that Joe wins as an indy in all the polls

In a 3 way race, Joe and Lamont are tied 40-40 in the latest Rasmussen poll.

Plus, this is a HYPOTHETICAL poll. When Joe loses the primary, he will continue to bleed in the polls, national Dems will support Lamont, Lamont will be a winner, Joe will be a loser, etc.

Joe is only going to continue to go down.

[Bretttido]

88. You are absolutely correct.

The polls will change massively once people actually SEE that Joe has LOST the primary. And as you said, the last Rasmussen poll which is already out-of-date showed them tied in a 3 way race among likely voters. That was when Lamont was only ahead of Joe by 4 points in the primary. Now he is ahead of Joe by about 14 points, so you can obviously assume that he has also taken a lead in a 3-way race.

GO GO NED!

[RamboLiberal]

89. I agree skipos - I believe the polls cited in a 3 way are a bit old

If Lamont wins the primary which I think he will, I think the publicity plus he is a very good candidate with support from Dems like we at DU from all over the country will get him the victory in November and make Lieberman look like the petulant whiny child he is.

[Dr Fate]

96. Lamont will win if Lieberman decides to endorse & back the Democrat.

It's up to Lieberman whether the Democrat wins.

If Lieberman wins the primary, good for him- he will probably win the election.

If he loses the primary, but does the right thing and uses his influence and left-over campaign funds to endorse the Democratic Party candidate, then we will win that way too.

I just hope Lieberman does not act like Ralph Nader and run against the Democratic party.

[calico1]

97. Oh, I disagree.

Its not up to Lieberman. He doesn't have that much power. The fact that newspaper endorsements, and support from prominent Democrats didn't help him seems to prove that. If he loses it would be nice if he offered his campaign funds to Lamont but I would prefer he stay quietly in the background. (though I doubt he would do either). He hasn't done well as a good luck charm.

[Dr Fate]

98. I would rather Lieberman follow Howard Dean's gracious example.

If he loses the primary, Lieberman needs to do the right thing and endorse and assist the Democratic party.

There is always the House of Representatives, the Governorship, or a future Senate seat for him if he is truly for sticking with Democrats.

All this talk of him running 3rd party needs to be combated with the proposition- "If he is a loyal Democrat, shouldnt he endorse the Democratic candidate?"

[calico1]

99. I agree that that is what he SHOULD do.

But I personally don't think he will. Dean in the end put the interests of the Party before his own personal ambitions. He didn't threaten to bolt the party as Lieberman has. His campaign here has been so nasty and bitter. Many people in CT are shocked at how nasty he has gotten. Its not the mild mannered Lieberman people were used to. If he loses I just think he will be very bitter and unwilling to put the Party first. I hope I am wrong.

[Dr Fate]

100. All the more reason to keep putting the notion out there.

We should just act like it SHOULD be a given- the loser in the primary usually stays with the party and endorses the winner, in the hopes of staying in the good graces of the party.

With Clinton & Boxer endorsing Joe, he should feel obligated to stick with DEMs no matter what.

[Catchawave]

101. I live in Virginia, and "met" Lamont on Colbert.....

Now I only wish I could vote for him. He's the future of the Dem Party :loveya:

on Edit: and the guy in my sig line too :hi:

[fujiyama]

121. The republican guy (Schlechinger)

is barely polling double digits.

He's really not relevant in this situation. This is by most means, a race between Lieberman and Lamont. At the worst, Lieberman wins as an independant but cauceses with Dems.

But whichever Dems support Lieberman as an independant candidate should face some real scrutiny. Lieberman's actions have been inexcusable.