Posted on 08/09/2006 5:24:20 AM PDT by PDR
Political Wire obtained a copy of the exit poll last night done by CBS News and the New York Times that provides some interesting insight into the views of Connecticut Democrats who voted in the primary yesterday.
Key findings: As expected, the war in Iraq played a significant role in the race with "a significant majority" of primary voters saying they disapproved of the U.S. decision to go to war with Iraq, and most of them cast their ballots for Ned Lamont. Of those surveyed, 78% disapproved of the decision to go to war. Among the war’s opponents, 60% cast their vote for Lamont, while 78% of the smaller group who supported the U.S. decision to go to war voted for Lieberman. Lieberman’s relationship with President Bush was also a factor in the race. 59% of Democratic primary voters said Lieberman was too close to the President, while 41% didn’t think so. Those who said Lieberman was too close to Bush voted overwhelmingly for Lamont. 61% of voters rejected the notion of Lieberman running as an Independent candidate in the fall, something he has promised to do. 39% supported it. Moreover, one in five Lieberman voters does not think he should seek an Independent run in November.
Sad day for Connecticut. Sad day for America.
Wonder if this means bad news for Hillary, Kerry, et al.?
Here is how I see it shaping up for November.
In 2000, Lieberman won 63-34 against a generic Republican, in an election where he was also running for Vice President, so you know there was supreme turnout.
Even if the Republican in this election is a generic one, let's assume he can get about 34% tops.
If you split Lieberman's 2000 votes up according to yesterday's primary, here is how the race is going to look:
Republican Dude (R) - 34%
Crazy Anti War Kook Dude (D) - 32.76%
Dad from the TV Show ALF (I) - 30.24%
We can win this thing.
I wonder if it will encourage Democrats to run even further left to appease the "Bring Them Home" moonbats with money?
We'd be in great hands if the people of CT controlled the nation. Not.
I hope that's the silver lining.
I heard on the Radio(Curtis and Kuby) this morning that Jodi Rell is not liking the Republican candidate because of some Foxwoods/Mohegan Sun improprieties and that she is considering trying to get Leiberman put on the Republican ballot as well as being on the Independent ballot. Though I cannot find this in print anywhere.
We can win this thing.
You may be correct but I suspect the best we can do is put another New England RINO in. While this will annoy Red Stater "true red" conservatives who will ask "what's the point?", a seat is a seat and necessary to keep the Senate committee chairs in Republican hands.
I don't think Lamont is going to win. Probably Lieberman will win as an independent. So in the end, it may not be so sad. We're better off having Lieberman as an independent than having Lieberman as a Democrat.
I'm guessing it's too late to put Lieberman on the GOP ballot, even if he wanted to be there, which he does not.
I think you're right. And IF Lieberman wins as an Independent, he will owe absolutely NOTHING to the DNC and will be a free agent.
I don't expect Joe to caucus with the GOP, but he might not be inclined to give the time of day to the 'Rats.
Now if Moonbat Lamont gets elected to Joe's Senate seat?
He's only one person, utterly inexperienced at that level of political office, and I predict he'll never make it up the learning curve before revealing himself as just one more mouthpiece for the Moron.Org crew.
Does that mean four in five think that Lieberman should?
The Republicans should face reality and above all else, create a two candidate race, not a three candidate race.
Lamont vs Lieberman (by whatever label) or a Lieberman clone (eg his articulate daughter). The GOP should not delude itself into thinking a 3 way race would hurt Lamont.
The entire contest is now pro-Lamont vs anti-Lamont. Don't divide the anti-Lamont vote.
Even if it is a RINO, it will basically be Lieberman with an R next to his name, which is no change in the vote (which currently goes our way even with dips like the guy in RI), but it will be a pickup of a seat.
Considering the three choices, the Republican is the best option for us, even if he votes like Lieberman.
Lamont has the aura of one who will ultimately end up behind bars.
The Republicans should fund a "Republicans for Lieberman" vote campaign in CT, to make sure the Dem's lose a seat in the Senate.
Well, but our current candidate isn't a generic Republican, he's been mired in some bizarre and embarrassing casino scandal that makes him tough to take seriously. Lieberman's going to be fighting hard for Republican votes and will take quite a few. Unless we swap in a better candidate we are not in the hunt for this seat.
There is zero chance of a Republican pickup here. The GOP candidate (Alan Schlesinger) has gotten all kinds of bad press for racking up gambling debts and being sued by the casinos over them. The most recent poll had him getting 9% in a three-way race. Besides, there's a good chance the state GOP will be working to help elect Lieberman.
So 22% of those who supported the Iraq War voted for Ned Lamont? Whazzup wit' 'dat?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.