The Pre-Debate Rally, and Alan Schlesinger Perot

Flickr set of photos of the setup for this rally are here.

Today there's a debate at 3pm, which for some reason won't be broadcast until tomorrow evening, and will have very limited media coverage.  I don't get it.  But then this has been the weirdest race of the cycle, by far.

The big story is Alan Schlesinger, who is figuring as the Ross Perot of the race, the cranky and loveable conservative who appeals to the low information voter that is angry at the system and mostly libertarian in outlook.  These voters span the parties, with the unifying issue an anger at immigration and a lack of belief in the ability of government to change their economic status.  Schlesinger is furious at Lieberman and the Republican Party for throwing him under the bus, and he is ignoring their memo that he soft-pedal attacks on Joe.  The response from the Lieberman camp, through surrogates of course, is going to be furious.  You'll see a huge amount of dirt leaked on Schlesinger, mostly because Joe's vindictive nature applies to anyone who challenges him.  It's not clear to me if this is going to work or create a backlash, since people like Schlesinger who buck the system have a kind of teflon coating against nasty personal attacks.  The kinds of attacks that are coming are going to lend themselves very well to a candidate whose essential message is that the Republicans can go fuck themselves.

So that's the story of the race right now.  I'm sitting at the University of Connecticut, waiting for a rally with Ned to begin with law students and professors.  This is a friendly area for Ned, with Lamont signs on the lawns of houses all over the place.  Smart campaigns fire up their candidates with pre-debate rallies, because debates are a mental contest as much as they are about substance.

The rally is beginning now, and Ned's about to speak.  The room is packed with students.

UPDATE: I added some more pictures to the flickr set, and I have some video snippets of Ned speaking. He's fired up.

Tags: Alan Schlesinger, Connecticut, CT-Sen, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)



Alan Schlesinger Perot


by global yokel 2006-10-18 08:30AM | 0 recs
when lieberman attacks Schlesinger
Lamont should remind voter's that Lieberman is insulting the intelligence of Republican/conservative voters.  
First by Lieberman painting himself as the true conservative in the race and second by blurring the line of Lieberman's convictions which are very confused and constantly with his finger in the wind.
Again, peel off the moderate DEMS leaning toward Lieberman after they see his hard core conservative streak and second peel off republicans that think they are voting for the best conservative of the bunch.
by gasperc 2006-10-18 08:31AM | 0 recs

Doesn't it seem like Schlesinger should be the independent in this race and Joe-Mentum the Republican?

It sure seems that way from the polling numbers and Lieberman's actions.

by Tom 2006-10-18 09:08AM | 0 recs
Odd race

Something is a bit fishy about the polls, I think.  Lieberman won 63 percent of the vote the last time around in 2000, against a pretty weak Republican.  That means 37 percent of the state's voters voted against him.

Something tells me those 37 percent were not liberal Democrats, the kind of people who would be supporting Lamont.  Yet the polls are telling us that 80-90 percent of Connecticut's voters are going to vote for either Lamont or Lieberman.

No matter what the polls say, Schlesinger is bound to get 20 percent of the vote based on the "R" next to his name alone.  Connecticut Republicans are sorely mistaken if they think Lieberman is going to vote like a Republican if they send him to the Senate.  No, he's not going to be a Democrat, he's probably not even going to be a Jeffords.  But he's not going to be a Republican.  Lamont supporters aren't going to suddenly decide to vote for Schlesinger, but Lieberman's might over the last two weeks.  I guess part of it is that the Republicans in the state would rather have Lieberman than Lamont -- but really, do you think a major party nominee is only going to get 5 percent of the vote?  I doubt it.

by Tom 2006-10-18 09:29AM | 0 recs

When you put it that way, it just boggles my mind.  Well stated, sir!

by JJCPA 2006-10-18 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: The Pre-Debate

I figure that Schlesinger should garner a minimum of 10%, if only due to the hard-core, straight ticket voting republicans.  Those types on the left should give Lamont a straight up 15% of the vote (as, I believe, Connecticut is heavily blue, and republican turnout is likely to be depressed this year)
So, that leaves Lamont and Lieberman to battle over the other 75%, with Liebs needing to grab about 61% minimum to gain the largest share of the vote.

Of course, can I base this on any real data?  not really.  I'm just wasting your time.  

by JJCPA 2006-10-18 09:34AM | 0 recs
Re: debate
will you be able to live blog the debate?  i'm dying here.... wanting to watch it and not being able to!
by selise 2006-10-18 10:38AM | 0 recs
Re: The Pre-Debate Rally, and Alan Schlesinger Per

Does anyone else see the irony in the ideological, extremely partisan Republicans voting for the self-professed moderate "Democrat," while the independent-minded, more centrist and libertarian ones vote for the actual Republican?

What's that old saying about the company you keep?

by Zephyrus 2006-10-18 11:01AM | 0 recs
Low information voters?

I'm quite familiar with the issue of illegal immigration and the perils involved, so, from my perspective those who support pro-illegal immigration candidates like Lamont and Lieberman are the ones who might perhaps need to do some research into the subject.

If Lamont wanted to win, he could have an epiphany and pledge to strongly oppose illegal immigration. He could pick up a lot of pro-American votes that way and the only votes he'd lose would be from racial power groups and the far-left. Sounds like a good bargain.

by TheLonewackoBlog 2006-10-18 02:32PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads