« UK Terrorists Were Going to Take Their Baby on the Suicide Mission | Main | Giuliani-Romney 2008? »

Lieberman 46%, Lamont 41%

Feel the Joementum!

Rasmussen Reports growing support for Joe Lieberman, and waning support for Ned Lamont. Yeah, yeah, I can already see the wheels turning from the PR folks, so don't get me started on political naivety. No Republican has a chance in this state, nor was anyone thinking that one would.

However, this is clearly a left-leaning state, but the balance of power is in jeopardy. The far-left is in a direct face-off with the moderate left. It's the direction the state is going to go we're looking at. I've never been a believer in polls, and I don't trust them, but sometimes they're telling. That's why I was surprised by one line in the story from Rasmussen explaining from whence this influx of Lieberman support is coming.

Republican Alan Schlesinger earns just 6% of the vote, down from 13% a month ago.

A 7% drop for the seemingly hapless Republican candidate, but it seems that Connecticut voters are picking their fights, and choosing the most conservative candidate who has a chance to win. As I mentioned before, a Republican has as much of a chance in Connecticut as I do with Jessica Alba, so that was never in doubt. It is telling, then, that indicators are that they will vote for the more moderate candidate.

This now opens a question in my mind: does this mean Connecticut is becoming more conservative? No, not Texas-style "hang 'em high" type conservatism, but less blue and more purple? I think so. It is the opinion of this writer that moderates are beginning to feel uncomfortable - and even unwelcome - in the Democratic Party.

We shall wait, in eager anticipation, on the spin that comes from this. I can already guess what's going to happen, even without checking all the links at memeorandum. You can be sure we'll keep developments like this here, and at Wizbang Politics.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Lieberman 46%, Lamont 41%:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Lieberman looks outside state for help with independent run

Comments (16)

Lamont is an anti-war moder... (Below threshold)
greenstater:

Lamont is an anti-war moderate. Lieberman is a pro-war moderate. People in Connecticut are opposed to the war in Iraq. Dick Cheney et al might have succeeded in persuading some people that Lamont loves Islamofascism and wants to triple your income taxes, but all that shows is that some Americans are still stupid enough to listen to liars like Deadeye Dick.

All You repub Connecticutte... (Below threshold)
914:

All You repub Connecticutters go all in for Joe and send Lapont back to the Dean pre-natal assasination seminary club!!

Here is part of an exchange... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:

Here is part of an exchange on fox News Sunday:

WALLACE: This week you even linked the war in Iraq to what's going on in Israel. Take a look at this, if you will.

LAMONT: Sure.

WALLACE: This is what you had to say. "Hezbollah has been emboldened. They're attacking Israel. I think you can just look around the Middle East right now and you can see just the many factors of how this invasion of Iraq was a disaster."

Mr. Lamont, here's a brief history of Hezbollah, and let's put it up. In 1983, they bombed the U.S. embassy and the Marine barracks, killing 258 Americans.

In 1996, they helped the Iranians blow up the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 servicemen.

They have been at war with Israel for a quarter century. Can you really blame Hezbollah on the war in Iraq?

LAMONT: I'd say the war in Iraq has emboldened Iran. An emboldened Iran doesn't have its historical enemy, Iraq, right there, makes Israel more vulnerable. Iran, Syria, Hezbollah -- there is a nexus there.

Yes, I think we've destabilized the Middle East and we've done nothing for Israel's security because of this.

WALLACE: And you think that this Hezbollah attack -- you can link it to the fact that we're in Iraq?

LAMONT: Well, what I said was our invasion of Iraq has done nothing for Israel's security and has emboldened Iran. Absolutely.


Soooooooooo,

Let me get this straight. Because we took Iraq out of the picture, that took away Iran’s historical enemy, so without Iraq, Iran is emboldened to take on Israel?
Now I saw the show and I’ve read it several times to determine if I just wasn’t reading it correctly.

But he did say it and meant it all the while looking like a deer in headlights.


The Democratic far left are... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

The Democratic far left are saying that they are the anti-war party and now the anti-Semitic party too. I wonder how many moderate Democratic Jews will vote Republican in the coming election to show continued support for Israel? Whoops. I guess that kind of backfired for the Kos Kids, MoveOn.org, Soros, and the rest of those cowards! Funny how racist it really is given the facts.

The Guy is... (Below threshold)
Rob LA Ca.:

The Guy is just an Idiot. Did you catch the part about being a Business man and then further disgracing "TRUE" Business men by claiming "that's what we do". Also the quick duck of the ANWAR drilling saying it would only last us around 6 months. Why do the Media , FOX included let them skate on such blatant lies?

"I think you can just look around the Middle East right now and you can see just the many factors of how this invasion of Iraq was a disaster."

It's only a disaster in the eyes of the Failed Minority Anti-WAR/AMERICAN Democrat Party. We will be paying the price for the Disasterous 8 Clinton years that did their best to aid all these EVIL like minded minority failures. The only thing that makes Lieberman tollerable is his stance on National Security. The fact that they chose to smear him as the enemy(as if he were a Republican) Proves that they are nothing more than a Party of OPPORTUNISTICS ASSHOLES even amongst themselves.

Those that say we need a Two Party System of Government , that it is essential. Looking at the Democrat Party of Perpetual Fraud I have to ask exactly how have the Democrats contributed to this Country in the last 6 years?

If anything it seems as if they have done all in their Pathetic Minority Power to make things as worse as possible. Dividing the Country with their shameless and childish lies using the ignorant and criminal minded along with all those they and their Media continue to deceive for one purpose and ONE PURPOSE ALONE. To get their incompetant behinds back in POWER to further degrade our Country with their sick and failed agenda. Democrats don't give a shit about our Country at all. They have more than proven this time and time again in their desparate attempt to take what has been rightfully denied them at the Ballot Box,POWER and the Confidence to protect our Country.

Well stated Rob..right on!<... (Below threshold)
914:

Well stated Rob..right on!

Lamont :"Let me get this... (Below threshold)
Chris is Bliss:

Lamont :"Let me get this straight. Because we took Iraq out of the picture, that took away Iran’s historical enemy, so without Iraq, Iran is emboldened to take on Israel?
Now I saw the show and I’ve read it several times to determine if I just wasn’t reading it correctly."

This is called the "Bovine-Feces on the wall" defense. Just throw some Bovine-Feces on a wall and see what sticks. And someone tell Lamont not to use the excxt same talking points one would use on NBC, CNN, CBS, ABC as he would on Fox. Interviewers on the former alphabets would nod their heads in agreement to his statement and political philosophy.

The anti-war label is noble, but is as vacuous as a label such as "pro-choice" Nobody is pro-war, but some problems are handled better by using a boot in the backside as opposed to say uummm.... clinking champagne glasses with a person who jsut threatened you with nukes. Lamont is anti-Bush, as are those who voted for him. Libs are angrier about Iraq than they were about 9/11. And this is why Lieberman will beat Lamont by double digits in November. And why a liberal Democrat will never again be elected to the White House

LAMONT: I'd say the w... (Below threshold)
Chris is Bliss:

LAMONT: I'd say the war in Iraq has emboldened Iran. An emboldened Iran doesn't have its historical enemy, Iraq, right there, makes Israel more vulnerable. Iran, Syria, Hezbollah -- there is a nexus there.

I meant to highlight this quote.

My bad

Also the quick du... (Below threshold)
Jumpinjoe:
Also the quick duck of the ANWAR drilling saying it would only last us around 6 months. Why do the Media , FOX included let them skate on such blatant lies

Rob, Here is that exchange:

WALLACE: You're for energy independence. Let's talk about some of the components of that. Drilling in ANWR?

LAMONT: I oppose that. I just think it's a false choice. That's going to buy us a few months, six months. Doesn't get the job done.

I’m not trying to swing way off topic but rather focus on the fact that Lamont is either stupid on the subject or a pure propagandist.

That six-month supply figure has been spouted by the lefties since this debate began about drilling there.

They based it on an estimate of how much oil was in ANWR and then someone determined the supply was equal to the TOTAL production of the U.S. for six months. (foreign imports plus domestic production) Meaning ANWR would count as our ONLY source to get that figure. Every import would amount to zero and every domestic well shutoff simultaneously.

When in fact ANWR could replace Saudi Arabian oil for about 15 years or longer. Gee, less Middle Eastern oil equals more leverage for us in the region.

Democrats and especially Lamont are not “big picture” kind of people. They are short-term sound bite political hacks, nothing more.


Gee, wasn't it nice of gree... (Below threshold)

Gee, wasn't it nice of greenstater to try to change the subject so that he wouldn't have to deal with the polling results?

Just a point of clarificati... (Below threshold)
yetanotherjohn:

Just a point of clarification. We elect republicans to state office, democrats just don't have a chance to win at the state level. We don't execute by hanging, we execute by lethal injection.

And if I was in CT, I would very much vote for Lieberman. Schlessinger doesn't have a chance and I wouldn't want the fall out from the US running away in Iraq to be on my conciance,

*Conscience*, y.a.j. And h... (Below threshold)
greenstater:

*Conscience*, y.a.j. And how come leaving Afghanistan in the care of an outgunned NATO force isn't on your conscience? If the Taliban manage to take over again, and it seems that they might, will you be able to sleep at night? 'Cause I wouldn't if I were the sort of person that cares as much about Iraqis as you profess to.

__________________________________

I didn't change the subject, David. The caricature of Lamont as a male Cindy Sheehan is dishonest, and has been perpetuated by dishonest people including the VP. Lamont is a moderate whose views are much more closely aligned with the people of CT than Lieberman's. Just because the far left like the guy, doesn't mean he's one of them.

It is utterly preposterous ... (Below threshold)
Jim Addison:

It is utterly preposterous to claim that withdrawing from Iraq as Lamont wants would not embolden Hezbollah, Iran, al Qaeda, and the neighborhood radicals.

One could still argue it was the best of bad alternatives - I would disagree with that, but it could be argued - but saying our withdrawing wouldn't embolden the terrorists and their state sponsors just as it did when we withdrew from Beirut and Mogadishu is simply idiotic.

Lamont's claim that our invasion of Iraq - which caused Libya to volunteer to give up their own nuke program just in case we knew about it aided or emboldened Hezbollah in any way is equally idiotic.

Say, how about an "Idiots For Lamont" group? Oh, never mind - they're already with him.

"Idiots for Lamont", Jim? I... (Below threshold)
greenstater:

"Idiots for Lamont", Jim? Is that how you refer to 60% of the American public? Lieberman and the GOP got the U.S. into a conflict with no end in sight, and Lamont et al (again, 60% of the nation) don't think it is going to end well with or without American soldiers there. Bush & Co. shit the bed. Don't rub Lamont's face in it because he's trying to change the sheets.

The terrorists are already emboldened, Jim. I don't know how much more bold they can get, actually. We'll be perceived as losers when we leave, but do you honestly think anybody outside of the United States thinks that America is winning in Iraq?

And why did anybody expect this to turn out otherwise? Sunnis and Shiites hate each other (and they both hate the Kurds). They were colonized and lumped together by the ever so culturally sensitive British, and were ruled by foreign or domestic dictators who used brutality to keep the peace. Anyone with a very rudimentary grasp of the region's history who put ten seconds of thought into this prior to the invasion could not have thought this would turn out otherwise. Saddam is gone--good. But as far as democracy being a silver bullet against terrorism, it clearly isn't. Democracy works really well for people who don't kill their neighbours for going to the wrong church.

Please tell me why I'm wrong, but I can think of only one solution to this quagmire (and it doesn't involve American soldiers): the country needs to be split into three separate nations with oil revenues shared on a per capita basis. Let the UN draw the formal boundaries, I don't care. Let GWB and Condoleeza (and Clinton and GHB and Carter) beg Arab countries (and Iran and Turkey) on their hands and knees to send peacekeepers to ensure that the transition goes as smoothly as possible (likely not very smooth at all, but probably not worse than what is going on right now). Pulling out and doing nothing might lead to ethnic cleansing, and thus is not an acceptable option; but "staying the course" is a waste of American blood and treasure. Remake the country. We can't fix it as it is, because it's inherently broken.

I agree with Bush...let so... (Below threshold)
Ray:

I agree with Bush...let some future president solve the Iraq situation. The answer will not come from this one.

greenstater,But a... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

greenstater,
But as far as democracy being a silver bullet against terrorism, it clearly isn't. Democracy works really well for people who don't kill their neighbours for going to the wrong church.

You forgot Japan. American missionaries moved in after we dropped the bombs and Shazam! it's one of the largest democratic economies in the world.

[Iraq ] needs to be split into three separate nations with oil revenues shared on a per capita basis. Let the UN draw the formal boundaries, I don't care.

You mean like Israel. Sure. Great idea. NOT.

Let GWB and Condoleeza (and Clinton and GHB and Carter) beg Arab countries (and Iran and Turkey) on their hands and knees to send peacekeepers to ensure that the transition goes as smoothly as possible

Never beg, son.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy