Lamont gets by with a little help from his friends

August 25, 2006

There’s been some lingering concern of late about whether, and to what extent, the Dem establishment and party leaders would back [tag]Ned Lamont[/tag] in [tag]Connecticut[/tag]. The major players will go through the motions, the theory goes, and formally endorse the Democratic nominee, but below the surface, Dems in DC aren’t terribly concerned about the race. If [tag]Joe Lieberman[/tag] wins, he’ll caucus with the Dems; if Lamont wins, it’s another Dem. Either way, a “blue” seat stays “blue” — so why sweat it?

It’s this attitude that makes it all the more noteworthy when Dem senators step up and show they take the race seriously — and are willing to make a real commitment to the Lamont campaign.

I learned this morning that Sen. [tag]Hillary Clinton[/tag] met with Lamont today and agreed to a) do an event together; b) help him raise money; and c) direct long-time aide Howard Wolfson to help Lamont with rapid-response work and coordinating the national Dems’ response to the Connecticut race.

Good for Clinton; may others follow her example. This is going to be a very close race and the more Dem leaders who dedicate themselves to helping the Democrat win this race, the better.

As for Lieberman, the former Democrat is also hitting the trail with some high-profile allies — who happen to be Republicans.

Lieberman was out yesterday with Governor Jodi Rell and Congressman Rob Simmons, both Republicans, at the Groton submarine base. While Rell is expected to cruise to victory this fall, Simmons’ House race against Democrat Joe Courtney is considered up for grabs and one that Democrats need to win in order to crown a Speaker Pelosi. […]

Campaigning with Rell and Simmons may be the way for Joe to boost his GOP support. But the more he is seen as a Republican, the less appealing he will be to Democrats, who still heavily outnumber Republicans in Connecticut. Suffice it to say, the next few months will be a tough balancing act for Holy Joe.

Dems are focusing considerable attention on those Connecticut House races, which very well may be the difference between a Dem House majority next year or the status quo. For Lieberman to campaign alongside Rob Simmons is but the latest in a series of betrayals.

Ah Joe, becoming less and less acceptable every day in every way to everybody.

  • “But the more he is seen as a Republican, the less appealing he will be to Democrats, who still heavily outnumber Republicans in Connecticut.”

    But isn’t it true independents outnumber both democrats and republicans? If so, he’d be smart to try to stay as middle-of-the-road as possible and try to appeal to moderate republicans, some democrats and alllllll those independents.

  • Lieberman seems to be seriously self-destructing here. Can he really believe that no one will notice who he’s hanging out with and continue to support him just because he’s Mighty Joe Lieberman before whom all others must bow?

    And pigs might fly someday, but I doubt it.

  • It actually occurs to me that the less help Ned Lamont gets for his eventual win (he’s heading in the right direction last time I looked) the less beholden he’s going to be to the Democratic Establishment. That’s better for Connecticut and America, as far as I see.

  • For Lieberman to campaign alongside Rob Simmons is but the latest in a series of betrayals.

    Any comment from the Moose on this latest development? My guess is not (my company’s firewalls prevent me from reading Whittman’s blog).

  • What you guys fail to realize is that moderates (both GOP and Dem) and independents don’t get offended if Joe rubs elbows with moderates like Rell, they actually respect it. Many of the same Dems that vote for Rell will also vote for Joe.

  • Good for Hilary Clinton. Maybe she can convince Bill to return to Connecticut and campaign for the Democrat.

    Are Democrats still convinced Lieberman will caucus with them should he be re-elected? Looks like ol’ Joe is signalling he’s keeping his options open.

  • Personally, I like the fact that the GOP reps, like Shays, are coming to accept Lamont’s position on the Iraq war–this could be used effectively in the campaign by Lamont.

  • If the Democratic Party fails to get behind their nominee in Connecticut I will skip my first Congressional election since 1964. In NJ that means one less vote for Menendez.

  • Lieberman really isn’t likable to anyone except Marshall Wittman and David Brooks. At this point in his career, the more he’s in front of people, the less likely they are to support him–as the 2004 presidential nomination campaign proved in spades.

    My in-laws live in Connecticut. They’re independents and pretty squarely middle-of-the-road politically, but they told me months ago that they were for Lamont. Their explanation? “Joe’s forgotten where he came from.”

  • Edo, why would the Moose be offended? Wittmann is not a Democrat and has never claimed to be one. I’m sure he’ll see Joe’s campaigning with Republicans as an admirable indication of bipartisanship. I still have no idea what the DLC thinks they get out of supporting Wittmann and allowing him to be repeatedly quoted in the press as their representative, a spokeman for a Democratic organization bashing Democrats and reinforcing Republican story lines.

  • JRS Jr, if what you say is true why has Lieberove slipped so much in the polls in one week?

  • I would guess that Lieberman’s strategy is to remain a Democrat so that he can keep his seniority in committees, and then if the Republicans end up still in control, negotiate a deal with them so that he can keep that standing as he switches parties. Don’t know why the Dems don’t see it.

  • KCinDC,

    Edo, why would the Moose be offended?

    I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that I thought Wittman would be offended. I was wondering what, if anything, he had to say about it. Having said that, I, too, have no idea why the DLC supports him.

  • “JRS Jr, if what you say is true why has Lieberove slipped so much in the polls in one week?”

    Doubtful, nice try. But let’s make sure you are looking at the same polling service when you are talking about week to week poll comparisons… Now, were you the one you called in the Kerry win after early polling in ’04???

    Rasmuessen conducted on 8/21 has stayed pretty stable with Joe at 45% vs. Lamont at 43%. The last Ras poll was conducted on 8/10 and Joe was at 46 vs. Lamont at 41. So I wouldn’t call a 1 point slip by Joe and a two point gain by Lamont in two weeks “so much.” Moreover, All polls since the primary have Joe in the lead by an average of 5.3% (including Rasmuessen, Quinipiac and ARS.

    Many of you left wing partisans were crowing that once Joe lost the primary he’d fade into oblivion. Clearly that did not happen. Then again, if you folks are looking for a pro-war moderate Dem like Hillary to help him win the election, I can’t wait to try to see them exlain their differences of opinion on the War in front of the cameras.

  • I know it’s too early to interpret Hillary’s motives — isn’t it always? She could just be sincerely helping Lamont, or she could be writing tickets to cash in during her own run for the presidency. I’m hoping it’s the former. It wold be outstanding if she follows Ted Kennedy’s lead and becomes the powerhouse in the Senate.

  • So I wouldn’t call a 1 point slip by Joe and a two point gain by Lamont in two weeks “so much.” JRS Jr

    Unless it is a trend. Then you’re looking at Lamont ahead by a few points and Lieberman losing. By the way, fading, by definition is a gradual change, not instantaneous. Everytime Lieberman polls down two more points he is fading away.

    I happen to think a three point change in two weeks is a significant difference, especially since it puts a Lamont win in the margin of error.

    To echo you’re malicious sentiment, “nice try.”

  • He’s all over the people bashing Mele because he’ll be diving out of the DLC next year to join his hero McCain as soon as he announces for Prez. Wittman has never made any secret of the fact he thinks McCain walks on water.

  • Yes, Tom, that’s always been clear. But the mystery remains: What does the DLC get out of the relationship?

    It’s hard for me to see how the post-primary polls can be anything other than the high point for Lieberman. I predict we’ll see more of the same trends we’ve seen before, in which the more people see of Lamont (who’s still an unknown to lots of people) the more they like him, whereas the more Lieberman campaigns the less people like him. Yes, the Republicans are doing their best to paint Lamont as some sort of Michael Moore figure, but he has the money to fight back.

  • Kerry has a LTTE in the WSJ today in support of Lamont. Lamont’s position on the war in Iraq is almost exactly the same as Kerry’s, whereas Clinton’s still hiding in the weeds and hedging her bets. And Kerry didn’t send his spouse to campaign for Lamont’s opposition.

    Seems to me you’re congratulating the wrong Democratic senator.

  • Democrats need to get over the “he will caucus with them” thought. First, how many times has he sided with the GOP and the administration against the Democratic part? Two, he is even less likely to do it before because if the Democrats don’t take over the party there is no reason tow. Third, he is also less like to be friendly once the DNC and official people/orgs don’t support him no (like they shouldn’t), it will be revenge time. Fourth, on all those issues that he took the Democratic side but may have only done so for political reasons or because it wasn’t a huge issue, he can cheerfully discard (I’m talking to you NARAL). Do not freakin’ assume that because he was a (fairfweather) friend that he will continue to be so, he has no reason to be.

    ** Joe Lieberman is not longer a Democrat.
    ** Joe Lieberman is not beholden to a Democratic party platform or their leadership.
    ** Joe Lieberman is not necessarily a friend to the Democratic party, many of it constituent groups, or any part of the platform/agenda.

    GET FREAKIN’ OVER IT!!!

  • Okay I am going to cash in my chips on the Lamont-Lieberman thingy.

    I’ve been known to assert that the CT race is being manipulated by Rove to divide and conquer Democrats AND to focus the Iraq War debate firmly within the namby-pamby democratic party.

    Well okay… fug all that.

    This Lieberman slug has got to go…
    I want to see this stink-toad destroyed….

    Yep…

    I’ve had it with this ugly leech…
    It is time to cut this parasite from the body-(democratic)-politic and let him bleed to death on his own.

    Cut and bleed.
    Cut and bleed.
    Cut and bleed.

    Lieberman is cancer to democrats.
    I’m sending a check to a Lamont.
    Posthaste.

  • Now, now Doubtful a “malicious nice try” right back at you…

    Unfortunately, 2 data points definately don’t make a trend and the 3 point could be deemed “statistically insignificant.”

    We’ll see in future months, but I’m still waiting for Lamont’s bounce propelled by the bug bad democratic campaign machine. Maybe the great Rev Al could come back up to our fine state and stump for Ned!

  • KCinDC,

    Well, Edo, I risked my sanity by visiting the Bull Moose blog again. No mention of this issue

    You are a brave brave soul. I’m not surprised that he chooses to ignore the issue. The DLC should drop Wittman like a bad habit.

  • What Oy said at #21. Don’t get me wrong: I’m glad Clinton is doing what she needs to do. I’m just a touch underwhelmed by her policy position machinations, esp. as regards Iraq.

    Here’s Kerry’s LTTE
    http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=:ePkh8BM9EwLbwQq0w4CFOFuMBPjmJ-358ODbPJtGkQZJq959AFrTDzo/0-1&fp=44efe643ad870e8a&ei=I3LvRMzEEpioaOOOmKoE&url=http%3A//online.wsj.com/article/SB115647449152645291.html%3Fmod%3Dgooglenews_wsj&cid=1109053820
    (subscription required)

    Lamont Has the Courage To Defy Bush and the War
    August 25, 2006; Page A15

    The sentiments expressed in “The Lamont Wing Is a Threat to Security” (Letters to the Editor, Aug. 22) will do nothing to make America safer. If the neoconservatives were half as good at fighting the war on terror as they are at misleading the American public, we’d be a lot safer than we are today.

    The disastrous policy in Iraq has made America less safe. We were misled into a war which has become a dangerous distraction, and a profound drain on our financial and military resources. Nearly five years after the attacks of 9/11, it’s clear that this administration hasn’t learned the real lessons of 9/11 and failed to take the steps to make us as safe as we must be. Osama bin Laden is still on the loose. The 9/11 Commission’s recommendations to secure our most vulnerable infrastructure remain virtually ignored. Homeland security funding has been cut for cities such as Boston and New York. Staying the current course in Iraq is not making the American people any safer at home or abroad and has hurt our fight in the war on terror.

    Ned Lamont has had the courage to stand up to George Bush and make this cause a central part of his campaign. That’s why Connecticut Democrats chose him over Joe Lieberman. Mr. Lamont will be tough and smart about our national security. He’s boldly stepped forward to demand a winning strategy from Washington and he has put forward concrete ideas. Mr. Lamont vigorously supported the war in Afghanistan and will help restore America’s focus on destroying Osama bin Laden and the enemies who actually attacked us on 9/11. He won’t stand by and allow Afghanistan to continue to descend back into chaos. He’ll fight for increased funding to protect our ports that have been left vulnerable and he’ll fight to restore the cuts to the veterans’ budget for our heroes coming home from Iraq. In fact, continuing the current course is a grave threat to our security and we’ll be stronger with Ned Lamont in the Senate.

    Sen. John F. Kerry (D., Mass.)
    Boston

  • If, for example, I was to envision the Bushite Lapdog as “a house,” and I then contemplate that every Republican he’s involved with is “a cockroach,” how long would it take before the house is deemed to have been “infested?”

    Lieberman’s also worthy of a Monty Python gag. We could pass him off as a sleeping security guard—snoring to “beat the band”—while untold plane-loads of “terrorists” sneak by. Every plane has ObL’s head sticking out through the cockpit roof—and there’s dozens of tiny little legs protruding through the belly of each aircraft, running along for dear life. Some could be dancing. Others could be skipping—or jumping rope. One plane-load could even do a group hopscotch kind of thing.

    The point is—Lieberman’s weakness is to have his “seriousness” called into question. Make him out to be the joke that he’s become, and he’ll blow away in the breeze like dust….

  • Hillary’s just covering herself with real Democrats by helping Lamont. After abdicating any credibility she might have had by “poll watching” us into a war, it’s the least she can do.

    • Comments are closed.