In Connecticut, First Post-Primary Poll Shows Tight Race

[dolstein]

<<Rasmussen Reports began polling the Ned Lamont-Joe Lieberman general election match-up last night. After 375 interviews, preliminary numbers show Lieberman ahead of Lamont by 3 percentage points. Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger is a non-factor in the single digits.

The last Rasmussen survey of a three way general election found Lamont and Lieberman tied at 40% with Schlesinger at 13%. It appears Lieberman is gaining ground primarily among GOP voters.

Rasmussen will be back in the field tonight to complete the survey and hopes to post final data on their website before midnight.>>

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/08/10/in_connecticut_first_postprimary_poll_shows_tight_race.html

Let's see what the final numbers show. But if Lieberman's ahead now, I think people can pretty much forget about an early exit.

So much for a post-primary Lamont bounce.

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. I wish we'd remember who was senator before Lieberman n/t

[dolstein]

2. Yeah, a Republican -- Lowell Weicker

People forget that left-wing Democrats couldn't defeat Weicker, but Joe did. I'm not sure that bodes well for Lamont.

[calico1]

6. Joe beat Lieberman by running to the RIGHT of him.

Oddly enough, Weiker, a 60's Republican is more Liberal than Lieberman.

[Kolesar]

14. Joe beat Lowell Weiker by running to the right of Lowell

...on Cuba, IIRC

[warrens]

18. Lowell Weicker: Too Liberal for Connecticut

Joe invented that slur. Now he's bringing it back out again.

[JerseygirlCT]

31. Yup. Here we go again.

Voted for Weicker in 88, and I'd do it again.

Hopefully more people have now had a stomachful of Joe and won't be fooled again.

[virgdem]

32. You are not the only one to have voted for Weicker in 88'

Weicker is the only Republican I have ever voted for. I couldn't stand Joementum in 88 and I still can't stand him. I only wish that I still lived in CT so I could have voted against him again. I hope like hell that Lamont wipes the floor with him in November. If Joey keeps spouting BS the way he has been, I don't think he has a prayer of a chance.

[Stardust]

44. Vote Republican???

Don't you realize how important it is to have the Senate Majority?

[JerseygirlCT]

46. Psst...

I said I'd vote for Weicker over Lieberman again in a heartbeat.

Weicker, however, is not running. While, unfortunately, Lieberman still is.

And yes, lol, I realize how important it is. You've just lost track of the thread, I think.

And, BTW, Weicker hasn't been a Republican for years and years now.

[Stardust]

61. Sorry, I didn't know he had switch parties.//

[JerseygirlCT]

62. That's how he became governor

A Connecticut Party.

And did a fine job there, too.

His Lt. Gov. did the same (left the GOP). Another fine person -- Eunice Groark.

CT has had a history of maverick liberal Republicans... unfortunately, I think they both saw the way their party was moving, and got out.

[calico1]

22. Yes, that is what I meant.

Lieberman, a "Democrat" ran to the right of Weiker, a progressive Republican. This is something a lot of non CT people do not realize.

[gulfcoastliberal]

53. You mean Lieberman ran to the right of Weicker. Funny how Nixon woud be

called a far-left fringe wacko with his ideas on universal healthcare, the EPA, etc. Nixon was very intelligent - just too paranoid. But he did do some great domestic tings. Foreign policy (re: SE Asia - not good).

All that Coors, Olin, Scaife, etc think tank money and policy proposals succeeded in shifting things so extremely to right that Goldwater republicans seem like a extreme leftist wakos in todays politics.

[Zensea]

15. Well, Weicker was fairly liberal

I wouldn't be surprised if he supports Lamont in this race also.
He had been making noises about running if someone didn't step up against Lieberman after all.

[Larkspur]

17. Weicker is starting an Independents for Lamont group

Weicker is a big supporter of Ned Lamont.

Lamont won't win most of the Repuke vote. He'll get some moderate Republicans. It's the Independents that Lamont needs to win.

[Kolesar]

21. And there you are, in the middle of it all

Must be exciting.

[zanne]

52. QUESTION

Sorry to shout, but I've been wondering about this since Lieberman stated he'd run as an Independent if he lost the primary. Here goes: What would stop anyone, from now on, of doing the same thing as Joe? Why just lose if you can run twice? Or why not skip the primaries altogether? I've been asking these questions and getting no answers. Is anybody here an expert on election law?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

54. I don't think the scenario comes up all that often

This is only playing out like this because a three-term incumbent was unseated in the primary.

In most cases, I don't think anyone generally challenges the incumbent from the same party. Or, if they do, the incumbent has much more name-recognition and usually trounces the challenger. If you can't pick up more than 20% of your own party, you generally don't run as an independent in the main election. It's too expensive.

However, in this case, Lieberman is extremely well-known (ran for VP and all that) and only lost the primary by 3-4 points. Also, I'm sure he's got enough money to tide him through until November.

This is a bad situation, though. I have a feeling that we would take the Senate back -- except for Lieberman. I'll wager $5 right now that says he wins CT in November; he's going to be the Democrats' Jeffords.

[RCinBrooklyn]

3. Lieberman is out to be a spoiler for ALL Dems. AIPAC JOE is all Wack!

[McKinneyIsAHero]

23. Lamont is fairly AIPAC as well

He has good sense on Iraq but is with them on Israel

[truthisfreedom]

4. if Lieberman allows himself to be elected by rethugs, he'll lose the trust

of his fellow Congressmen. he might as well pull a zell at that point.

[Zorra]

41. Traitor Joe has no class and already lost the trust of at least half

of all Dem voters.

If he were a real Democrat, and had any class whatsoever, he would bow out of the race now and apologize to Ned Lamont and Dem voters for acting like a spoiled brat.

[villager]

5. isn't Lieberman's lead in a 3-way race shrinking?

Wasn't he way ahead in earlier polls?

[skipos]

8. Quinnipac has had Joe leading in a three way

Rasmussen has shown it to be closer.

It is going to take a lot of work for Lamont to win, and I don't expect the polls to be flattering to Ned for some time.

[Lasher]

51. Yes, that's correct, villager.

In May Lieberman had 56% against Lamont's 13%. The July 23 Rasmussen poll is the only one that did not show Lieberman ahead, and it was a tie. Here, check it out for yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_United_States_Senate_election%2C_2006#General_election

The August 11 Rasmussen poll showed Lieberman gaining 6% and Lamont gaining 1%. It is interesting to note that these gains came from a 7% drop by Schlesinger, and not from any post-primary net defection of either Lieberman or Lamont supporters.

The polls in this race will now come fast and furious, so we'll soon be able to see if there is a trend in favor of Lieberman.

Lasher

[dolstein]

57. That's not entirely correct, Lasher

As your yourself admit, the most recent poll before this (done by the same polling firm) showed Lieberman and Lamont tied in a three-way race. This poll shows Lieberman ahead (by five points in the final poll). While I wouldn't read TOO much into this -- there's been no statistically significant change between the two polls -- it's certainly possible that Lieberman has stabilized or even recovered slightly. Time will tell.

[Lasher]

59. That's pretty much what I was trying to say, dolstein.

Sometimes I don't communicate very effectively. :dunce:

[skipos]

7. The general election will be a lot like the primary, IMO

There will be lots of people saying "Lieberman is a shoe in" and "there is no way Lamont can win." The early polls will be close, but give an edge to incumbent Lieberman. As Lamont gets more publicity, endorsements and support, Lieberman will do his Fox News Tour of Anger, and continue to get endorsements from mostly rightwingers like Hannity, Coulter, Kristol, Rove, etc. As time goes on Ned will gain little by little and win.

[patricia92243]

11. I think so too - IF, IF, IF the big guns of our party will REALLY support

him - not just words, a wink,and a nod.

I believe most of them still want Joe - which makes me want Ned even more - but I don't live in CT - lol.

[dolstein]

20. Except that independents and Republicans will be allowed to vote

NT

[skipos]

24. Republicans will split their votes between Joe and Alan

Ned will take most of the Democrats and enough independents to win, IMO. A few months ago most people thought there weren't enough Lamont supporters in the Democratic party for Joe to lose the primary. I fully expect to hear people claim that there aren't enough anti-war and anti-Bush independents in CT for Lamont to win.

Polls have Ned and Joe neck and neck in a three way. Why would losing the primary and gaining Republican endorsements help Joe rise above Ned with independents? Since most independents in CT do not connect with the Republican talking points that Joe is now enthusiastically embracing, I am curious to hear you logic.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

55. I would not be at all surprised to see the Republican drop out

He's obviously not going to win, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Rove dangle a nice, cushy ambassadorship in front of him.

Most of the Republicans would go for Holy Joe; Democrats lose the Senate as Lieberman becomes the Democrats' Jeffords.

[Atman]

9. I believe a CBS poll subsequently was better for Ned

DO YOU THINK OF YOUR LAMONT VOTE AS…?
(Among Lamont voters)
For Lamont 52%
Against Lieberman 48

DO YOU THINK OF YOUR LIEBERMAN VOTE AS…?
(Among Lieberman voters)
For Lieberman 92%
Against Lamont 8%

MAIN REASON YOU VOTED FOR LAMONT?
(Among Lamont voters)
Opposition to Iraq war 43%
He would oppose Bush 24
It's just time for a change 21
Issues other than Iraq 9
His personal qualities 3

MAIN REASON YOU VOTED FOR LIEBERMAN?
(Among Lieberman voters)
His experience 48%
His personal qualities 21
Issues other than Iraq 21
His support for Iraq 6
Works well with Bush 3

78% of Democratic voters disapproved of the decision to go to war with
Iraq, including 61% who said they strongly disapproved. Only 22%
approved of the decision. Six in ten of those who disapproved voted
for Lamont.
U.S. DECISION TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ
Approve 22%
Disapprove 78

VOTE CHOICE OF THOSE WHO DISAPPROVE OF IRAQ WAR
Lamont 60%
Lieberman 39

VOTE IN NOVEMBER IF LIEBERMAN RUNS AS AN IND.

Lamont 49%
Lieberman 36
Not sure 12

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2771099

[Rose Siding]

27. That was a poll of just Democratic primary voters

[rocktivity]

10. Only 375 interviews?

When they interview a full thousand, you can wake me up.

:boring:
rocknation

[Bill McBlueState]

38. quick,

What's the margin of error for a sample of 375? By what percentage does this improve when the sample size is 1000?

[rocktivity]

43. One thousand respondents and a 3-pt. margin are considered standards

for a credible poll.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Bill McBlueState]

49. with 375 respondents, the margin of error is 5%

Sure, 3% is better than 5%, but the point remains the same: at the moment, it's a close race between Lieberscum and Lamont, and the Republican is a non-starter.

[movonne]

12. I think he is working with the repugs and has all along...he doesn't

care about any of the friends he has made over the years...he is out to see that the repugs win and he is one of the repugs....

[Reckon]

13. Lamont really needs to make the case why Loserman is not a Democrat..nt

edit:Loserman

[dolstein]

19. And how will this help Lamont among independents?

You seem to forget -- Democrats represent a minority of the statewide electorate.

Kos's political strategy is to run every election as though it were a primary election -- veer to the left as much as possible. While it may generate strong turnout among your die-hard supporters, it also drives turnout among your opponents. Plus it tends to turn off moderates. Perhaps Kos is counting on there not being enough moderates left to make a difference. We'll see.

[Reckon]

25. I think the majority in CT are Democrat..

Either way, LeMont needs to do a better job of painting Lieberman as being a Bu$h republican.

"Enough IS enough!" of the failed policies of the Bu$h Admin and Lieberman's support of them.

[Raydawg1234]

28. majority in CT are Independent, but it is a blue state, and most swing

democrat. For instance, I used to be independant, but I always voted for democrat candidates. Last week I registered as a Democrat so I could vote for Lamont.

[dolstein]

29. If most swing Democrat, than how do you explain the fact

that Republicans hold three House seats? How do you explain the fact that there is a Republican governor who is cruising to re-election? The fact that moderate Republicans have been very competitive against liberal Democrats in Connecticut can only be explained by a willingness of independents to back Republicans. And since there is no viable Republican candidate in the Senate race, and since Lieberman has consistently enjoyed high approval ratings from both Republcans and independents (higher, at least in recent polls, than his support among Democrats), why wouldn't you expect Republicans and independents to line up behind Lieberman?

Just because you used to be an independent but always voted for Democratic candidates doesn't mean that you are representative of independents in Connecticut as a whole.

[Tuttle]

48. Red vs Blue

how do you explain that Republicans hold three House seats?

uhm, congressional gerry mandering: one day at work, Democrat Jim Maloney represented me and co-worker and the boss... next day, Rosa Delauro represented the boss, co-worker was represented by Nancy Johnson and I was represented by Chris Shays (and none of us moved to different towns)

How do you explain the fact that there is a Republican governor who is cruising to re-election?

She was John Rowland's lt-gov and survived his corruption scandal (Rowland got into office by promising to end the income tax introduced by Weicker)... she is VERY liberal

And since there is no viable Republican candidate in the Senate race, there is now: Zell! and since Lieberman has consistently enjoyed high approval ratings from both Republcans and independents (higher, at least in recent polls, than his support among Democrats), why wouldn't you expect Republicans and independents to line up behind Lieberman?

Everyone is sick of the war AND Bush AND Zell

Tut-tut

[Riverman]

16. NO MO Jo - that is what he should be referred to from now on!

Calling him Joe makes him sound like just another good guy, a regular Joe, a guy next door, a likable fellow! BS - he is a snake and hopefully the republicans will emrace him only to find out later - as democrats have these past five years or more, that whatever the situation he will slither to a position that he thinks will be best for him, and friends, supporters, party regulars be damned. It's All about Lieberman and always has been. An opportunistic SOB if I sever saw one. Be Gone! He should be shunted at every turn. So, no Joe for me - now that he has been defeated by his former party - he is NO MO JO to me for now and forever.

[featherman]

26. Essentially even and within the MoE

Either Leiberman or Lamont could be up quite a bit in the real world but a sample of 375 wouldn't necessarily show it. I consider this poll good news considering earlier polling showing a blow out for Leiberman in a three-way. Gotta keep working here and everywhere.

[dolstein]

30. Let's get our history straight . . .

While earlier polls showed Lieberman winning easily in a three-way race, the most recent poll, taken before the primary election (and when polls showed Lamont winning by a large margin) showed Lamont and Lieberman in a statistical tie. I find it hard to believe that you were unaware of that poll, considering all the attention it received in the blogosphere.

If this new poll showed Lamont and Lieberman in a statistical tie -- AFTER Lamont defeated Lieberman -- that would show that Lamont didn't get any bounce out of his primary victory.

[TrueFunkSoldier]

33. This doesn't say much...

All it says is that the media is doing a fantastic job holding LIEberman up as some poor demogogue who has been wronged by the system of petulant, "fringe" commies.

Don't count Lamont out. Nobody thought he'd fight back from 25% under. AND, LIEberman started campaigning the day *after* he lost. Lamont hasn't begun his campaign run yet...

[dionysus]

39. a closet joe-mentum gut, cool!....not

[Tuttle]

47. Joe's biggest problem is...

Joe's biggest problem is JOE! He is approaching Bush in the stupidity column...

Ned is very smart and, if you live in CT (which I do), you will see Ned's campaign for what it is: not negative! People in CT get turned off by Joe's stupid commercials and Bush-junta-tactics... like turning away ticket holders from campaign events... and being a whiny little bastard who has decided to run and NOT support the choice of the Democratic voters.

Your citing of polls is cherry-picking: Lamont had a big lead over Zell Lieberman in the primary, head-to-head... this received lots of media attention. At the same time, Zell was shown to easily win the general election (I believe it was something like Zell 51%, Ned 29%, repuke 9% - but my memory isn't so good in the early AM). This new poll shows Zell and Ned neck-and-neck: I call that a big bounce for Ned and a huge deficit for No-mentum (there's that Bush-thing again).

If you can post links to your polls, please do... BTW, are you from CT?

Tut-tut

[kurtyboy]

50. Bingo...

Joe sucks as a campaigner--

He sucked in 2000, when he dragged down the ticket in the South (he might have helped us win Fla, but I bet we would have had a fighting chance in Ark and Tenn if someone else would have been the VP nominee--and that would have been enough for the White House)

He sucked in 2004, when he couldn't do any better than a three-way tie for third in New Hampshire (and he called THAT a victory!)

He sucked in the 2006 CT primary, when he went from 55% ahead to 4% behind in less than nine months.

I don't see any reason to believe that he'll do anything but suck for the next three months. I'm glad he's around to ensure that the GOP cannot pick up this Senate seat--because it looks as though the Republican sucks even worse than Joe at campaigning.

[SaveElmer]

34. Confirms that it won't be a cake walk...

Lieberman will still be a formidible opponent...

[Telly Savalas]

35. One thing Lamont's got going for him is that a lot of high-profile

Democrats will come to Connecticut to back him up. Lieberman won't have a team supporting him.

[SaveElmer]

36. Lamont can win...and probably has a small advantage...

But to disregard Lieberman's chances, as many here seem to be doing...is very dangerous!

[Telly Savalas]

37. I agree completely.

But I have faith that the Democrats on the ground in Connecticut won't make that mistake.

[PATRICK]

40. Bounce?

That presumes things are settled in for an early portrait. First, people have yet to react to smokin' Joe's defection and the GOP have yet to get a shot at their own candidate. One example is the "face-off" between perot and Bush, Sr. that stupidly tied up the experts and the polls while Clinton went about growing the democratic vote. That is not at all analogous to this situation but it goes to show that this is not a simple bounce situation. it's a mess from which lamont will eventually benefit and Joe eventually suffer unless someone sells the entire state GOP on selling out their candidate for someone who is a mere dupe for the DC GOP crowd.

That plus Joe's consistent lack of good judgment, grace and common sense adds up to one thing. All that is left to Joe is dirt and GOP "enthusiasm". The state GOP is left in the dirt and confused as well by the overt machinations of the DC GOP. Lamont is clear and enthusiastically backed. With the party lining up behind him and good political sense he should win handily.

Of course, I know sh** about Connecticut politics so this is a pretty broad guess. Maybe a real good Democratic government will resolve that state's increasing identity crisis as the stubborn Northeast is weened away from extremist control of its traditional GOP party.

[sutz12]

42. It's early....maybe we need to wait for the fundraising to kick in. nt

[Tiggeroshii]

45. I don't expect lieberman to caucus with the Republicans if he wins

I think he simply wants to win. He really is a good Democrat, frankly. He just isn't popular among them. If he wins I don't think it'll hurt our chances at all of taking back the Senate. And if he loses, then it's still going to work that way.

Meanwhile in Nevada Jack Carter recently jumped about 10 points from 29 to 39 percent against the incumbent Senator John Ensign's 46% in the latest Rasmussen.

[ShortnFiery]

56. Well Loserman can't effectively caucus with the DEMOCRATS

because we don't want him!

He's one arrogant and petty man. :(

[Tiggeroshii]

63. If it means gaining a majority, we'll certainly accept his caucussing with

us. He may be greedy and arrogant, but he really is still a Democrat.

[gorekerrydreamticket]

60. He would probably side with whoever is in control...n/t

[Lochloosa]

58. Show me a poll in a month. I'll pay attention to that one.