Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The real story about last night in CT

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Sam Odom Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:48 AM
Original message
The real story about last night in CT
The American people did not speak nor did the people of Connecticut!

150,000 registered Dems from a Blue State spoke, they said they hated Bush and his policies. Not so shocking is it?

The real story is 140,000 registered Dems from a Blue State were ambivalent toward Bush and his policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. Nope. That is not the real story.
But nice try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sam Odom Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Too many good folks are intoxicated with the WIN
to see the truth right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Why should CT be any different than any other state?
ALL states should have 99% voting. But none do. Connecticut was the FIRST state to fire a shot across the GOP's bow, and the FIRST to unseat an incumbent in decades.

Savor winning the battle, even if the war rages on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sam Odom Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. You are making my point!
"Connecticut was the FIRST state to fire a shot across the GOP's bow"

No! CT fired no shot! It was a DEM Party Primary shot with 52% support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Then I don't see what your point is.
Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
danalytical Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. OH I get it
You're trying to remove CT from the equation and claim it was all Democrats that did this. In some ways you're right, because there was some outside help but in other ways you're totally off base. We had to win in the face of no money from the National Democratic party, Bill Clinton stumping for Lieberman, no name recognition, and no corporate dollars. That could have happened somewhere else I guess, but it didn't. It happened here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
danalytical Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. LOL yeah I was thinking the same thing
Edited on Wed Aug-09-06 11:45 AM by danalytical
I live in CT and voted, and no that is not the real story. The real story is we created a mini revolution and it's going to roll through the country and topple the oligarchy. THAT's the story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sam Odom Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. mini revolution
52% - 48% is mini alright.

I was hoping for a double digit win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Lamont won by precisely the same margin that Lieberman did
when he unseated Weicker. That was an upset too, and for mirror reasons.

from Wikipedia:
Lieberman was first elected to the United States Senate as a Democrat in 1988, by a margin of 10,000 votes. He scored the nation's biggest political upset that year, after being backed by a coalition of Democrats and unaffiliated voters with support from conservative Republicans, who were disappointed in three-term Republican incumbent Lowell Weicker's liberal voting record and personal style.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sam Odom Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. What we saw last night was DEM PARTY Politics
If Ned beats Joe in Nov by only one vote then I will be happy. Ned ain't in the Senate yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. No, he isn't, but he will be.
And whether you recognize it or not, acknowledge it or not, a message was sent nationally with this Primary election.

And it's the Democratic Party, TYVM.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
danalytical Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. It's not even about the amount of votes he won by
It's the fact that he WON at all. ANd he did from NOWHERE! THAT is a revolution albeit on a mini scale. You know what they say about ripple effect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrary1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. "I was hoping for a double digit win."
By whom?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calico1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
18. Good God!
Just a few short months ago few people in CT knew who the hell Ned Lamont was! By contrast, Lieberman has had an over 30 year political history in this State. When Lamont went up against Lieberman it wasn't just Lieberman he went up against. It was also most of the MSM, the Democratic Party machine, the pundits, etc. And out of all the newspaper endorsements, Ned got ONE. And this was a Democratic primary in a mid term year in the summer when a lot of people don't normally participate because they are vacationing or just can't be bothered. But this primary was a record turnout. Biggest in CT HISTORY. But you still aren't satisfied? :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissWaverly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
2. the real story, 140,000 voted for Lieberman as a nice guy
amd probably regret it after his performance this morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
5. if CT Dems choose not to vote or are so apathetic they don't vote, then
those who DO vote make the choice. That's democracy, which is not dead yet in CT.

Ned won fair and square and he will win the senatorial race, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-09-06 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
14. You mean 140,000 voters lost their nerve when they got into
the voting booth and went with the devil they knew, or 140,000 voters liked Lieberman's attacks on labor, or 140,000 voters love corporate subsidies, or 140,000 voters thought Lieberman was their guy to protect Israel.

My guess is that most of them are the first category.

Remember, the incumbent ALWAYS has the edge, if only for name recognition. Add to that the dirty campaign he ran and he tripled his advantage.

It still wasn't enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Impashund Ubique Donating Member (98 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
17. Not entirely true.
Edited on Thu Aug-10-06 12:22 PM by Impashund Ubique
The exit polls (from Tuesday's election) show that only 16% of the democratic primary voters supported Bush. So, they are not ambivalent toward Bush or his policies.

Instead, they were repaying Joe Lieberman for the domestic goodwill he has accumulated over the years. They voted for Lieberman, not Bush, but in doing so, they did not realize that they were also voting for the continuation of the war in Iraq.

You are totally discounting the personal history Joe Lieberman has in CT. If this race was between two new faces, and one of them was supporting Bush's policies, then your logic might apply. Not so much in this race, where Lieberman has the advantage of an unshakable impression on the minds of most CT residents.

The point about ambivalence is this: The democrats who voted for Lieberman are ambivalent about the power of their vote and the symbolic (plus practical) weight this race carries. They are also ambivalent about how Lieberman's re-election fuels the pro-war, pro-Bush agenda.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 22nd 2019, 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC