79% of Dems nationally glad Lieberman lost

[welshTerrier2]

it sure looks like DU's Lieberman fans and the whiners saying that Lamont shouldn't have dared challenge an incumbent are way out of touch with THE MAINSTREAM OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ... it's time you all apologized for accusing us "left wing extremists" for being out of touch ... it turns out that it was you all the time ...

source: http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1155

Democrats Pleased Joe Got Beat in Connecticut

Dems nationwide think their party is stronger for Lamont’s victory, and want their candidates to tout anti-war credentials

An overwhelming majority of likely-voting Democrats nationwide said they are glad three-term Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman was walloped by anti-war challenger Ned Lamont in that state’s Democratic primary election Tuesday.

They also said the Lamont victory over one of the few pro-war Democrats in Washington makes them optimistic they can win control of at least one of the two houses of Congress in November. <skip>

It found that nearly four out of five Democrats (79%) were happy the former Democratic vice presidential nominee was knocked off by Lamont ... <skip>

Nearly two in three – 62% - said they believe the results of the Connecticut primary will hold national implications for the elections coming up this fall. In addition, 70% said they think the Lamont victory makes the Democratic Party stronger heading into the important election season.

The Connecticut election highlights what Democrats across the country said they want to hear from their candidates – a resolute opposition to the war in Iraq. More than three-quarters of Democrats (78%) said they want candidates who opposes the conflict, while just 6% said they think their Democratic candidates should support the war. Another 13% said they want their candidates to take a middling stance somewhere between support and opposition.

[senseandsensibility]

1. kand r

Good news. Let's hope we can capitalize on it.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

2. OMG!!! THE FAR LEFT HAS TAKEN OVER!!! OOGA BOOGA!!!! -nt

[tsuki]

18. Sorry, it is those of us in the radical center that have taken over. nt

[beltanefauve]

26. Agreed

The wingnuts in power have moved the goal posts SO far over to the left, that I think it's really about the reclaimation of center. And those who claim to be "Centrists" are really Conservatives rather than the full-blown radical Rightists we have in power today.

Take a look at Ned Lamont. Hardly a "flaming" Liberal! Look at some of the other candidates getting the support of the "liberal" blogosphere: Bob Casey? John Murtha? Nope, this election is about the pendulum swing. And it's only beginning to swing.

[Boomer]

40. "Radical center" -- I love it!

n/t

[Cha]

3. The people I talk to are

certainly happy lieberman lost and are grateful to the people of Connecticut who did it for us!

[jonnyblitz]

4. Hopefully we, in CT, can do it again for you!

[Cha]

9. Yeah, jonnyblitz!

[bigwillq]

13. I can't wait to beat Joe a second time!

[jonnyblitz]

17. I hope you are correct. I always expect the worst.

[bigwillq]

21. We need to just get out the vote!

DEMS outweigh the pukes in CT and I'm sure Ned will get a fair share of INDY votes too.
There were a lot of new voters for the primary, which bodes well for Ned.

[Totally Committed]

46. You and the rest of the CT Democrats did an AWESOME job!!!

I sincerely thank all and congratulate you all on your dedication and your determination. You all gave me so much hope. Thanks!

TC

[connecticut yankee]

49. Our pleasure

We all worked very hard and will continue to do so until "the game" is over.

[PegDAC]

83. I'm thinking

that Joe might just split the Repuke vote, not the Democrat vote. What do you think?

[Olney Blue]

5. We have been starving for a voice like Lamont.

[Burried News]

7. He will make an outstanding Senator and not just because

Liebercon was such an easy act to follow.

[Olney Blue]

29. Yes, he is unafraid. I love that.

[jonnyblitz]

20. I am glad so many people outside of CT took such interest.

I would have felt like crap if we who vote here couldn't beat Lieberman. We owed it to the whole country to defeat him for so many reasons. It was odd having an election go the way I wanted it to, it's been awhile. August 8th was a happy night for me.

[bigwillq]

23. My neighbor, who is a very good friend,

was in her driveway up the street and I was smoking a cig at my house.

She yelled down, "So Lamont did it" and I said "Yeah, I finally voted for a winner"!

I am so happy that Ned won b/c it's the first election in awhile that the candidate I voted for actually won.

Well, municipal elections have gone my way but I mean a real, big time election!

[Olney Blue]

30. You deserve to be happy... and safe.... and free.... remember when?

Well, the journey has begun to reclaim this optimism again.

[bleever]

6. It seems that the Democratic Party, and Americans in general,

are now dangerous fanatics outside the "mainstream".

In the immortal words of Rudy Giuliani on September 11, "Thank God George Bush is our president!"


Otherwise, it's all "We the People" this, "We the People" that, yada yada yada.

[PinkyisBlue]

60. Yes, the 60% of Americans who are against the Iraq War are fanatics

and are "outside the mainstream".

It makes me angry that the talking heads attribute Lieberman's loss only to his approval of the war. Lieberman lost for many other reasons. I mean, he let Bush kiss him; any true Democrat wouldn't let Bush get to first base with him.

Lamont appears to be the real deal.

[Old and In the Way]

8. Isn't that a pisser.

I'll bet 80% of Republicans are sad to see their #1 opposition underminer beaten, too.

[gratuitous]

10. Yep, just a bunch of radicals

Hard to imagine that when 79% of any identifiable group agrees on something how that is outside the mainstream.

Surely the popular media will explain it all to us.

[mitchtv]

11. Apologize? you must be dreaming

they are in all the threads, with palpble venom. They are living in the past.

[welshTerrier2]

14. still, i counsel unity ...

some want to blow the bastards out of the party in a major purge ... that's a really stupid place to start ...

let's call for a real intra-party dialog ... let's at least try to find some common ground ... a house divided against itself cannot stand ... our party's leaders have been incredibly slow to recognize the energy and anger and how widespread it's become ... they are far to insulated from the masses ... that has to change and it has to change immediately ...

of course, absent any progress, we'll have to do what we'll have to do ... i hope it doesn't come to that ... we'll all lose if it does ...

[mitchtv]

42. Unity is right support the primary winner

I know I have had to support candidates like Feinstein for party unity. But this crowd in DU (DLC crowd) preaches a whole lot about unity. Now let them follow their own advice. If I had a nickle for every "moderate Dem" I've had to hold my nose to vote for.... Now they can hold their noses and vote. If they don't , they lose their claim as Democrats.

[SaneInSC]

48. Exactly!

MitchTV, I agree completely.

[BrightKnight]

12. Lieberman lost because everyone hates Bush.

Everyone has seen Bush kissing Lieberman and Lieberman kissing Bush's ass. Regardless of his record that is the image in everyone's mind.

[welshTerrier2]

15. do you vote on kissing?

this election was primarily (pun intended) about two major issues:
1. the war
2. we want our candidates to fight harder against the neocon agenda

what's going on right now goes way beyond Lamont and Lieberman ... the voters, i.e. the mainstream of the party, finally have found their voice ... we want our guys to fight harder and we want the damned war to end ...

again, from the OP:

The Connecticut election highlights what Democrats across the country said they want to hear from their candidates – a resolute opposition to the war in Iraq. More than three-quarters of Democrats (78%) said they want candidates who opposes the conflict, while just 6% said they think their Democratic candidates should support the war. Another 13% said they want their candidates to take a middling stance somewhere between support and opposition.

the people are demanding real changes from the party's leaders ... good politics suggest that it's time our leaders did a little more listening and a little more representing ...

[calico1]

36. Do you think CT Democrats are that

simple minded? The reality is that anger has been simmering and building against Joe ever since he bashed Clinton for his affair with Lewinsky. It got worse when he ran concurrently for Senate and VP knowing that if Gore had won the seat would have gone to a Republican. His opinions and/or votes regarding things like school vouchers, social security, eavesdropping, etc. didn't make things better. And it was pretty well known when he casually stated that a rape victim shouldn't be able to demand the morning after pill if she went to a Catholic hospital....she could just go to another hospital. Then he threatened to bolt the party and run as a third party candidate if the voters rejected him in the primary. The "kiss" was just representative of everything he has done to disappoint CT Democrats. It symbolized how out of touch he was with us. It didn't in and of itself make people vote against him.

[skipos]

16. kick

[tblue37]

19. The doting mother was watching her son

as he marched in the high school band during the Fourth of July parade. She was proud of her son’s performance, but she couldn’t help but feel disturbed by the overall effect the marching band was producing.

“Just look at that!” she exclaimed. “Isn’t it shameful that my Joey is the only one who knows how to march in step?”

[jonnyblitz]

22. LOL

[Superman Returns]

24. well its obvious

the majority is out of the mainstream.

[Douglas Carpenter]

25. so does that mean that 79% of Democrats are far left fringe????

Far left fringies of the the world unite

[Bretttido]

44. No, it means we've been the center all along.

[AtomicKitten]

27. I can honestly say

I don't know anyone who isn't thrilled with the fabulous Lamont victory. If anything, I think people might be worried about keeping the seat blue. I can't image anyone actually wanting Lieberman to win after he has stabbed the Democratic Party en masse in the back.

[welshTerrier2]

28. the underlying message about the war

the Zogby survey and the OP included this:

More than three-quarters of Democrats (78%) said they want candidates who opposes the conflict, while just 6% said they think their Democratic candidates should support the war. Another 13% said they want their candidates to take a middling stance somewhere between support and opposition.

each person might define those categories differently but i would argue that almost all Democrats in the Senate, with perhaps a handful of exceptions, could reasonably be seen as falling into the "middling stance" category ... i would argue that a middling stance would object to a date certain for total withdrawal, continue to believe that we can't withdraw all troops until a certain degree of success is achieved, and yet want to see some withdrawals begin soon to send a message that we don't want to be permanent occupiers ...

does that sound like a fair definition? it's the best one i could come up with ... maybe i should start a separate thread on this ...

if that's the definition, would it be fair to say that almost all of the likely presidential candidates, and most of the Senate, fall into that category? and if that's the case, and i believe it is, i would argue that our party leaders are currently representing the views of only 13% of Democrats around the country ...

i believe they are way out of touch on the war ... that has to change or be changed ...

[AtomicKitten]

32. the underlying message on the war couldn't be more clear

and the Democrats would be irretrievably retarded not to run on the Republicans being WRONG ON TERROR particularly since the GOP is already starting the attack claiming the Lieberman loss pegs Democrats weak on terror http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Cheney_characterizes_... . This, of course, is nonsense particularly since they are ignoring the loss of McKinney which is important because it completely dispels the notion that the "loonie left" has taken over the party. People rail against her loss but I think it was critical to underscore the message that Democrats are, in fact, not weak, but rather know what they are doing.

There is no reason to keep troops in Iraq (except for the oil and that is not a national endeavor but rather a private special interest quest). You are right that Democrats would be wise to take the pulse of the party - how could they miss it?!! - and do something different for a change, actually represent the will of their constituents and actively and aggressively untangle this foreign policy mess starting first by withdrawing troops from Iraq immediately. And, again, they need to come back HARD with the mantra - THE GOP IS WRONG ON TERROR.

[Clark2008]

72. Exactly.

Let me preface this by saying that I like Cynthia McKinney and always relished in her spunk and abilties to question the administration balled-faced.

That said, what her loss underscores to me is that, yes, the "loonie left" ISN'T taking over the party, but, rather the center is doing something Republicans WON'T do: kick out people of questionable character who swat at police officers (even if they're not indicted).

McKinney may have had a lot about her that's correct and good, but that incident - whether blown out of proportion or not - proves that WE'RE able to vote our alleged law-breakers out of office, unlike, oh, I don't know, those Republican voters in Texas who KEPT Tom Delay in the primaries, despite all the alleged law-breaking HE'S accused of.

I totally get your point.

[DAMANgoldberg]

80. She'll Be Back...

Once before, in 2002, she was outspoken, and then proceeded to lose the election to Denise Majette, who is now running for GA STATE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT.

[BR_Parkway]

31. Lines up perfectly with the 18% approval rating of Congress overall - what

the idiots in charge fail to see, time and time again:

We're tired of being taken for granted. We're tired of working, supporting, sending money to prop up campaigns for people who go to DC, fall into the corporate lobbyists pockets and shit all over us.

And we're through with it. 4 out of 5 Americans think Congress over all does a crappy job representing the PEOPLE who sent them to DC. Close to that many thing the Apprentice is good TV. Bring those two ideas together? You're FIRED. Go home, we'll get someone else to do the job. And if they don't do it, we'll replace them and keep replacing them until we send someone to DC to represent US. We, The People.

No need for expert, in depth analysis by overpaid pundits of every stripe.

[jsamuel]

33. well, now I know why a whole 14% of Dems support Bush

Same ones huh...?

[spooky3]

34. I think this is an interactive poll; representativeness is questionable.

It's not the same as their random surveys.

So we just don't know if this reflects the average Dem's views. It reflects my views!

[welshTerrier2]

35. read this ... there is solid methodology behind the poll

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1064

[spooky3]

38. I already read it. It's better than it used to be but

most social scientists would still have issues with it. The samples are not random.

[The Count]

37. Democrats - them crazy kids! Never listen to advice from Snow, Coulter, &

Rove, Fox andthe rest of their good friends who know what's good for them! Bad, bad Democrats!

[underpants]

39. See it just all the 79% way out there on the left

[Bretttido]

41. I hope the few democrats that are actually supporting Traitor Joe see this

Because guess what folks, you're pissing off 79%-88% of your constituents. Is that good politics or just good ass-kissing?

[mitchtv]

43. If they support Joe now

they aren't Dems. We Dems support our candidates.

[Bretttido]

45. Touche!

[ChipsAhoy]

67. The few who are here ....

... couldn't take any negative talk about ol' Joe, and now this GREAT LOSS.

DEAL WITH IT, Joe's a LOSER!

[dolstein]

47. A simple question: is this a scientific poll?

NT

[skipos]

51. It is done online

You sign up, give your stats, and answer questions. I wouldn't be surprised if it is less accurate that calling people on the phone but even so, it is clear that it is Lieberman who has been moving out of the mainstream with his support of war and support of Bush. Polls of Americans, regardless of party id, show that a majority think Bush is a bad president, and the war was a bad idea. Lieberman is out of the mainstream on those issues.

[Clark2008]

73. In primaries, I think that "scientific" polling, well, isn't.

For example, take the Hillary conundrum.

In poll after poll after poll in the corporate media, we see that "likely" Democratic voters want her to be our 2008 nominee - yet several people on this board, on KOS, on MyDD don't know a soul who's planning to support her in the primaries (or don't know many). I know I don't know any. I know a couple of people who would support her if she is the eventual nominee, but most Dems I know, know that she wouldn't have a prayer to capture my purple state and want a fighting chance (they don't hate her, mind you, they just think she hasn't a shot in hell).

If you look at polls on all these Democratic boards, the top three are, interchangeably, Wes Clark, Russ Feingold and Al Gore: and these aren't "likely" Democratic voters, they are CERTAIN Democratic voters. People who will brave snowstorms and hail and torrential downpours to go vote in the 2008 Democratic primary.

Polls are a gauger, but aren't the end-all, be-all, whether they're conducted on the phone or online, that people seem to think they are. They're a snapshot of time and should be used to determine the best scenario needed in order to get a REAL populist as the nominee (electronic voting machines, with-standing).

[maxanne]

50. interesting

The reaction (THE SKY IS FALLING)from the right is an indication that giving Joementum the heave was absolutely the right thing to do!

It is beginning to amuse me that any reporting on Lamont now mentions his money, and no one ever points out that Joe isn't exactly living in a homeless shelter. Poor folks don't get to run for Senate. There is no mention in the mainstream corporate media that Joe's wife is a lobbyist for drug companies, and that insurance, defense, and pharma are his biggest campaign donors.

[CrushTheDLC]

52. Only 79%??

Must have been a FAUX News poll. I would have guessed around 95%

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

53. I'm one of the 79%

I love it.

One less DINO in the Senate next year.

[Renew Deal]

54. Every active Dem I have talked to is happy.

This includes active Jewish dems. I have heard stories about inactive Jewish dems being unhappy, but I only know of 2 at this time.

[Dr Fate]

55. Yeah- all that "far left" crap from the usual suspects is joke now.

Far left blah blah blah far left blah blah blah far left blah blah blah.

What a joke.

Looks like Democrats, moderates, progressives and others did not care for Holy Joe either.

[LincolnMcGrath]

61. Can you believe that a few of the more militant dlcentrists STILL

will not back Ned Lamont?

[filer]

56. We're glad!

All us "lefties" have been whooping it up in Oklahoma. Thank you Connecticut!! Go to Zell, Joe.

[Jacobin]

57. The 80% fringe

nice to be in such good company.

[oldboy101]

58. Lieberman may still win the general election

While the progressive democrats here at DU are congratulating themselves on Lamont's victory in the primary, we should all keep in mind that having the backing of a majority of Democrats does not necessarily mean victory in the fall election.

Lieberman is well-liked by many voters in Connecticut including many Republican voters. Since it appears that the Republican nominee has little chance of winning, don't be surprised if Independents and Republicans join with the minority of Democrats who voted for Joe (remember that the result was 52% vs. 48%) and re-elect Joe this fall.

Personally I think we should recognize that Lieberman is still a Democrat regardless of his unpopular support of the Iraq war. We should keep our eyes on the big goal this fall, which is taking back control of Congress from the Republican crooks who have been taking from the poor and giving to the rich for the past five years!

[LincolnMcGrath]

62. He will never caucus with Democrats again, get real!

His entire political existance is now exclusively dependant on his "I'm not them" status.

[PegDAC]

63. Maybe, just maybe

Joe will split the Repub vote, giving it to Lamont.

[oldboy101]

64. Can Schlesinger win?

My concern with the Connecticut race is that Lamont and Lieberman might split the Democratic vote this fall, and open the door for a Republican Schlesinger victory. That would be a real tragedy, losing a solid Democratic seat to the Republican because of Democrats eating their own!

[noahmijo]

79. That's what I think is going to happen

It'll be like 60% for Lamont 30% for Joe and 10% for the repug. As far as I can tell no one in that state really even know who the hell the repug is, and being that CT already said No to Holy Joe I highly doubt they'll say Yes to some puke lackey.

[me b zola]

70. No, Lieberman is not still a Democrat

Joe has decided to begin his own political party and is running against the Democratic nominee. It's that simple. Joe has left the party.

[ScreamingMeemie]

74. Lieberman registered Independently last week. He is no more a

Democrat than Jim Jeffords is...even though Mr. Jeffords is far more progressive. I think we should turn our backs on Mr. Lieberman and support true Democrats who don't cry and whine and switch parties...in the name of self.

[LincolnMcGrath]

76. I agree, kick Joe to the curb before he causes more harm.

[Zhade]

81. You are in violation of DU rules with this post.

You may not advocate for Lieberman now that he has lost the primary.

This post has been alerted on, as mods have requested in cases of rule-breaking.

[LincolnMcGrath]

59. K snicker & R snicker

[cleveramerican]

65. its an indicator of the very real split among Dems

so many in the party are screaming for a new direction, more genuine,less nuanced.
Then there are the others who say "we only lost by 1%, we're doing okay just letting the GOP shoot itself in the foot over and over"


Far be it from me to quote Ronald Reagan but I will...
" A big part of politics is simply showing up"


we all will see who shows up in November.

[cboy4]

66. Here at DU, the percentage has to be what, 95% or higher?!

Poor Joe. I feel bad for him.

[professor_grove]

68. I´m one of them for sure

the sad part is to realize how out of touch and neocon-ish Bill Clinton has become.

[wussoch]

69. C'mon

So, 79% of the national Democratic electorate are glad that
Lieberman lost to Lamont?  This is why Zogby is frequently
incorrect in his polling, leading to disappointed poll
readers.  Look deeper into this nonsensical result:

LIEBERMAN GOT 48% OF THE DEMOCRATIC VOTES IN CONNECTICUT!!!! 
Now, Connecticut is a more liberal-leaning state than, oh,
say... Missouri or West Virginia.  Although the "more
liberal candidate" only got 52% of the Democratic vote
in one of the "more liberal states" in the union,
we are to believe that 4 in 5 of the Democratic electorate in
the rest of the country (presuming that on average these
Democratic voters are LESS LIBERAL than those of Connecticut)
preferred Lamont???  This defies both common sense and
statistical analysis.  Unless the coal-mining Democrats in
West Virginia are more liberal than suburbanite
Connecticutters?

[Telly Savalas]

75. So what methodological flaw do you think exists in Zogby's poll

to account for what must be at least a 27 percentage point error?

[LincolnMcGrath]

71. !

[Major Hogwash]

77. And 87% of Connecticut Democrats were against the Iraq War.

Joe shot himself in the head, not anyone else.

[Totally Committed]

78. 79% of Dems nationally MAY BE glad Lieberman lost....

Barney, however, is distraught. He had come to love Joe so.....





TC

[Brian Stevens]

82. I'm curious.

I don't believe in polls unless they give out the number of the people surveyed, not just a percentage. How many people were surveyed anyways?

[welshTerrier2]

84. well, if you're really curious ...

you could follow the link in the OP to the full article that gives the details you're looking for ...