Filed under: CT-Sen
electoral-vote.com, one of the most popular websites during election 2004 has relaunched with a page that has daily updates, showing where the Senate seats on the line in 2006 currently fall
The “Votemaster” uses an average of the most recent polls, and has great graphs showing the progression of polls from all of the major non-partisan pollsters in a state.
As you can see CT-Sen is currently extremely close by all accounts, and it is clear that the only clear loser is Schlesinger, who has dropped from a high of nearly 10% to somewhere around 3% in more recent polls. Suprisingly, both Lamont and Lieberman have received increased support as Schlesinger’s numbers have dwindled.
It is also interesting to note that the main reason for Lieberman forming his own (Connecticut for Lieberman) party was to avoid getting last slot on the November ballot. According to a news post (http://ctnewsjunkie.com/index.php/2006/08/23/lieberman_gets_ballot_bottom_green_party) the order has been decided, and Schlesinger is on top, with Lieberman falling to the dreaded last position. Schlesinger’s prominent placement will possibly hurt Lieberman as Republicans who don’t realize that there is even a Republican running may see the (R) next to his name and check him off.
It’ll be interesting to see if Schlesinger gets a signifigantly higher percentage of the vote than polls currently predict, and what impact that has on Lieberman. If this race is still as close as it is come November 7th, those extra Schlesinger votes could cost Lieberman his seat.
Filed under: administrative
The other seven blogs that are being done as part of this project are now linked in the blogroll on the right side of this page, check there for great commentary on Michigan, Texas, Florida, California, Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania.
Before I begin I should point out that this is strictly an opinion piece. I have no delusions about my opinions being completely accurate, or popular, or even entirely grounded in reality.
In November Connecticut voters will be forced to make a choice between Democrat Ned Lamont and former Democrat Joe Lieberman. As of a September 19th American Research Group poll Lieberman was up by 2 points, well within the 4 point margin of error.
Let us assume for the moment that it is after the election in November and Liberman has won. He has openly stated that he intends to continue caucusing with the Democrats. It has been rumored that the Democrats will strip him of his seniority if he wins and chooses to return to their caucus. His only other real option would be to caucus with the Republicans.
This raises an interesting hypothetical situation. The Democrats have no particular reason to let Lieberman back into the caucus. Unless by some fluke the Democrats win a total of 50 or 51 seats they don’t need Lieberman. Lieberman will have just defeated a Democrat in order to retain his seat. In doing so he has turned his back on the Democratic party, and he should have no reason to expect them to welcome him back with open arms.
If Lieberman can’t caucus with the Democrats and turns to the Republicans it could very well end the two party system we have right now. Lieberman is a moderate Democrat. If the Democrats start chasing the moderates out of the party, they’ll be forced to flee to the Republicans or pick third party candidates and waste their vote.
The Republican party would then have the same problems the Democrats have now with divisive infighting. In my ideal little fantasy world this would cause the Republican party to implode under its own weight. The end result of both of the parties infighting would be a large centrist party and two small fringe parties on the far left and the far right.
All that being said, the Democrats will probably welcome Lieberman back, probably even with all of his seniority priveledges and nothing will change. Even if Democrats win in November, very little will change in the grand scheme.
Filed under: Uncategorized
The race between Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman is anything but going back to honest politics, (if there ever was such a thing). Both of these politicians who hope to fill the Senate seat in the next couple months, are taking on the countries biggest issue at hand, the Iraq war. By offering solutions to the desperate Connecticut residence’s, they are bound to make the race all that much more interesting… but not necessarily honest. In this Washington post article the issue lies in the inability of the politicians (especially ones who can’t get their stories straight) to come up with solutions to such a huge situation. And if anything, this situation has shown America how culturally ignorant we are to attempt to impose such a government into the Middle East. We must come to grips that unfortunately, Connecticut is not going to be the state that elects in the politician to end the war or if anything, the politician that will come up with reasonable alternatives. These politicians should stop using political jargon about a topic that is far from their reach, just to gain power. Hopefully the people will be smart enough to realize that the political decisions must go beyond their politician this year, because regardless, these are not politicians who are going to stick to their guns when push comes to shove . Lieberman so far seems to be the rockiest politician regarding his stances, a politician that was onceadamant about withdrawing troopes is now becoming disheartened about the current choices. And Lamont wants to “get the job done”. But do these politicians even know what they are supporting even without the flip flopping of their plans? To withdraw immediately would cause serious situations that we need to approach slowly, but to stay in would, in my opinion, be outweighingly devastating. The politicians need to understand we are dealing with extremely dangerous possibilities and not just a political race for power and popularity.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire posted an interesting story yesterday:
As CT races approach the homestretch, campaigns are polling potential campaign allies for the likability. John McCain (R-AZ) edged out Michael Bloomberg (R-NY) as the most favorable, while John Kerry (D-MA) polled as the least likable of a list that also included Junior Democratic Senator from New York, Hillary Clinton.
It should be no suprise that every possible element of such a tight race be polled before being implemented into the race, and this story is just another example of how tight this race is shaping out to be.
Filed under: Uncategorized
It has been quite the busy week for the Connecticut races.
First off, 5th District Democratic candidate, Chris Murphy, gave the response to the President’s weekly radio address this week. The speech focused on Medicare, in which Murphy blamed his opponent, incumbent Nancy Johnson (R) for rising Medicare premiums. Murphy was tapped for the response by Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Johnson’s campaign jumped on the speech saying, “Chris Murphy couldn’t have picked a worse issue to try to resuscitate his floundering campaign. Murphy’s relentlessly negative attacks on the Medicare drug law have backfired on him and seniors will hold Murphy accountable.” (Source: Hartford Courant, 17 SEPT)
Independent Senate candidate Joe Lieberman has had a busy week. A new campaign ad touts the Senator’s bi-partisanship, and he has come out on the offensive about the infamous embrace President Bush gave him at the 2005 State of the Union address. Lieberman, during a Sunday interview on “Face the State” stated, “The fact that Lamont was making a big deal out of the fact that George Bush gave me a hug after one State of the Union speech, you know maybe we’d better in this country if there was more hugging and less hating.” The Senator makes a very valid point, but one that will go much unnoticed during a very important and heated mid-term election season. (Source: Associated Press, 17 SEPT)
Lieberman also voted along fellow Democrats in a bill calling for a complete implementation of 9/11 Commission recommendations, as well as language calling for a withdrawl of troops from Iraq. The Senator was quick to say he still opposses a troop withdrawal, as the vote was purely procedural, and had it passed he would have voted to remove the Iraq clause. (Source: Hartford Courant, 14 SEPT) This week’s actions are merely a reflection of Lieberman’s aim to portray himself above partisan politics.
In other Lieberman news, New York City Michael Bloomberg (R) will hold a campaign fundraiser for Senator Lieberman in November, as well as campaigning alongside the Senator’s wife in Chicago. Lieberman’s challenger, Ned Lamont, criticized the incumbent for participating in such fundraisers, saying the event is thrown by the very lobbyists Lamont has sworn off in this race. Interestingly enough, it has been released that Lamont’s campaign manager, Tom Swan, is a registered lobbyist in Connecticut. (Source: Newsday, 17 SEPT)
Ned Lamont gave a speech on national security earlier this week, and in it, he praised Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush; an unexpected move from the anti-war Democrat. In the speech, Lamont praised Reagan and Bush 41 for depending on bipartisanship and foreign allies to defeat enemies abroad. Lamont blasted President Bush and Senator Lieberman for pushing into Iraq without support of the UN, taking away valuable resources from the protecting the homeland and rebuilding Afghanistan, and for insensitivity towards Arabs. Lamont said as a result of these actions, “Today, America is weaker, not stronger. We have sacrificed our daughters and sons and our treasure in a war we didn’t have to fight. We have ignored the real threats and security needs in the war we should be fighting, the one against the terrorists.” In the speech, Lamont also stated a time-table for withdrawal was needed so that Iraqis would be forced to take responsibility for their own security.
Lamont also conveyed the need for a strong alliance to confront Iran, saying, “Now is the time for us to work with Europe, China and the international community to confront Iran, engage in tough negotiations and say to Iran that an active nuclear weapons program is unacceptable to the world community.” Lamont and Lieberman actual agree on the threat Iran poses to the rest of the world, and Lamont added, “Make no mistake, the use of force is always on the table against those who threaten us, but strength must always be matched with judgment.” The speech was the candidate’s first major oration on national security. (Source: Hartford Courant, 14 SEPT)
Filed under: CT-Sen
My Left Nutmeg, a blog following the Democrats running in CT has an interesting take on a recent story, and something that might get media attention in coming days.
In an ongoing battle about Lieberman’s actions during the Lewinsky scandal, where Lieberman has been criticized for coming out against President Clinton, Lieberman’s campaign released an email that was written by Ned Lamont to Lieberman which they claim praises Lieberman’s actions. The actual contents of the email do not seem to praise Lieberman’s actions, but it seems as if the Lieberman campaign has left out certain portions to make it seem like Lamont has changed his views. This debate is fairly murky, and as both campaigns have tried pointing out, is 8 years old, the Lewinsky scandal is no longer relevant.
What is interesting as My Left Nutmeg points out, is the way that Lieberman released an email written by a constituent to the media in a campaign.
When Lamont wrote this email he was writing to his Senator, the way any citizen is supposed to feel free to do, and there is a certain confidence placed in that, which is outlined in Senate Ethics rules. Lieberman may have just significantly hurt himself if the media picks up on the fact that by using Lamont’s email, Lieberman violated a certain trust that constituents place in their Senators.
Filed under: general
Connecticut is one of the most interesting states in what promises to be an extremely interesting general election. There are five races to watch in CT, all of which have a Democratic challenger against an incumbent from another party. (disclaimer: I am not making a judgement here on Lieberman’s past performance as a Democrat, but he is technically running as a part of the Connecticut for Lieberman party, so I count him as an incumbent challenged by a Democrat)
CT-Sen: Lieberman (CfL) vs. Lamont (D) vs. Schlesinger (R)
The hottest race in CT, and pershaps the nation is also the one which really has pulled the other races into the national spotlight is this Senate race. Joe Lieberman a 3-term senator and one of the most well known names in the senate has split with the Democratic party after losing against a longshot challenger named Ned Lamont. This race deserves it’s own background post, so I’ll leave out some of the gory details there, but Lieberman is now the favored candidate, with polls showing him holding somewhere near 49% of the vote against Democratic challenger Lamont and Republican challenger Schlesinger (who has not recieved the endorsement of any major Republicans).
Connecticut is considered a reasonably liberal state as a whole, which is why Democratic primary voters revolted against their incumbent in favor of Lamont. The war has been seen as the big issue in this state, where the President’s approval ratings have been in the 30s for more than a year. (2)
Despite the fact that CT is generally tinted blue, 3 of the 5 seats in the House of Representatives are held by Republicans, the newly energized Democratic party has launched strong attacks on all three of these seats, as they could be a key 3 out of the 15 seats Democrats need to win control of the house.
CT-02: Simmons (R) vs. Courtney (D)
CT-02 is said to be the most democratic leaning district in the country with a Republican representative, although Simmons has won three elections with increasing margins and is considered a somewhat moderate Republican. The NRCC and DCCC both agree that CT-02 is one of the most vulnerable seats, and there is no doubt that both are going to spend a lot of time and money campaigning here.
CT-04: Shays (R) vs. Farrell (D)
Several polling sites have suggested that this is one of the Democrats best chances for a high profile pick-up. Republican Shays has been known as one of the more socially-liberal Republicans in office, and was nearly ousted by Farrell in 2004, despite having won by large margins for most of his 10 straight terms in the House. Farrell is running against him again, after an election that was probably too close for comfort, and this time with a strong anti-war platform that seems to be doing well in the state.
CT-05: Johnson (R) vs. Murphy (D)
Early suggestions say that Johnson is the most secure of the three Republicans in Connecticut’s House delegation, she’s held on to her seat for 12 terms, and her challenger is a younger politician who at the moment does not have a strong advantage. The fact that the Lieberman-Lamont race will probably have Democrats out in record numbers is what makes this race a dangerous one for Johnson.
CT-Gov: Rell (R) vs. DeStefano (D)
This race will most likely go to Rell, who after taking office after the resignation of Gov. John Rowland, achieved an astounding 81% approval rating in February 2006. She is one of the most popular governors in the country, and New Haven mayor John DeStefano Jr. currently trails 35-57 (3), although his numbers have been steadily rising.
Indeed, all of Connecticuit’s Republicans would probably be in a more comfortable place if it didn’t seem like Democratic turnout in November, especially in CT is going to be on the surge. The fact that there is little motivation to vote for the Republican Senate candidate seems to suggest the possibility for Democratic gains across the board, with some polls even predicting that DeStefano will be able to overcome Rell.
Sources
1: Information on Senate and House races in this post comes primarily from: http://www.electoral-vote.com:2006/evp2006/Info/hothouse.html#CT
2: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollTrack.aspx?g=33bc7cbc-7fde-4f35-97d6-50bcb47ca175
3: http://rasmussenreports.com/2006/State%20Polls/August%202006/connecticutGovernor.htm
Filed under: general
This blog will serve to monitor all of the major races in Connecticut in the 2006 general election. It is being done as a class project for Professor Sean Sutton’s Political Parties and Voting class at RIT in Fall of 2006. There will be four editors of this blog, who will be introduced soon.
Please check back soon and we’ll outline the races we’ll be covering as well as who we are.
