These are the SUSA approval/disapproval ratings for Joe Lieberman from December 2005 to June 2006.
All adults
63/31
55/41
-8/+10
NET ANTI-LIEBERMAN SWING: 18
Republicans
69/24
64/34
-5/+10
NET ANTI-LIEBERMAN SWING: 15
Independents
63/31
57/41
-6/+10
NET ANTI-LIEBERMAN SWING: 16
Democrats
59/36
46/50
-11/+14
NET ANTI-LIEBERMAN SWING: 27
These numbers are rather remarkable. While Democrats are abandoning Lieberman, with a 27 point swing against him, Republicans are abandoning Lieberman almost as quickly. About a quarter of Democratic voters have changed their mind about Lieberman, and slightly more than one eighth of independents and Republicans have done the same.
This trend is confirmed by Quinnipiac polling that shows Lamont gaining 25 points on Lieberman from May to June alone in a head to head matchup.
So we have to ask, why is Lamont winning support, and Joe losing it, not just among Democrats, but among all voters?
1) LIEBERMAN'S SUPPORT OF FAILED CONSERVATIVE POLICIES: Lieberman supports the war in Iraq. But he doesn't just support it, he thinks that the situation in Iraq is good and getting better. Other pro-war Democrats, like Murtha, Kerry, Reid, Edwards, etc, have recognized their error. Lieberman not only won't admit error, he also thinks that anyone who disagrees with him is unprincipled at best, and unpatriotic and treacherous at worst. The voters of Connecticut don't agree, and understand that more failed conservative policies is not principled judgment, but simply more failed conservative policies.
2) LIEBERMAN ROUTINELY INSULTS VOTERS AND THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS: Senator Lieberman's surrogates are constantly attacking voters, and Lieberman is constantly demonstrating his contempt for them. John Droney, a Lieberman advisor, says that voters of Connecticut are 'terrorizing' Lieberman. Senator Lieberman himself has written that we undermine the "President's credibility at our nation's peril", with the clear implication that the anti-war views of most Connecticut (and American) voters hurts our military and our country. Lieberman's 'double-dipping', running for office as an Independent if he loses the primary, is a further insult to Democratic primary voters.
3) NED LAMONT IS AN ACCOMPLISHED ENTREPRENEUR, AND HAS GOOD JUDGMENT: While Lieberman is a lightning rod, the fact is that voters will not drop support for an incumbent unless there is a viable alternative. Ned Lamont is a viable and great candidate. Lamont is an entrepreneur, a community leader, and has clear good judgment. When I talked to him in February, he told me that he believes government needs to be more entrepreneurial, and in the broken system that we have, entrepreneurs are exactly what we need. That's why voters who are changing their minds about Lieberman have somewhere to go.
The rest of this debate is interesting, but somewhat of a sideshow. There's a tremendously obsessive attitude towards bloggers among establishment types, but that's a function of machine politics and the lobbyist-campaign-journalist complex than anything going on in Connecticut. The fact is that voters on the ground are moving away from Lieberman, and towards Lamont. Those are the facts on the ground.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 29 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
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.
