Debate Train to Crazy Town

You know you're in an incredible political environment when you're at an event where egomaniac Ralph Nader is wandering around, and not only is no one paying attention to him, but Ralph Nader himself doesn't even expect anyone to pay attention to him.  That was the scene earlier today in Hartford, CT, where five candidates went at each other, or mostly at Joe Lieberman, for the Senate nomination in a debate.  I wasn't feeling so good about this race a few weeks ago; it had stagnated, and the polling reflected that and will still reflect that for a week or so.  Today, I think there was a decisive shift both in the dynamic of the race and in the tone of the political environment.

It's not that Lamont has overperformed, or that Joe has melted down, it's that Connecticut Election 2006 has gone off the deep end.  It's not your normal white picket fence suburban election, with attack ad facing attack ad.  No, this is more like a white picket fence election that suddenly gets bored with life and decides to live in the forest, take a bunch of LSD, trout-fish naked, and taunt a bear cub before ending its life suddenly and with total and inexplicable resolution on November 7.  Well not really, but there's no analogy that I can think of summarizing what's going on.  What has happened is that Joe Lieberman competed in a Democratic primary, lost, and is now competing in a Republican primary, and is losing again.  Meanwhile, Lamont is finally picking up renewed steam and getting back on track as a candidate.  There's energy here, real energy.

Experienced Connecticut politicos consider this the strangest modern election in the state's history, with the possible exception of the Presidential election in 1992.  And actually, there are a lot of parallels between Alan Schlesinger and Ross Perot.  Both are charismatic, and both tap into a xenophobic and charming right-wing populist streak in the American electorate focusing on closed borders and the insolvency of entitlements.  2006 is somewhat similar to 1992, with a stagnating economy and uncertainty about America's place in the world.  Both Perot and Schlesinger see themselves as truth-tellers rather than politicians, and if there were a single slogan that both were running on, it would be 'Go fuck yourself'.  And don't kid yourself, lots of voters really like Billy Idol-style politicians, and would vote for them to protest too much Pat Boone-style platitudes.

This afternoon was the second debate out of three, and it included five candidates (or a whole lot of hot political manflesh): Democrat Ned Lamont, Connecticut for Lieberman candidate Joe Lieberman, Republican Alan Schlesinger, Green Ralph Ferrucci, and Tim Knibbs of Concerned Citizens.  

The pace of the debate was slow because of all the candidates.  The forum was arranged in a semi-circle, with five podiums, one for each candidate.  Strangely, the debate won't be broadcast until tomorrow night, and all electronic equipment except what you can sneak in was banned.  Before it started, the Lieberman and Lamont staffers were milling around, including Dan Gerstein, who apparently whispered after he saw his mortal enemy for the first time, "I should have stuck my foot out and tripped Sirota as he walked by."  Ladies, I believe that this classy man is as single as they come, and exfoliates to boot.

Most campaign staff went downstairs prior to the debate, to some lair with electronic equipment that every staffer from all five campaigns had to share.  Awkward.  Apparently the Joe people were quite mad every time Alan took a swipe at Senator Lieberman's 'liberal' record.  They're good at righteous indignation.

The other two candidates weren't very articulate, breaking up the timing and making the whole thing less fun to watch.  Bob Schieffer of ABC News moderated, and he's a rock solid moderator of a man who has 40 or 50 years experience sounding earnest and being famous.  Schieffer wasn't taking shit from anyone, including Joe Lieberman, and he was ruthless about timing the candidates.  I've moderated a few panels in my day, and it's really hard to cut someone off, so I appreciate a master at work.  Bob Schieffer gives good debate.

And onward to the candidates.

Let's start with Joe Lieberman, a petulant and brilliantly good liar who always gives me the feeling that he just likes wearing diapers because they make him feel safer.  On Monday, Lieberman was shocked that his feisty Republican opponent criticized him for voting with the Democrats 90% of the time.  To understand this debate, you have to understand that Joe is a very self-centered man, and honestly believes that this election should be renamed 'Joe Lieberman Tribute Season'.  He thinks that voters think about things like Committee seniority and how awesome his parking place is outside of the Dirksen Senate office building (to be fair to Joe, it is a really good parking spot).

This means that he also buys into the ridiculous idea that Democrats are mean, and Republicans are nice.  Thus, a Republican attacking him from the right was not only shocking, it was problematic, since his strategy hinges on getting votes from conservatives and moderates to hold off dirty fucking hippies like businessman Ned Lamont and his venture capitalist wife, Annie.  Lieberman didn't quite know what to do about getting attacked from the right and the left, so he bragged about everything he had done for Connecticut, the pork and funding he had brought home, and the work he had put in on all the little micro-issues.  At one point, he said something particularly revealing, saying that he couldn't have delivered all the pork he had if he didn't work across the aisle, since the Republicans have been in the majority for so long.  It was interesting to hear a politician so succinctly make the crass argument for political appeasement, but that's all that's left for Joe.  

So my sense is that Joe didn't do that well, but he's a really good liar.  As I mentioned before, most of his time was spent talking about all the pork he had delivered for Connecticut and being cut off by Bob Schieffer, the moderator, for going over time every singe answer and rebuttal (seriously, watch for that tomorrow night).  In a question Joe answered about all the ways he's vowed to vacillate on Social Security, Lieberman bragged about personally passing a bill in August to protect corporate pensions.  Naturally, after the debate it was revealed that Lieberman actually skipped the vote on the final bill.  Thankfully, we were treated to the pleasurable moments when Schieffer cut off Joe's mike after the first six times Joe tried to go over his allotted time.  How awesome would it be if Joe were always moderated by Bob Schieffer, 24 hours a day?  Pretty awesome.  Kiss Float

And now we come to Alan Schlesinger.  Ironically, if you were in Connecticut over the past two months, you wouldn't have known there was a Democratic wave in the rest of the country.  That's how stagnant the race had become.  Fortunately, Alan Schlesinger just shattered the status quo here and injected a sense of fun, making this race what it's needed to be for awhile, a friggin' carnival.  Lamont stayed still for a month or two, and as Foley got caught molesting boys and the Republicans got caught being Republicans, no one really noticed the groundwork being laid against Lieberman by an increasingly angry and passionate Alan Schlesinger.  He was watching, and waiting, and practicing, and now it turns out he's very, very good.  Republicans and conservative unaffiliated voters are now torn between their heads and their hearts, because Schlesinger really delivered, once again.  

His passions are Social Security and immigration, and he really understood how to cut through Lieberman's arguments with dramatic flair and effective use of detail.  There were two particularly exciting moments.  The first was when Alan did a comedy routine with Lamont, cutting through Joe's central thesis that he is somehow above Washington even though he's been there for 18 years.  It was something along the following lines:

Schlesinger: If you had someone doing a job for eighteen years, and after eighteen years, their record was one of complete failure, what would you do? What do you think should happen with that person?. . . Ned, you're a businessman: what would you say about someone like that?

Lamont: I'd say, "It's time to go, Joe!"

Schlesinger's closing statement was also terrific, as he went down every argument that conservatives had for voting for Lieberman and blew them out of the water.  He called Lieberman a tax-and-spend liberal, more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and even Ned Lamont.  Alan is very smart and Joe was not prepared for this kind of attack, at all.  I'm excited to get you clips tomorrow.

Finally, we get to Lamont.  Ned did much better than he has in any debate so far.  He's learning how to be a candidate on the fly, but one thing that's very impressive is how he's getting much more specific in his criticisms of Joe, and in his ability to state what he'll do.  He's done his homework.

Ned is also getting back to the basic themes, like health care's perverse effects on business, Lieberman's vote for the Energy bill, Terry Schiavo, the war in Iraq, and Joe's general cheerleading for the right-wing.  This isn't just the progressive message that worked in the primary, it's a general message that's blowing out Republican candidates around the country.  Ned really brought this one home, and I think Connecticut residents are going to look at Lamont and say 'this guy could be our Senator'.  That's a big hurdle to get over.

All in all, it was an impressive, serious debate, and I don't think you could look at it as anything but a clear victory for Ned Lamont and Alan Schlesinger.  Alan Schlesinger says he's getting in money now, and he's going to go on TV.  I actually think Alan's Perot-style message is quite resonant, and that in a totally freakshow moment he could pull enough votes from Lieberman and Lamont to eke out a weird 37% victory.  That's not likely, but it's in the realm of the possible, real enough that there's now an incentive for Joe's allies to start leaking nasty information about Schlesinger to the press.

After the debate, both Schlesinger and Lamont were mobbed by reporters and supporters outside, but Joe was nowhere to be found.  Some friends here think that Joe is scared to face reporters, but I don't think that's what's going on.  I think Joe actually and honestly doesn't like people and doesn't want to deal with them if he doesn't have to.  That's why he doesn't like or care about doing good visibility events - his ego isn't fed by large crowds since he doesn't think much of people he doesn't know.  Lieberman thinks that he's smarter than everyone else, and when he gets angry he shows it by doing stupid things like skipping the post-debate spin session outside with reporters.  

But enough psychobabble, let's get to what this means.  There's going to be a Q-poll coming out shortly that was taken before these debates, so it's pretty meaningless and won't include the Schlesinger surge.  I think it's pretty clear that the anti-establishment wave that's collapsing Republicans all over the country is beginning to crumple Lieberman, just in time.  Alan Schlesinger is the first candidate I've seen who is genuinely tapping into the frustration grassroots conservatives feel with their party, because he's very clearly not supported by the establishment or even President Bush.  As a result, Lieberman has to now make the electability argument to conservative voters, and that's never an easy place to be since it makes your message more complicated.  Lamont can keep on with his progressive message, and he can only grow from here.  And Schlesinger is just making this fun again.

Wow, what a ride.



Display:


I just got my sixty bucks worth. (3.00 / 1)

Matt, if you accomplished nothing else, you made one 58-year-old bastard very happy. I knew this could be done, and now it's happening.

Note to Big Foot Scribes: Don't miss the speedboat on this story. ABC News is in your rear-view mirror.

Beat Holy Joe
Beat him like an old carpet!


by stevehigh on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 09:48:55 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 4)

This is going to be interesting. I'll be in Connecticut doing some volunteer work this coming weekend, so I can't wait to see firsthand what it'll be like.

But let's be clear about this: we're going to finish what we started. Joe Lieberman's going to be a distant memory come November 8.


by PsiFighter37 on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 09:52:43 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 2)

Alan Schlesinger - Joe's October Surprise.

HA HA!

[/Nelson Muntz]


by watertiger on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 09:57:31 PM EST

Lieberman wears diapers? Life imitates art... (none / 0)

See MJS's classic Joe Lieberman to run as Dependent.

Thanks for the brilliant debate coverage. What an, erm, relief...


by lambert on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:02:07 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Bob Schieffer is ABC's good thing.

Ditch Kouric. Put Schieffer in the big chair.

Schiefferific!!!!


by smacfarl on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:08:31 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Schieffer's with ABC now?


by markg8 on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:28:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

put schieffer in the big chair. (none / 0)

amen.

.

.


"blogtopia - yes, i coined that phrase!"
by skippy on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:15:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Dems better be carful, Alan could be tbe next Jesse Ventura. Let's not get too giddy about this new elephant in the room.

Goper's Lament (Hard To Be A Republican)


by Subway Serenade on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:09:06 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I am willing to take that chance. If Lieberman is beaten, it will teach a lesson to similar democrats how to bow out gracefully. Lieberman will be known as the turncoat who ruined the party's chances because he would not let go.

Even if Schlesinger might vote the wrong way more than Lieberman, Lieberman's arrogance does more harm to the dems because he has been a big enabler of republican's namecalling of liberals and other democrats.


by Pravin on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:53:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Alan is better than Joe!!!


Gandhi - "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
by HCLiberal on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:54:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Alan could be tbe next Jesse Ventura.

That would beat the hell out of Lieberman winning.

More apropos, of course, is that Schlesinger could be another Lowell Weicker.  Lowell Weicker was a great senator.  It was a horrendous blunder for a liberal organization years ago to help Lieberman defeat Weicker.

Given my druthers, I would much prefer Schlesinger and a Republican majority to Lieberman should Lieberman keep his word and vote with the Democrats to organize the Senate - not a given at all.

What a wonderful break for Lamont that Schlesinger has made it a race again.

Best,  Terry


by terryhallinan on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:01:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

The loss of Lowell Weicker in the Senate was really a terrible thing. He helped keep both Democrats and Republicans honest.

Has there been another Republican liberal in the Senate since he left?

I actually remember him losing and not feeling very good about that. I didn't live in New England anymore but I knew something bad would come of it.

And Lieberman has certainly been a rotten Senator.

phat


by phatass on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:23:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

Sen. Jim Jeffords of VT was certainly one, elected in 1988, the year Weicker was defeated... but he got fed up with the new regime pretty damn fast and quit the Republican party in May 2001.

Now he's retiring, and his seat will be taken by Congressman Bernie Sanders, founder of the Progressive Caucus in the House.


Tim Wolfe

John McCain is not pro-choice!

by bruorton on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 09:01:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

a schlesinger victory (none / 0)

would be a valuable, if painful, lesson to the Dem "leaders" who supported Lieberman after he lost the primary. And who promised him seniority.

It would be fun to see their faces if Schlesinger won.

Maybe the next time they would get it right.


by mightymouse on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:52:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a schlesinger victory (3.00 / 2)

I never realized that Ned Lamont and Alan Schlesinger have so much in common.
Perhaps it's why they have a kind of chemistry in the debates...

1. Both men hold positions on the issues that represent the base of their parties rather than the beltway crowd.

2. Both men worked hard to win their party's primary.

3. Both men won but have been unable to count on their party for full support.

Ned hasn't been abandoneded as badly as Alan Schlesinger, but too many have been sitting on their hands in this race.


by irene adler on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:15:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Great post!! (3.00 / 2)

Lot's o'good snark and analysis. Fun to read. I'd just like to rain on everybody's parade with two caveats.

1) The MSM is going to hype the shit out of that Q poll, they'll mention as a footnote that it was taken before the debates, but if Lieberman has a margin even close to what it was in the last one, the over-riding meme will be "Ned Lamont just can't get any traction".

2)  He thinks that voters think about things like Committee seniority and how awesome his parking place is outside of the Dirksen Senate office building (to be fair to Joe, it is a really good parking spot).
Yeah, but.... I keep seeing posts from people who say they hate the war, hate Bush, but they're planning to vote for Lieberman because of his seniority and experience. I can't ask them what good they think his "experience" is (as a backstabber? as a preening spotlight junkie ready to dance on Democrats' heads in return for some praise from Tweety or Hannity?), cause I'm not in CT and it's not a real conversation. But these people clamp on this like a dog with a bone. Other people, good progressives that I 'know' (as much as you can know someone on a blog) keep saying they don't care who wins because Lieberman has promised to caucus with the Democrats. I don't know where the hell they've been for the last five years.

Since I was something of a buzz-kill here tonight, I'll end on a positive note: I think once Lamont does get some momentum, it'll snowball. I suspect once people see Lieberman as vulnerable, they'll bail on him.


by BlueinColorado on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:14:07 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

What I fear ( but as has been mentioned earlier on a blog) that Alan pulls a Jesse Ventura and wins.
If it is a nutso election year look at another screwball election. Minn. Gov. Humphry Jr. v.s some quasi serious rethuglican ... and Jesse. By three weeks a month out Humphry and his oppenent bored the shit out of the electorate and Jesse danced across a gray stage with boa flying, wild stories and hints of "..If I told you I'd have to kill you" trailing in his wake.

So fearfully this could happen in Conn. with Alan.

You know an arguement to make to rethuglicans is that if you really are a conservative you would rather have a new Senator that probably will make some mistake that you could make work against him then a wily old survivor who will vote for whomever is paying him at that moment.
After all in 2 years who knows what political wind Joe will be trimming his sails to catch. And remember if you can buy him so can others. Are you ready for the auction to start again in Jan?

Liarman doesn't even meet Boss Tweed's definition of a honest Politician: They stay  bought. A dishonest one opens up a new auction at every fund raiser.

Sounds like Joe and way to many others.


by Rational on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:26:44 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I'm scared, too.

Alan Schlesinger and the Republicans can really win this thing.


Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News - Covering Key Races Around the Country
by HellofaSandwich on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:39:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

No. They can't. Lets stay rational please.


by ATalbot on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:45:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 2)

Shhhhh... I'm trying to make Schlesinger look serious here.


Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News - Covering Key Races Around the Country
by HellofaSandwich on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:52:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I think that's paranoia.  Best scenario: Schlesinger pulls in 20%.  Serious.


by beeswax49 on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:53:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I was joking.


Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News - Covering Key Races Around the Country
by HellofaSandwich on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:13:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

my apologies then.


by beeswax49 on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 08:34:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

At this point I think I'd rather have Schlesinger in office than Lieberman. Lieberman will do far more to damage this country by constantly undermining the progressive moment than Schlesinger would as a one-term senator.


by Covin on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:18:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I agree with Matt that a "review" of Schlesinger will probably occur soon in the pro-Lieberman press.

If he's starting to pull in campaign money, maybe he'll be able to explain himself in the papers as well as he did on WTIC with Colin.

He's a likable character, and man can he talk.


by jeffs on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:28:16 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

Ned's upcoming commercial with Chris Dodd should help alot.  Dodd is very well respected by rank and file Dems in CT.  Also, the press won't dismiss Dodd, he'll get the same softball questions that now they only give Joe.


by 1970cs on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:30:18 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Oh hot damn. I've been waiting for some elected Dems to see the light, besides Kerry and Kennedy.


by BlueinColorado on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:37:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Great post, Matt. I know I give you a lot of shit, but this was one of my favorite posts of the cycle.


by AaronE on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:32:06 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Yeah, this really was one of my favorite posts all week.  A hat tip to you, Matt!


Swing State Project: Campaign & Election News - Covering Key Races Around the Country
by HellofaSandwich on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:41:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Yes, terrific post by Matt, an enjoyable read throughout.

I bet plenty of money bet on Lieberman but it was merely advantage positioning, something I do every day. The last couple of days Schlesinger has finally given me hope that I'll lose my wager. So yeah, this qualifies as a strange race in more ways than one.:)


by Gary Kilbride on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:18:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

    Thanks, Matt for your posts. The CT-Sen is back to being interesting, and your writing brings it alive for those of us far from CT. Echoing an earlier commenter but at a lower amount, you sure are giving me my ten bucks worth.
    Go Ned Go!!!   Go away Joe...
by Zack from the SFV on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:50:30 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I'm not fan of "Luv ya Bush" Schieffer, who's about as clueless as they get in the MSM for someone of his "gravitas" (i.e. age), but he is quite good at cutting people off due to time constraints. Maybe it's because Face the Nation only gets 30 minutes while the others get a full hour. Anyway, good to see him cut Holy Joe off, even though, I'm guessing, he's his favorite candidate in this race, given his right of center politics and love for so-called "centrists" who don't go for the extremes.


by kovie on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:52:29 PM EST

Schieffer (3.00 / 1)

   Nothing makes a better moderator than a cranky, old man.


Jim Oberweis
by cilerder86 on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:50:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schieffer (3.00 / 1)

Especially if the moderatee is also a cranky, old man.

Hurry up with that crazy-ass monologue, you old geezer, I don't want to miss the early bird special at Applebee's!


by kovie on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:31:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Schieffer (none / 0)

Damn that was funny!


by sxp151 on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:11:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Great post, Matt. You made the debate and the personalities come alive as no one else could.


by grayslady on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 10:57:30 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Now I hope this is the last time I see you praising a Republican!


by Reece on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 11:13:38 PM EST

What's Ned's Repub numbers (none / 0)

If in some crazy world, schlesinger could pull 37%, is it possible that Schlesinger could pull more votes from Ned than Joe, thereby hurting Ned rather than helping him?

Did Schlesinger attack Ned or Joe in the debate? or both equally or unequally?


by debcoop on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:08:57 AM EST

Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

Jeezus, what a beautiful irony if Lieberschnitzel gets submarined by a Republican.  Poor Joe has been doing his best to run as the de facto GOP candidate, including getting support from the Republican hierarchy.  From here on out Lamont just needs to keep his balance and not do anything stupid.


by global yokel on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:10:32 AM EST

Re: Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)


I love the way the Rovian campaign recipe of "irreconcileable differences" is showing up and doing Joe in.

I think Joe didn't appear at the press conference because he suddenly realized the end is near.  He thought he was the exception to the rule that there is no survival in running in the center this election either, as in '02 and '04.  Now he's stuck in the vise and will get crushed in from both Right and Left.

The hardcore Right in Connecticut will be 15-20% of the electorate, and after this performance I don't see them being able to stomach backing Joe any longer.  I bet the next poll is roughly Lamont 45, Lieberman 35, Schlesinger 15.


by killjoy on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:20:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

I keep hearing parallels between Alan Schlesinger and Ross Perot, but there is an important difference we should point out: Lieberman is the third party candidate.

A spoiler takes the votes that should have gone to one candidate and makes the other a winner. None of the Republican votes were ones on which Joe had some sort of natural claim. That Joe can't capture all of Schlesinger's constituency is too bad for Joe, but Joe acting like a spoiled kid doesn't make Alan the spoiler.


by TakeBackTheHouse on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:13:36 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 2)

no, this is more like a white picket fence election that suddenly gets bored with life and decides to live in the forest, take a bunch of lsd, trout-fish naked, and taunt a bear cub before ending its life suddenly and with total and inexplicable resolution on november 7.  well not really, but there's no analogy that i can think of summarizing what's going on.

best analogy of the campaign season.

.

.


"blogtopia - yes, i coined that phrase!"
by skippy on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:18:09 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

Lieberman doesn't do visibility?

That's the sign of a guy who doesn't like people. He doesn't like to have fun. I don't know that visibility actually gets more votes (in a close race, sure) but but it certainly keeps people from getting too serious. Visibility lets people meet people and keeps things human.

No visibility?

I will say that visibility doesn't gain votes much. Not doing visibility loses votes. Not scientific, but I think it's a good hunch.

What is this guy doing running for any race?

That's just horrible.

phat


by phatass on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:19:02 AM EST

Crazy Town (none / 0)

I'm not counting any chickens just yet, but it sure does feel good to feel optimistic again.  The past couple weeks have been an orgy of good news for Democrats.  It feels like we are in the  game again after living under a dark cloud for 6 long years.  No matter how this turns out, I'm thankful for the battery recharge.


by global yokel on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:28:17 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

Calling Lieberman a Kapos is horrendous.  Mind you, I dislike the bastard intensely, but that's almost unspeakable.

If you haven't looked up the word, do so.  I won't even define it here.


by Crablaw on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:32:40 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Anyone seriously pretending that Schlesinger could actually win this thing, even if just trying to drum up support for the Republican, is offending human intelligence.


by Epitome22 on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:42:23 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

The timing of the Dodd ad following the debate and Schlesinger's emergence as a viable Republican candidate could work nicely together, to help voters clarify who's who...there's a Democratic candidate who has the support of Dodd and other leading Dems, a Republican candidate who can appeal to hard core Republicans, and then there's Joe SoreLoserman (or Joe Panderman), who doesn't belong anywhere, doesn't deserve votes from supporters of either party, and has already been rejected by his own party.  Joe's got nowhere to go but home.  If he didn't have such a sense of self-importance and self-righteousness, he'd do just that.


by mitchipd on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:42:32 AM EST

You're In Rare Form, Matt (none / 0)

most enjoyable post


by Lemonsquare on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:53:44 AM EST

So, Lieberman is still a douchebag? (none / 0)

Because, I really don't have deeper thoughts any more on Holy Joe.


by jcjcjc on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 12:54:55 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

As much as I want Lamont to win, he's got a tough row to hoe countering Lieberman's seniority argument successfully. "[Lieberman] bragged about everything he had done for Connecticut, the pork and funding he had brought home, and the work he had put in on all the little micro-issues."  

Pork-provider doesn't seem like a talent that would fire up voters, but it's an argument that works nationwide.  That's why PA Dems have such a hard time unseating the equally two-faced and obnoxious Specter.  Many Democrats hold their noses and vote for him time and again saying that he has brought a lot of money to the state and his seniority (even when it's more correct to say "senility") counts. Micro-issues are not "little" when they're YOUR micro-issues.  If a voter has benefitted financially from ANY pork, it makes him/her feel duty-bound to support the provider. And as this debate shows, Lieberman is just the kind of whiny-assed candidate to play that guilt for all it's worth.  

BTW, Schieffer is with CBS, not ABC, where he hosts Face the Nation now that he's been bounced outta the big seat by Missy Couric.  And God bless him if he can shut Joe up.


by jukesgrrl on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:01:19 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

The station that sponsored the debate is WFSB, Ch3, a CBS affiliate.


by 1970cs on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:48:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 2)

I wonder what all the Lieberman supporters imagine will happen 6 years from now.  Is the idea that Joe will cruise back to the Left, be reannointed by Dems and then Republicans will turn their weary eyes to Schlesinger who did such a great job last time, but just didn't pick the right year?

I mean seriously. These conservatives who keep saying they'll hold their nose and vote for Lieberman...to what end? If Lamont is such a crazy hippie commie, won't it be easier to reload in 6 years and seize the center-right spot for decades?  It seems to me that Republicans are starting to figure that Lieberman is the best they'll ever get out of Connecticut, so they don't want to let him go.  In which case, I wonder whether Schlesinger is really gonna pick up all that much traction.  Couldn't Lieberman end up being Ben Nelson in horrifying reverse?  I mean, if somebody way to the left challenged Nelson, would there be enough ideologues to vote against Nelson, widely considered the best that Dems can hope for in such a red state?


by Lucas O'Connor on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:30:15 AM EST

Hillarious (none / 0)

Thanks for the great summary.  I snorted!


by WA37 on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:33:38 AM EST

Go Matt Go! (none / 0)

This is the best piece of Matt's I've ever read.  Proof that great journalism and honest partisanship are not mutually exclusive.  I felt like I was there.  Bravo, man.


by loopster on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:52:21 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (3.00 / 1)

seriously, this should go into the blog hall of fame.


by Todd Beeton on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 03:15:38 AM EST

Yay Schlesinger! (none / 0)

I liked this guy from the beginning.  I knew he would be key after the primary. I even wrote a diary about at the time. People weren't too receptive then, and I'm glad to see the rest of the progressive bloggers getting on board.

I almost wonder if Lieberman was right in that Lamont  might not be able to beat Schlesinger on his own.  I kind of doubt it though, especially if Lieberman was actually willing to campaign for Lamont.

Oh well, Lieberman is an idiot, it was obvious from the beginning that Schlesinger was going to fight it out to the end.


by delmoi on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 04:12:37 AM EST

By the way (none / 0)

I would hate, hate, hate to see the republicans retain control of the senate (which I think really could happen if Lieberman is elected, either by flopping over, or getting nominated to something) so I wouldn't want to see Schlesinger win for that reason, but I do like the guy.


by delmoi on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 04:14:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Great post.

What's interesting here is that if Joe had actually respected the primary process, CT would have a choice between two solid candidates.


by s5 on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 04:22:07 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Rove's decision to starve Schlesinger doesn't look too bright now.  Alan might have won with some resources.


by Bob H on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 08:30:03 AM EST

But Karl Rove's a genius! (none / 0)

(snark)


by Hesiod Theogeny on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 08:48:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

In all seriouslness... (3.00 / 1)

...no way does Schlesinger campaign the same way if it's a two person race between him and Ned Lamont.

Schlesinger would have moderated his positions and his tone to appeal to independants and crossover Lieberman Democrats.

Right now, Schlesinger is running the perfect spoiler campaign to fuck oiver Joe Lieberman and the White House.

I always had a feeling that things wuld get interesting after the debates.

That's why I didn't join in all the doom and gloom some people here and elsewhere were spinning about the Ct Senate race earlier.

All that being said, I think SChlesinger will only make a real move if he can get TV spots on the air. I do think 15% for Schlesinger is a realistic possibility.

The key for Schlesinger is getting to the point where Republicans think he has a realistic shot at winning. That would mean 20% in the polls.

If that happens, Joe might come in third!


by Hesiod Theogeny on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 08:52:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Lincoln-Douglas style debate (none / 0)

I'd like to see the two major party candidates have a Lincoln-Douglas style debate, on principles and policies, without the rancor and pandering of the Connecticutt for Joe candidate.

Ned and Alan are passionate about what the believe, and I think it would be an engaging, respectful and informative exchange.


by xtrarich on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 08:47:43 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

GREAT GREAT GREAT article by Matt Stoller!!!!!
THANKYOU THANKYOU THANKYOU!!!!
Matt your coverage of this event hit the ball out of the park. Expect a call from Joe Torre and Wilie Randolph inquiring about your spring training availability.

In my heart I was beginning to give up on CT but these post Schlesinger events have restored my faith that Ned can win this thing!

Expect Lieberman to bring up Alan's casino player card fraud because we all know how important the complimentary shrimp cocktail is! As a fellow Jew I guess Lieberman could always say "Alan, I don't blame you for the frequent player fraud for free food, but did it have to be traif!"


by politics64 on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 09:10:22 AM EST

Fear and Loathing in Connecticut (none / 0)

I hope Hunter S. Thompson stopped rolling in his grave long enough to get a great chuckle out of Matt's post.


by aldon on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 09:42:03 AM EST

Nice splash (none / 0)

Googling Lamont this morning, I found Matt's piece #3 in the news rankings, by way of Huffington Post and Yahoo News.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/2006101 9/cm_huffpost/032012


by stevehigh on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 10:15:36 AM EST

Re: Nader (1.00 / 2)

Nader an "egomaniac."  Way to repeat the ridiculous DNC talking points, Matt.  I suppose you'll call him a "spoiler" next and then ignore Democratic resistance to IRV legislation.


by justinh on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 10:20:11 AM EST

Hats off (none / 0)

Matt,

One of the best-written pieces I've read this cycle. You made me want to be there. Methinks you caught a wisp of the ghost of HST somewhere on your drive north.

Keep it up!


Me | My Work | Future Majority
by Josh Koenig on Thu Oct 19, 2006 at 01:35:31 PM EST

Interesting (none / 0)

Your optimism is definitely refreshing. But here's the thing:

So far, everything I've seen has shown Lieberman leading in every single poll at every step of the process, and Schlesinger slowly fading further and further into complete invisibility. And the momentum of the race has been slowing down.

If this debate turns out to be a tipping point of some kind, how will we be able to tell? If the general public interprets this debate same the way you have, will there actually be any sign of its impact or will we just have to take your word for it? And if the media just turns this into a bunch of bland articles tomorrow like "CT senatorial candidates debate" with one sound bite per major candidate, will enough people have seen the debate on television for its actual content to have made a direct impact on them?

And I remember the first debate of 2004. That felt like a tipping point as well. Is this debate enough to make things really start to change in CT's political dynamic?-- and I don't mean among the people who already are inclined to read this blog post nodding their heads and going "yeah, that's good", I mean among the people who haven't bought (into Lamont | into Schlesinger | against Lieberman)?

How do we tell what the real impact of this is?


by mcc on Fri Oct 20, 2006 at 02:13:48 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

I don't understand why Ned never mentions Joe's vote on the pharmaceutical bill in the list of why not to vote for Joe.  Maybe next time?


cando
by cando on Fri Oct 20, 2006 at 09:49:56 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

we sell wood doors,steel doors pvc doors wooden doors and china doors.
by doorschina on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:27:27 AM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

手機主題, 暗瘡治療, 租車, Virtual Office 搬屋公司, 食譜, 諾基亞手機 主題, 傢俬, 室內設計, 商業保險, 泰拳, 減肥, Nokia手機主題, Chicago Storage 商務中心, 迷你倉, 僱傭, 物流, 暗瘡, Thai Boxing, 暗瘡護理, 減肥食譜, Virtual Office Services
by 3gmobile on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 10:20:26 PM EST

Re: Debate Train to Crazy Town (none / 0)

Summer Study Abroad Program, Summer School , study in china, Chinese School, http://www.huangjinjiage.org/, 香港婚紗相 香港結婚相 深圳婚紗攝 影 Wedding Photo Services 化妝課程 黃金價格 Mandarin 深圳婚紗相 專業婚紗攝 影 Putonghua 婚紗攝影
by peak on Thu Apr 24, 2008 at 11:41:01 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.