[campaignPete R-CT]

I campaigned with/for Alan for about one month .... in July when I was guessing a 3-way race would be a good thing and I assumed Liarman would lose the primary.

Then when Liarman lost, the GOP rushed to HIM. I went and did something else. He was a successful mayor.

He’s a wretch, but not as bad as most politicos. He’s got the energetic personality for 1-on-1 campaigning ...

[BillyBoy]

Schlesinger's biggest problem in 2006 was the baggage from the casino scandal, but IF every single Republican had supported him instead of Al Gore's running mate, he would have won easily in a 3 way race. Damaged goods or not, with two liberal RATs splitting the liberal RAT vote, Schlesinger only needed 34% of the vote in CT and he'd be a U.S. Senator. No doubt he was "moderate" and would have probably been another Judy Biggert type squish, but compared to LIEberman it would have been a huge upgrade. For example, he would have opposed Obamacare.

I honestly hold the pro-LIEberman Republicans directly responsible for the RATs taking control of the Senate in 2006. Even if Ned Lamont had won in CT, a single victory by either George Allen in VA, Jim Talent in MO, or Conrad Burns in MT would have made the difference and resulted in a Republican controlled Senate. All three lost by 1%, but the GOP nationally was too focused on kissing LIEberman's butt to care about those races.