HARTFORD CURRENT
EmailCataclysm! Last night Lamont won, 52-48%, as you know, and Lieberman is now pursuing an independent big for Senate in Connecticut, where independents make up a plurality of the electorate.
According to the Almanac of American Politics, the Nutmeg state is 43% Independents (unaffiliated voters and members of minor parties); 34% Democrats, and 23% Republicans.
The Lieberman camp’s thinking (however accurate) is: those who voted for Lieberman yesterday already like his independent ways, so they will stick with him, and Lamont won’t get above what he has now — the 52% of Democrats. That leaves Joe to clear the deck!
The other argument is — Lieberman will be portrayed as a sore loser, Democrats will abandon him after all those 2008 hopefuls — Biden, Hillary, Bayh, Kerry, et al; to say nothing of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama — come to Connecticut to stump for Lamont, and Lieberman’s independent bid is going to crumble like a matzah.
Republicans meanwhile, are having fun.
In Ohio, this morning, RNC chair Ken Mehlman said the Lamont victory "reflects an unfortunate embrace of isolationism, defeatism, and a ‘blame America first’ attitude by national Democratic leaders at a time when retreating from the world is particularly dangerous."
Incidentally, yesterday I asked Liebermsan which was tougher, this or the Florida recount. His answer: "I don’t know how to compare those two. This has been a tough fight, (but)…to get re-elected to the US Senate I don’t have to carry the electoral college, I just need to get the popular vote as I did, as Al Gore and I did in Florida. You know, about once a day the memory of that 2000 recount comes up to about here" — raised hand about chest level — "and I push it down because you gotta go forward."
More later from this nutty Nutmeg state –
jt
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
I could easily foresee this mess which Lieberman himself is creating to force a squeaker between him and Lamont in November. It is my most sincere hope that the second argument wins out: that the Dem heavy-hitters will go to Connecticut to campaign for Lamont and against Lieberman. Lieberman’s campaign should be thrown out like yesterday’s gefilte fish!
Posted by: chuck | August 9, 2006, 9:08 am 9:08 am
Once again, thanks for the work you did to keep the Political Junkies informed during this race. One small quibble. You write, “Republicans meanwhile, are having fun.
In Ohio, this morning, RNC chair Ken Mehlman said the Lamont victory “reflects an unfortunate embrace of isolationism, defeatism, and a ‘blame America first’ attitude by national Democratic leaders at a time when retreating from the world is particularly dangerous.”
I beg to differ with the ‘Republicans meanwhile, are having fun.’ angle. They’re scared spitless and I can’t believe Mehlman’s first retort is a re-hash of the very ‘policy’, (Stay the Course) that got Lieberman dumped and that more than 60% of ALL AMERICANS disagree with. Simply put, the Lamont campaign succeeded by addressing moderate, centerist concerns and calling this Radical will not change this. I truely hope Mehlman et. al. really believe, and campaign on, their own BS.
Posted by: Bill From PA | August 9, 2006, 9:43 am 9:43 am
I was never a supporter of Lieberman (how could I be, I don’t live in Connecticut; haha; but seriously, I am not a fan of his politics), but I do find one thing demonstrably unsettling about immediate calls for Lieberman to “drop out” of the race as an independent. Isn’t a multi-party system (meaning, more than two political parties) the best system we could arrive at in this country? Ideally, shouldn’t there be a liberal, a democrat, an independent, a republican, and a conservative on the ballot, representing the cross-section of the population, all with a decent chance of snagging a good percentage of the vote (depending on the individual electorate, of course)? If that is what happens as a result of the Lamont v. Lieberman storyline, then so be it, and hopefully it means more “third-party” candidates in the future. (Once again, I am not a supporter of Lieberman.)
Posted by: reyonthehill | August 9, 2006, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm
Bill from PA: I was going to post the same thought, but you said it better than I could have. I wonder if Mehlman actually believes that those who opposed the Iraq invasion from the outset and those who have come to acknowledge that it has been a debacle are actually “isolationist” and “blame America first.” Here’s hoping so.
Posted by: DKNY | August 9, 2006, 12:52 pm 12:52 pm
The republicans are going to have a field day with the photo of Lamont and the dynamic duo of Jackson and Sharpton behind him!
Posted by: gerard l | August 9, 2006, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm
Bill and DKNY – Have you learned nothing from the last 5 years? Calling the opposition unpatriotic, etc. is Page One of the KRV Bible (Karl Rove Version)
but here’s the thing – this will not result in a gain of a seat in the Senate, especially if Lieberman runs as an indie…CT appears to be blue enough that it’s either going to be Lamont or Lieberman…and we would assume if Joe is elected, he will go in either as a Dem-aligned Independent, or he will switch back.
All this attention over a Senate seat that is relatively safe for the Dems…can these bloggers now put their energy where we really need it and send Little Ricky (Santorum) home to PA?
Posted by: phillygirl64 | August 9, 2006, 3:41 pm 3:41 pm
The more Lieberman is embraced by the Mehlmans and their ilk, the better are Lamont’s chances in the fall. IF Joe did win as an independent in Nov., how do the Conn. voters know he will caucus with the Democrats? After all, he thinks like a GOPer, and votes like one of them all too often, why wouldn’t he caucus with them and vote like a Republican (which he often does already)? Looks like a very winable position for the Democratic nominee to take.
Posted by: sophillyfatz | August 9, 2006, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
Hey Steno Jake….does it ever occur to you why the Republican party cares so much about the outcome of this primary? I’ll explain it to you, since it seems to have gone over your head: they loved Joe…and that love for Joe is exactly why Joe lost.
Don’t you think it’s strange that the Republican Party doesn’t even endorse their own party’s candidate in that Senate race? I bet you didn’t even know that. How could you, after all, you’re just a political reporter….
Posted by: Irony Man | August 9, 2006, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
The round-up was starting quickly..Mark Davis of WTNH-was on Senator Joe in a quick question about SUPPORT..Senator Lieberman was makling plans as he walked into the next day..right there on the spot..it became a Money Issue of first importance..the follow up in the Primary was that Senator Joe should back off..Kevin Sullivan or Chris Dodd were well on the way to imagine the future..leaveing the solution in the hands of a Broker when the Liberal ideas are lost in “bragging” rights..one thing was very clear..the picture of a Liberal Democrat seems long on solution and totally BOGUS on Road Skills..if the failing economy just looses its RING over the Bragging Rights/you only get a chance and a half here in Connecticut..when twice as much is needed..the cover-up of the real policy is the fighting ground..ITS going to appear late but I would not let Senator Joe leave so quickly without remembering his friends/if the divide is actually a hole in the ground..then its just popular tactics what we witnesses on the Television..The DOUBLE DEAL is in the Democratic future..because they screwed themselves that bad.
Posted by: MarkSM | August 9, 2006, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm
Why Ironic Man would deem it necessary to attack Tapper is beyond me. Jake has been as insightful and thorough covering this story as anyone in the major media. An ironic thing is that there is absolutely nothing ironic in Ironic Man’s post; just straight, self-important “analysis.” More ironic, still, is that the “analysis” is the most obvious, least probing I’ve seen on the subject matter. Thanks for the tip, deep thinker.
Posted by: DKNY | August 10, 2006, 9:08 am 9:08 am
Why, thank you, DKNY. Now that we’re in agreement that my “analysis” is painstakingly obvious, you can start wondering why Mr. Tapper seems so oblivious to it.
Posted by: Irony Man | August 10, 2006, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm