Dem angst over Lieberman escalates

http://hill1.thehill.com/thehill/opencms/TheHill/News/Frontpage/081606/news1.html

i don't have any problem with this. but i can just see the whore media and everyone putting all the attention on this.

i want to go after REPUBLICANS . why the fuck is Lieberman doing this ? i really can't stand him. and he was on our Party Presidential ticket just 6 years ago ???????????

I don't get this at all.

http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpoliticalwire.com%2Farchives%2F2006%2F08%2F17%2Fin_connecticut_lieberman_holds_double_digit_lead.html&title=In%20Connecticut%2C%20Lieberman%20Holds%20Double%20Digit%20Lead&bodytext=In%20Connecticut%27s%20U.S.%20Senate%20race%2C%20a%20new%20%3Ca%20href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.quinnipiac.edu%2Fx11362.xml%3FReleaseID%3D948%22%3EQuinnipiac%20poll%3C%2Fa%3E%20finds%20Sen.%20Joseph%20Lieberman%20%28I%29%20leading%20Ned%20Lamont%20%28D%29%20among%20likely%20voters%2C%2053%25%20to%2041%25%2C%20with%20Alan%20Schlesinger%20%28R%29%20getting%204%25.%3Cbr%20%2F%3E%3Cbr%20%2F%3E%0A%0ALieberman%20leads%2075%25-13%25-10%25%20among%20likely%20Republican%20voters%2C%20and%2058%25-36%25-3%25%20among%20likely%20i&topic=politics



The signals put out by the republicans can't have been any stronger. I'd think that alone would sink Lieberman with dems and independents. There's still time, though, for all this to sort itself out before election day.

I don't care if Lieberman was 90% Democrat (as some claim), his actions following his defeat are despicable and 110% Republican.

This survey was done between Aug 10 - Aug 14, Thursday through Monday. It is August and typically people aren't following the news that much. Also, you had the ads with Clinton lavishing praise on Lieberman. That said it will be a tough battle. The pollster ignores that Lieberman is still polling high with independents - and there is a huge discrepancy between the Independents' approval for Lieberman and disapproval of Bush. That is obviously why the Democrats are making that link the main argument.

Here are some trends that are good for Lamont:

"Here is Lieberman' s overall approach trend:
Approve Approve
Aug 17 Jul 20 Jun 8 May 2 Feb 16
2006 2006 2006 2006 2006
Approve 55 55 56 59 63
Disapprove 40 35 32 29 25
DK/NA 6 10 13 12 11

In six months, his disapproval has gone from 25 to 40. That's 15 points - and the increase has accelerated in recent months. His approval has been stable over the summer - with the disapproval coming mostly at the expense of the the DK/NA. It may also be that he's lost Democrats as he gained
Republicans.

This shows how the 55% approval is spread over some demographics:
"Do you approve or disapprove of the way Joseph Lieberman is handling his job as United States Senator?


Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom Likely

Approve 55% 75% 38% 58% 56% 54% 56%
Disapprove 40 20 57 35 41 39 40
DK/NA 6 5 5 7 4 8 4 "

The strong Clinton comment is AFTER the time period of this survey - the question is will Clinton's almost too strong Lieberman comment lead to a change in the Dem column, where 38% still approve of him. The Ind column may include many people who don't follow politics this far out.

With Bush and many Republicans essentially backing Lieberman and Clinton and other Democrats tying Lieberman on the war to Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld, Lieberman's link to them on the most important issue (Iraq) may become more explicit. People on the boards know exactly how close Lieberman has been in defending Bush, not everyone knows. I suspect that Lamont has people scouring Fox News archives and Thomas - to find Lieberman comments that would hurt if focused on. Note, in this third chart - the approval for Bush is far lower among Democrats and Independents than Lieberman's approval. That is to be expected as Iraq is not Bush's only failure - but it is the main one.

"2. Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as President?
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Wom

Approve 29% 64% 9% 27% 36% 23%
Disapprove 67 31 88 67 61 71
DK/NA 4 5 3 5 3 5"


Another question that should worry Lieberman is:

"TREND: Thinking about the 2006 election for United States Senator, do you feel that Joseph Lieberman deserves to be reelected, or do you feel that he does not deserve to be reelected?


Aug 17 Jul 20 Jun 8 Feb 16

Yes/Deserves 51 56 61 63
No/Does not 40 31 28 26
DK/NA 9 12 11 11 1

This is an incredible change over the last 2 months - Lieberman's August number here looks slightly better than Bush's at this time in 2004 - but Bush's number had stabilized over most of 2004. Here Lieberman lost about 15 percent of his "yes" equally over 2 months. (The "nos" pattern is obviously the reverse)

The trendlines certainly don't favor Lieberman. I can imagine that in the long run the strong republican support for him might well boomerang with dems and independents.

I also hope it's ok to count tables as paragraphs in terms of what's ok to copy.

In this latest survey, Lieberman leads 75 - 13 - 10 percent among likely Republican voters, and 58 - 36 - 3 percent among likely independent voters, while likely Democratic voters back Lamont 63 - 35 percent. Two percent are undecided, but 28 percent of those who name a candidate might change their minds.


Among registered voters, Sen. Lieberman gets 49 percent, followed by Lamont with 38 percent and Schlesinger with 4 percent. This compares to a 51 - 27 percent Lieberman lead over Lamont, with 9 percent for Schlesinger in a July 20 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.

According to this Lieberman has already went down 2%and and Lamont up 11% and 28% may change their minds. IMO anything can happen between now and election day.

Also I saw where Biden was on Imus and he will not campaign against Lieberman. What a SOB.

Republican in CT, to actually go out on election day and vote for Lieberman?

As for Biden, he doesn't surprise me, he read the polls and he knows Imus supported Lieberman so here again is an example of pandering Joe Biden. x(

is what is the ratio among Dems-Rep-Ind. in Conn. IMO those Republicans that do go vote for Lieberman are voting on one issue Iraq, so if I were a Republican (which by the way I would never ever be) and I was totally aghast over the situation in Iraq, I would stay home.

are the majority in CT, followed by Democrats then Repubs.

I think one thing holding Lamont back is the perception that he doesn't have the experience necessary to be a Senator. I think this needs to be addressed. No Senator is experienced when he first takes office. The same goes for some of our former Presidents. Lamont strikes me as a smart enough guy to catch on to what is necessary to help CT. he certainly has it right on the war in Iraq.

It also means the likely voter algorythm is likely going to be suspect - as some people who NEVER vote will be energized and might even make it to the polls where some CONSERVATIVE Republicans, who both dislike the war and the Bush fiscal policies AND who are social consevatives may have NO candidate they approve of, may stay home. (Lamont might even be closer and they may feel he might be easier to beat than Lieberman by a good conservative in 6 years.) - Imagine William F Buckley CT people.

are simply exploiting Lieberman to give the appearance that their agenda has support. The numbers Karyn posted certainly show a trend against Lieberman. Looking at the administration's confused and dangerous actions in Iraq it's unfathomable that Lieberman has the gall to support "stay the course."

is a lot like Karyn's.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Connecticut-Senate.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Liberman was doing the right thing right before the primary with his comments that Lamont was running against Bush - and he wasn't Bush. He mentioned that he suggested Rumsfeld resign in 2003. He also emphasized his other issues - where he is often in good standing with Democrats.

The Democrats need to attach him to Bush - he needs to emphasize difference. Since the election, he sounds like the Republicans - which could drive him to Bush numbers. (If he responded to Clinton's point by pointing out that neither he or his wife suggested that Rumsfeld resign showing that he (Lieberman) was more critical than they in how the war was fought and countering Clinton's overly nasty characterization of his view he might prevent some moderates from seeing that he was so out of line.)

On Clinton's comments - it moved "All Democrats" to near Kerry's position which at the time of the vote was just NOT TRUE. I supect it may have been just Harkin and Kerry. (Edwards, for example, said he was for the war for other reasons in an OCT 2003 Hardball.) He then characterized Lieberman's as badly as possible. Smart politics, but not truthful.

They'd rather be on the winning side than almost any other single factor. Politics is like a team sport for a lot of them. It's easier than actually learning the facts and thinking about the issues.

Joe looks like he'd win over their own repub candidate--so they put their money on him. If they really wanted to be on the winning side, though, they'd just vote Dem, because our party is going to take control. ;)

just announced that the Republican Senatorial committee just endorsed Lieberman.


http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?mode=entry&entry=1CFF7F2A-E0C3-F090-AB8EF74D1B9B91CE

http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2006/08/nrsc-takes-lieberman.html

If anybody still had any doubts about him, this seals it.