Lieberman Up by 8

According to this diary, Lieberman is now up 8 points on Lamont according to the latest Rasmussen.

Lieberman (I) 48%
Lamont (D) 40%
Schlesinger (R) 9%

It looks like Schlesinger is taking votes from Lieberman, and that the Q-Poll was an outlier.  Lamont has a massive GOTV operation, much larger than Lieberman's.  I wouldn't be surprised if Lieberman's operation replicated his corrupt primary approach, which involved putting lots of untraceable cash on the streets.

This poll feels right, and it's more in line with internal polls across the state that I've heard about.  Lamont has sat in the low forties since August, and Lieberman has lost a few points to Alan's charismatic performances, which also makes sense.  Still, if this is the score going into election day, it's hard to see how Lamont makes up 8 points.  Looking at it optimistically, there is ballot positioning, which could take a few points from Lieberman, and there's field, which could add a few to Lamont.  And then there's the fact that a certain percentage of hard-core Republicans may just balk at voting for Lieberman, period, even though they'll tell a pollster otherwise.  8 is a lot to make up.

Of course, it's not election day, and the trend is in the right direction.  The war keeps growing as an issue, and while it's not adding to Lamont's support, it is damaging Joe.

Endorsements are coming in, with the New York Times endorsing Lamont in a great editorial, and the NH Register and Courant endorsing Lieberman.  None of the papers changed their stances from the primaries.

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

Comments

31 Comments

Re: Lieberman Up by 8

by etagloh 2006-10-29 09:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

There's a week to trim that to 5. Given ballot positioning and GOTV, with 5 there's serious ground for hope.

by BruceMcF 2006-10-29 09:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Oops: delete that mispost. I like the decision of Lamont and Schlesinger to debate on Thursday, without Joe in tow: because it suggests a healthier kind of politics that's stripped of phony 'bipartisanship'. I can disagree vehemently with Alan's positions, but they're honestly held and I respect him for that (especially given his shabby treatment by the GOP establishment).

What's important for Lamont is to avoid turning Thursday into partisan mudflinging. 'I respectfully disagree' should be a big part of his vocabulary. 'I think there's room to discuss these issues with the opposite side, because politics is about reaching consensus but begins with strongly-held positions.'

That's to say, he should help Alan claim the role of true GOP candidate, and emphasise his position as the endorsed Democrat.

by etagloh 2006-10-29 09:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I'm thinking in his summary. "Tonight we have had a debate between the two major party candidates. If you support the President on his domestic policies and his foreign adventures, you have that choice available.

While he could not be bothered to come tonight, if you really want to give the President a blank check on Iraq and Medicare, and cannot bring yourself to vote for a Republican, Joe Lieberman gives you that choice as well.

If you want the President held accountable, then I am asking for your support."

by BruceMcF 2006-10-29 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I'd suggest not even naming Lieberman, except by analogy. Talk about how true bipartisanship starts from principles. Moderation doesn't mean standing for nothing. Moderation doesn't mean proclaiming how well you lick up the crumbs from the ruling majority's table. Moderation doesn't mean throwing the rest of your party under the bus.

From watching the three-way debates, it seems to me that Ned and Alan, together, represent a healthier way to do politics in America. Joe's literally the elephant in the room.

by etagloh 2006-10-29 10:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I agree ... in another version of that message in another forum, I dropped the Lieberman name.

I do like "And if you want to give the President a blank check on Iraq and the Medicare donut hole, but can't bring yourself to vote Republican, there is a third party choice available to you".

It will be a strange debate, with both candidates engaged in the task of fishing for votes from the pool of soft support for the missing third candidate.

by BruceMcF 2006-10-29 11:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Well, actually, Joe is FIGURATIVELY the elephant in the room.  Unless he has amazing supernatural transformative powers I don't know about ...

.. which is probably true, upon reflection; after all, I've heard that the sun does shine LITERALLY out of Holy Joe's butthole.  Who knows what other talents he has.

by Ms Bluezone 2006-10-29 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I've always thought that the 'X' factor in this race is the fierce commitment of the Lamont supporters.  They will vote, every last one of them.   I'm not so sure Lieberman can count on his constituency to show up at the polls.

by global yokel 2006-10-29 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I agree. I think Lieb's 8 is very soft. They are not committed Dems. I suspect they are low informed Dems not very motivated who fill most of the ranks. and Repiglicans who are moderates but must really be devoted to Bushbag to getup and Vote for Joe. Serious Conservatives either wont vote or will vote repuglican and the end. The only thing Joe has now is Blumbergs GOTV and I think that it's a little late to gear up a really effective one. I think it will be a real horse race to the end. Here's hoping Ned will be our next "COME BACK KID!"

by eddieb 2006-10-29 12:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

In any other race an 8 point lead would mean the end but CT is so weird that Joe probably needs that sort of lead just to feel comfortable. Election day is going to be chaotic and Alan is bound to gain significantly due to ballot position.

by kundalini 2006-10-29 09:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

you guys should go recommend that diary :)

its excellent

by thorgrim 2006-10-29 09:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Let me pour on a heap of optmism in here, folks. There are somethings about polls that I've never liked. I thnk that they have a lot of trouble reaching poor, disabled and senior citizens, many of whom don't have telephones. They also can't reach the many people who only have cell phones.

I may be talking out of my hat here, and I didn't research it today, but I seem to remember that Lamont was around 5 points out going into the primary and came in 3 points up.

I'm sorry, but the way I read it, any support out there for Lieberman is very soft and half hearted. But all of blogdom is absolutely right on the essential question. It's the ground game, but the ground game is about more than stuffing bodies into the booth. Perhaps there is something more that can put us solidly over the top, in CT and across the nation.

Let this particular GOTV effort be a joyous reflection of the community we've become since Howard Dean asked "What I wanna know...!"

When the other side does its GOTV they have nothing positive to motivate them. Every vote is an against. Against investigations, against oversight, against, well let's face it, SUNLIGHT.

So let our voter turnout look like the "John Doe Clubs" from that movie Gary Cooper and Barbara Stanwick. Let it look and feel like genuine outreach. Let it look like this is something that won't go away after the ballots are cast.

I remember the day at The New School in NYC, whenDean announced the formation of Democracy For America. As I looked around the packed auditorium, my only thought was that Dean lost but we're still here, and we're not going away until we take our country back.

This is OUR moment. The first of many to come as we reverse the course of the nation. Let our GOTV look like we're all in this together and we're going to make it right again.

Lamont by 3.

http://teocawki.blogspot.com

by Subway Serenade 2006-10-29 09:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I think that you are absolutely right on the cell phone issue. Most of the young people I know don't even have land lines; and from what I've seen and read, Lamont has huge support among younger voters. Also, there are people like me who screen every phone call. I can't tell you how many hang-ups I've had during this election season. Yet, I'm a committed Democrat who has voted in every election for over 35 years. So people like me aren't factored into those polls, either. Bottom line, voter commitment and keeping Joe from paying off potential Lamont voters will be key to a win.

by grayslady 2006-10-29 10:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

But any competent pollster uses statistical adjustments to compensate for the cell-phone gap.  It's not like the pollsters are ignoring the cell phone gap; they're thinking about it all the time.  The question is, how good are their statistical formulas at compensating for it?

by OregonLawStudent 2006-10-29 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Absolutely.  Well said.

by Jeffrey Feldman 2006-10-29 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I've never seen Lamont get much past the 40 percent mark.   And I've not seen anything to suggest that he has ever understood that he's running in a general election and not the Democratic primary, thus accounting for point #1.   The ads & message I've seen reinforce the reasons to vote for him but they haven't done a good job of addressing Independents who didn't vote for him in the Primary or those who voted for Lieberman in the primary to change.

Too bad.  I bet 100 ITY's on Lamont after the primary and the person I bet is going to be a real prick about winning.

by InigoMontoya 2006-10-29 09:43AM | 0 recs
Another way to win

Just as Reps are coming home to Schlesinger, so, I believe, will Democrats come home to Lamont when they actually look at their ballot. This will move Lamont above 40% and pull Holy Joe down point for point.

Strong performance from the Democrats in down-ballot races will also help Lamont.

This race will continue to narrow, which is why the netroots should go all in. We'll want to shoot ourselves if Lamont loses, not by a nose, but by a sliver of dried snot.

Beat Holy Joe
Beat him bad

by stevehigh 2006-10-29 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

The mistake that lamont made was going completly dark after the primary..

What he should have done was, immidiately call schlesinger and arrange a dozen debates...People should have known that for lieberman to not stand a chance, schlesinger would have to get at least 20% of the GOP votes and they put all their hopes on lieberman die hard supporter to flip to lamont..Experience is really lacking in the lamont's camp...Now, lets hope its not to late for schlesinger to gain major exposure and with one last debate, we can still hope for the best.

by Maria19Rodriguez 2006-10-29 11:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Quite so, but what's done is done. At the very least Lieberman has been forced to work when he was expecting to coast to victory, which is a victory that can't be lost on election day.

But taking him down would be so much sweeter.

by BruceMcF 2006-10-29 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

the famous maria19 of dkos fame now on MyDD, as well? Now don't go get yourself banned 12 times here, Maria.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2006-10-29 11:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Banned for making the best point in this thread?

Immediately after the primary, Lamont needed to realize the Schlesinger factor and ignore everything else. Debates and name ID. Stick Schlesinger's name in every commercial and ignore Lieberman. You've already got the distinction from Lieberman.

I have no idea how the progressive netroots didn't figure that out and raise money for Schlesinger. It would have been 50 times more significant than money for Lamont. I mentioned that on several sites. Just imagine 5 more points for Schlesinger and where that puts the race. An effective commercial campaign could have provided that easily. Schlesinger would have ripped Lieberman in commercials. He knew damn well Lieberman was stealing GOP votes. Then Schlesinger backs it up with great debate performances.

Matt is correct, this poll feels right. High single digits is where the logical breakdowns of the three groups -- D, R, I -- logically puts the number. Frankly, I don't think it has ever been anywhere else.

by Gary Kilbride 2006-10-29 09:29PM | 0 recs
Don't count our chickens too soon

I read unbridled optimism here. It will take hard work to erase this 8%. Difficult but doable in an unusual year, and if any year is unusual this one is.

But I have to insert a dose of realism to some comments: Young people have terrible turnout.  I am delighted that they are enthused, but in past years when that was true, they still had low turnout. When you look at the data, there is a straight line increase of turnout by age, all the way to 80 years old. So younger people could increase their turnout a bit but the bulk of the votes are coming from older voters.

Second, poor and disadvantaged people also have low turnout.  Frankly it's hard to find time to vote when you have two jobs or inflexible employers and are juggling childcare and odd work hours.  The middle class have it much easier finding time to vote. So to get higher turnout from disadvantaged voters means lots of field effort to know when each voter is available to vote and if they need help getting to the polls or with kids etc. That's a big operation.

So let's not rest our hopes on enthused younger voters or the disadvantaged turning out without a lot of work on our part.  The polls are encouraging in many races across the country but we need to keep pushing with everything we've got and close the deal.  One more week.

by dwightmc 2006-10-29 11:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

I remain worried about this race.  Despite all the optimistic factors people have pointed out, 8 points is hard to make up this late in the game.  I will be thrilled--but surprised--if Lamont pulls this out.

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-10-29 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

It's an uphill fight, no question - but it could happen.  This is a three way race.  Ned is keeping his 40 % in all the polls, but Joe is losing points to Alan - Alan is first on the ballot - Joe is 5th, I think.  It could count for a few points.  

Ned Lamont's blog said that they're hoping to get out 50,000 "dear friend" cards, too!

Change is in the air!

by Astraea 2006-10-29 12:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Here's hoping!

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-10-29 02:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Meanwhile, in Alaska, Diane Benson has closed on Don Young.  From 30 points down 4 weeks ago to 9 points down last Thursday, even though she's been outspent by over 20 to one!

Yet the courageous race by this Tlingit military mom whose son lost both legs on his THIERD deployment (after his enlistment was over, for Crisakes!) has sparked NO national Dem funding, nor much Alaska Dem interest.  Contributors at firedoglake have brought in almost 7% of Benson's campaign funds at this ActBlue site:

http://www.actblue.com/page/egregious

by Edward Teller 2006-10-29 11:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Frankly, I think a lot of the soft Democrats who are voting for Rell and Lieberman will vote for the Democratic congressional candidates so they can "split" their ticket.  Normally they'd vote for the Republican congressional candidates and Democratic statewide candidates, but I almost bet you there'll be a reversal.

by MyDD Fan 2006-10-29 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8
I predict:
Lamont (D) 43%
Lieberman (I) 42%
Schlesinger (R) 15%
by forecaster15 2006-10-29 11:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Icky as it feels citing any of Kaus' theories, I think the robot poll effect may be borne out here.  I saw some douchey panel on C-Span this morning with Cillizza where they all repeated the same bogus stuff "Oh, he was a one issue candidate and that doesn't work in the general," "Even though I will completely contradict my own argument by pointing out that turn out was really high, somehow a tiny cabal of bloggers were the only people who cared about Lamont and no one voted b/c it was August."  "The Dems have done nothing to support Lamont b/c their so scared of big, strong, powerful Joe who's up 17 points and definitely going to win in a walk and then we can finally do what we really want--pretend this never happened."  It sucks that Lamont still has to fight the perception that he's somehow abnormal or an anomaly.  This, to me, was the biggest cost of his radio silence after the primary.  People got used to thinking of him in the terms he was cast in the primary.  He needed to start spending earlier.  But the good news is that it looks like people want a change, even if they're only willing to admit it to a robot over the phone.  Me personally, I'd be more afraid to tell a robot I liked Lamont.  I mean, how hard would it be for some yahoo at DOD or NSA to do robocalls to find Lamont voters and then make arrangements to get them cavity-searched whenever they fly.

by msbatxnyc 2006-10-29 12:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Lieberman Up by 8

Schlesinger's numbers won't hold on election day. People tend to get real conservative with backing losing candidates once they're in the voting booth. Remember how Nader always polled better than he actually did? That effect will more than make up for ballot positioning. Alan needs to be polling about 15% for him to draw enough votes from Lieberman on the 7th.

by js noble 2006-10-29 01:49PM | 0 recs
alan's numbers

I might agree normally, but I think Reps are used to voting and losing in Senate races in CT, and they may want to show their numbers, not as a mixin with Joe.

by drowsy 2006-10-29 02:03PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads