The Lamont campaign rolled out its latest ad — starring Connecticut's senior Senator Christopher Dodd. Something tells me that Turncoat Joe is going to be a little more petulant than usual today.
This is just the first of many things going on between now and election day. DNC Chairman Howard Dean will be campaigning with Ned at a rally in Hartford today at noon — if you are in Connecticut, it should be a great event from everything I'm hearing — so take your lunch hour with Ned and Howard Dean!
If you aren't happy with what you are hearing about poll numbers or establishment Democratic support for the Connecticut Senate race, well, here's the solution: get up off your butt and do something about it – you can volunteer for Ned's campaign, for canvassing, or calling, or whatever, by checking here.
And that goes for races across the nation. In every state, in every district — somewhere near you, a Democratic candidate could use a hand.
It's Friday — campaign staffs and local Democratic party groups are planning the weekend's canvassing and phone calls. Why not take a few minutes today and contact a local campaign office or Democratic headquarters and sign up to do something. Find a candidate whose values match up with yours, and give them a hand. Go and vote in the early voting — lock in your choices now, and then take election day to hold signs for your candidate. Whatever it takes. Where ever you are needed.
Because whatever progress we are going to make in this nation of ours, it is up to us — all of us — to do the hard work toward it. We can't sit back and hope someone else will do it for us — the time is now.
We cannot win anything if we do not get out our vote. It is that simple. All politics is local, as Tip O'Neill used to say, and he was absolutely right — knocking on your neighbors' doors and talking to them about why this election matters or doing the same thing over the phone is still the best way to get people out to vote. Channel that anger and frustration and disgust about the lack of accountability, the shredding of the Constitution, and the need for checks and balances into getting out every single vote you can find to make the changes we so desperately need in this nation of ours.
We need your help…won't you stand up and lead the way?
UPDATE: I wanted to add this analysis from reader dab in CT, who has quite a bit of familiarity with polling methodology:
As someone who used to do polling on a national level I can say that the statements that Schwartz made, that the debates made no impact, is just wrong, wrong, wrong – and unprofessional.
They held off the poll by ONE day because people were dismissing it as being done pre-debate.
They clearly did not do all the polling (1,800) people after the 2nd debate aired in CT at 7:00 pm last night.
I’ll wait till I see other polls after the three debates have aired. The next one is Monday the 23rd and it is being moderated by Stepanopolis. It will be shown live, nationally.
Polling is only a snapshot of the people that the poll taker chooses to put in the frame. What matters most is who is motivated to head to the voting booth. It's true for CT, and for the rest of the nation. That's why getting out our vote is critical — and why we should all be concentrating on those efforts, and less at trying to pick our candidates — and each other — apart down the stretch.



224 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
I want my country BACK
Lamont!
THANK YOU SENATOR DODD!!!!!
(and thanks for the fresh thread, Christy!)
love that ad – Thank You Chris Dodd !!!
about to head out for the day – but have been chuckling over how this is no longer parody
http://z.about.com/d/political…..ecover.jpg
oh heck, let me pile on
http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/bush-resigns.jpg
love to all dogs
Have An FDL Day !
Christy! Ned! Christopher! CT Bob! Spazeboy! Bye Bye Joe!
Christy, give me some hope. What about that Quinnepac poll that gives Loserman a 17 point lead? Damn, damn, damn! What can be done?
okay, couldn’t resist – one last chuckle
Get Out There Dogs !
I saw this on ThinkProgress about fifteen minutes ago: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..ithdrawal/
That ad is perfect and will have Joe gnashing what’s left of his beleaguered teefs.
“and so do I” is priceless; thank you Senator Dodd.
Can anyone who’s familiar with what’s going on in CT explain why Ned’s campaign has imploded?
This commercial changes the whole landscape. Thank You Senator Dodd.
Repeating this from the prior thread:
Gang — we’re all edgy as we head into the election, but that is NO EXCUSE for taking it out on each other. We are all on the same side and want a win for teh Democrats — disagreements about the best way to get that are not only to be expected, but are healthy. Capice?
Wow, lots of concern trolls out this morning.
Kimster at 9 — who says Ned’s campaign has imploded?
Deacon Blues @ 6
The Q Poll was taken before both of the debates. This race is much closer than this poll shows.
hes down by 17 points and hes releasing ANOTHER ad that doesn’t even mention Iraq. C’mon.
OT–
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq
Updated above, gang.
It’s nice to see Dodd and Ned share the stage.
The CT Senate delegation 2007.
I’m taking the rest of the day off; my wife and I are driving upstate for some sorely needed R&R. I may check in later if they have wifi wherever we end up.
If you don’t hear from me it doesn’t necessarily mean that our House Speaker has exacted his revenge…yet. (The story in the NH Register captures the moment beautifully…it’s probably good to get out of town for a while!)
Have fun.
angie at 17 — I heard that on NPR this morning. They reported that British forces, who are the controlling tropps in the area, are not engaged in whatever operations are ongoing. Which makes me wonder what is really going on there…
Kimster and Chris, you probably want to read the comments on the prior thread.
EPU’d a rather lengthy comment on the last thread about the odd dynamics of polling in a complicated race like this. Here’s the bottom line:
Half the battle of polling is to collect a representative sample, and the other half of the battle is properly analyzing what the data shows and knowing the limits of the data. There are so many things going on in CT that are unusual that both halves of the process are much more iffy than they are anywhere else.
Good pollsters are dealing with this by doing things that anywhere else would fly in the face of “standard polling” practices. Some will be right, and others wrong, but we won’t know who falls in which camp until after the election. I haven’t seen the background descriptions of the Q poll’s methodology, but they have been consistently at odds with much of the other polling.
1970cs @ 15
This totally contradicts the Zogby poll yesterday that showed Ned closing the gap w/ a 7 point deficit??!!! I smell a rat @ Quinnipiac!!
It surely does make one wonder, Christy @ 20.
Could this be democracy in action and the Iraqis “standing up so we can stand down?”
Well, I think I told you that Lieberman will survive election. And I took a lot of crap. Looks like he is going to do better than I expected.
If polls are not that accurate, Christie, then GOP will keep the control of both houses.
Netroots, eat your heart out. You guys are not people-powered. You guys are like Internet stocks in the 90s: all bubbles, no substance.
Thanks peterr.
For those interested in looking at the historical polling of Lamont vs. Lieberman though October 19, here’s a good link, pollster.com
y’all do Christy a favor – do not feed the trolls !!!
even if it is like shooting caged quail
Nina — what’s your suggestion, then, for getting a better government in place? Sitting at home, crying in your beer, and saying “I told you so.” No thanks — a bit too bitter and defeatist for my taste.
Nina @ 25
Hey Nina, I missed that comment.
Please, go find it. Every comment at FDL is timestamped.
oopos, cbl — I’m doing the feeding. LOL
Christy Hardin Smith @ 30
Repeating to self…must play nice…
OT-Given all the telegraphing we’ve been getting over the last few days, I think the al-Sadr takeover is just the latest manifestation of the unending CF that is Bush’s Iraq.
Folks, I’m away for the weekend on an anniversary trip. But I have to jump in to say this: The CT-Sen race is fluid. The polls are erratic because the situation is fluid. No one has a good likely voter model for a race like this, because there has never been a race like this. Forget the polls. Really. Just GOTV. Blue Army. Make calls. Walk precincts. Volunteer. This will be won in the last days on the ground.
You people are just upset that Al Sadr is putting his faith based initiative into action.
Why are you all so damn Godless.
-GSD
What’s going on is the Brits don’t want to get their fannies waxed so they are maintaing a low profile.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 20
drinksforall @ 23
It’s my understanding that alot of these polling outfits work off models and trends from previous races. The reason for this is it puts their results safely within a known framework. The polling firm doesn’t go too far out on a limb. But their is no framework or pre-existing race to base Lamont-Sore Loserman, so the polling tends to be all over the place.
The polling from the primary had 10 to 15% swings from week to week.
A reminder of why this fight matters: Court Told it Lacks Power in Detainee Cases.
And Bush is the deciderer, who all by his lonesomeness gets to designate folks as enemy combatants. Think about it: Nixon had an enemies list, but this is waaaay beyond Nixon.
This is King George XLIII, waving his hand and wishing people into oblivion without a meaningful defense at trial and without appeal. He must be stopped.
Oh yeah and Praise Rummy-Jesus!
-General Pace
Pachacutec @ 33
AMEN, Pach!
If anyone’s getting tired and wondering if all the work on elections is worth it to get a Democratic congress, read this.
We have to get rid of these bastards and then fumigate Capitol Hill. This story has me more energized than coffee ever could!
Peterr @ 37
worthwhile read
What Pach at 33 said…
Something tells me everyone needs to take a deeeeep breath, exhale slowly, and channel our energies into the things WE can do to create a change on November 7.
drinksforall @ 23
Not sure how this will format, but here are the poll results from TPM Cafe Election Central:
Connecticut Senate Race
CT-SEN
Latest Polls
Pollster Released Candidates
Quinnipiac Oct 20 Lieberman (CFL) 52%, Lamont (D) 35%
Zogby Int. Oct 19 Lieberman (CFL) 49%, Lamont (D) 43%
SurveyUSA Oct 11 Lieberman (CFL) 53%, Lamont (D) 40%
Hart. Courant Oct 11 Lieberman (CFL) 48%, Lamont (D) 40%
Rasmussen Oct 5 Lieberman (CFL) 50%, Lamont (D) 40%
Zogby/Reuters Oct 5 Lieberman (CFL) 53%, Lamont (D) 33%
Zogby Int. Sept 28 Lieberman (CFL) 45.8%, Lamont (D) 44%
Quinnipiac Sept 28 Lieberman (CFL) 49%, Lamont (D) 39%
ARG Sept 20 Lieberman (CFL) 47%, Lamont (D) 45%
Rasmussen Sept 19 Lieberman (CFL) 45%, Lamont (D) 43%
SurveyUSA Sept 12 Lieberman (CFL) 51%, Lamont (D) 38%
WSJ/Zogby Sept 11 Lieberman (CFL) 46%, Lamont (D) 42.1%
Pub. Op. Str. (R) Sept 6 Lieberman (CFL) 51%, Lamont (D) 35%
Rasmussen Aug 22 Lieberman (CFL) 45%, Lamont (D) 43%
ARG Aug 22 Lieberman (CFL) 44%, Lamont (D) 42%
Quinnipiac Aug 17 Lieberman (I) 53%, Lamont (D) 41%
Rasmussen Aug 12 Lieberman 46%, Lamont 41%
Quinnipiac Aug 7 Dem Prim: Lamont 51%, Lieberman 45%
Research 2000 Aug 4 Dem. Prim. Lamont 53%, Lieberman 43%
Quinnipiac Aug 3 Lamont (D) 54%, Lieberman (D) 41%
Rasmussen July 22 Dem Prim.: Lamont 51%, Lieberman 41%
Quinnipiac July 20 Dem Primary: Lamont 51%, Lieberman 47%
The recent Quinnipiac poll, as well as the SurveyUSA Oct 11 and Zogby-Reuters Oct 5, appear to be outliers. SurveyUSA and Zogby (IIRC) are robocall polls, which changes the response since people are more likely to hang up on a non-person. I don’t know about Quinnipiac. Also, the definition of “likely voter” probably varies from poll to poll. As Peterr suggests, party ID issues may be uniquely in play here. Someone said Quinnipiac had Lamont at double digits before the primary, which is correct (Aug 3).
So I don’t think we should get too worked up over one polling result.
Bush’s Iraq policy wasn’t going to end any other way except the way it is going today in al Sadr, and it’s positively obscene how many lives and how much money and destruction it took to prove it because Bush is criminally not capable of changing policies that will never work. And General Pace says Bush’s handmaiden Rumsfeld is doing “the good Lord’s work.” More like Satan’s, General Pace.
Pachacutec @ 33
And remember, that’s the part in this race that’s even more unpredictable than the rest. Joe has no party apparatus officially behind him. The GOP is generally strong on GOTV, and the national GOP is clearly supporting him, but is the state GOP? How much local support can he actually get for GOTV? These uncertainties mean that he may benefit from the vaunted Republican GOTV operation, or they may not be able to make it work for him at all.
The old saw about “Election Day is the only one poll that matters” is really true here.
I still cant believe that CT is going with Lieberman. Its shocking.
From out here in California, it looks like this: Ned won the primary. Then the powers that be pantsed him by asking him to hold off while they talked Joe down.
Joe didn’t come down, and the powers stuck their fingers up their butts. Ned was side-swiped by his good manners.
That left it with Joe taking the Republicans and a big chunk of the Democrats who voted for him in the primary. So Ned had to basically start over again.
And he did. And things are on track and just fine. Lieberman is the one who is imploding. Schlessinger has been able to make his own case (thanks to the debates; no thanks to his own party), and now, with Chris Dodd paying a visit to Realitystan, the wind is at Ned’s back.
Ned didn’t get to cruise to the finish line on the basis of his primary work, and that’s too bad. But this is a weird campaign, and he’s a big boy. And things are looking pretty good.
Peterr, it seems that it would just take one accepted case under one sympathetic district court to take this up under judicial review, but I’m not sure about jurisdiction issues with district courts.
Don’t even get me started with Specter’s views on that abomination of a bill…
LindaR @ 47
Good analysis – sometimes 2,700 miles provides the right perspective. In addition, some may have perceived Lamont as a one trick pony which the debates should help ameliorate. Alan S also will probably increase in visibility.
It ain’t over till its over.
TV-30 in Hartford has just run a couple of Ned ads I haven’t seen before. both were excellent…one had Jozo in various happy poses w/Bush and VP (I detest typing out it’s name…)
This timeframe is devoted to a ‘local’ news segment post-Today.
—-
More ads plus nice debate showings are moving the numbers Neds way. (imho)
———
OTOH – somebody’s running some nasty attacks on Murphy who is running against Rep. Nancy Johnson (R) the incumbent. Lord, he might as well be wearing an orange jumpsuit the way these are framed.
Speaking of Nixon’s enemies list, happy 81st birthday to Art Buchwald!
Another reason Why We Fight (via TPM Muckraker):
Right. They don’t actually believe all that anti-gay stuff, they’re just destroying people’s lives to stay in power. That’s much better.
Pretty much turns it from an argument why gay people and anyone who’s pro-gay-rights shouldn’t support or work for them into an argument why anyone who’s human shouldn’t support or work for them.
Shiite militia seizes Iraqi city
AFAIK, Amara sits on one of two main roads out of Iraq. Those roads are also key to our resupply efforts. A lot of military people have pointed out just how precarious our position is. We have to feed, shelter, arm, and support @150,000 troops, most, all? of whom are NW of Amara and the sole port, Basra. It costs $260,000,000 per day. AFAIK, the British are down south protecting our supply routes.
Jimmy Baker may think he’s got until after November 7 to finish his
fuckingstudy group. I’m not so sure that al-Sadr agrees.Someone above said the polls were very fluid. Boy is that right. Schlessinger is going to get more than he is polling right now, and he is going to take it away from Lieberman.
People!! Don’t lose heart!
The polls were all over the map on the eve of Bush v. Gore. And we all know what happened there. We’ve got to push this to the limit.
I said this on the thread below, but I’m in the mood to repeat myself:
Don’t not vote if you have a rotten Dem. candidate in the Senate (e.g., Menendez). Think of your vote as giving Russ Feingold a majority. Don’t let Russ down!
We’re sooooooooooo close to taking back both houses of Congress. Please hold your nose and vote D.
windje @ 8:05 – Thanks for the link!
GSD, yeah, you know it!
“I don’t know about Quinnipiac.”
CTBob trashed them on the prior thread.
John Caasper, you are correct. The news out of Iraq will continue to worsen. Yesterday our own military said things are getting worse. Today–Amara. Tomorrow, no food.
Anyone who wants to know what the best use of time is, IMO, Door-to-Door. That is the very best use of time. Meeting people, giving your passion. I don’t know if it is good to say you are from out of state, but I really think talking to voters at their doors is best. I don’t know what sorts of lists the Lamont campaign is using (who they are targeting), but whatever the strategy, I think going d-t-d is really the bomb!!
Blank Kludge @ 50
The RNCC is running those ads against Murphy. Their also running similar attack ads in CT01 for Rob Simmons. The CT Congrtessional races have been heavily targeted by the Rethugs, and they are still losing.
Peterr @ 55
I second the Art Buchwald birthday greeting.
Chris @
16
I have to agree. Good manners don’t win elections. Ned’s going to have to go negative, if only mildly. I’m 300 miles away, and from here, Joe just doesn’t seem hated enough for the happy high road ads to work. (Not everyone reads FDL.)
front page of SF Chronicle:
at first glance I read it as “General Concedes Failure in Iraq War” which would be a bit more sweeping.
Kimster @ 10
It hasn’t imploded. Far from it.
Schwartz who released this poll and Lieberman, go way back.
Also, I think any Social Scientist here would agree that you must always be careful what you INFER from a poll. What makes this poll so much worse is that Schwartz insists that the results indicate that the debates didn’t make an impact.
What is he basing that conclusion on? When was the poll conducted – last night at 2:00 am? Because people in Connecticut only saw the second of three debates last night at 7:00.
The poll was supposed to be released tomorrow. So he did some additional polling yesterday (again, before the 2nd debate) and then says the debates didn’t do anything.
Hugely unprofessional – and wrong.
John Casper @ 57
Yeah, I saw that. What I meant was I don’t know if they use robocalls or not.
Well, all I can say is if an “expert” on military and security affairs in an overstuffed leather armchair in a Washington think tank is thinking that the complete conflagration in Iraq “suggests” that people might be getting a little concerned, then wow, I guess we really have turned a corner.
Nina @ 25
Hey Nina
List 5 positive accomplishments of this administration please…..ahh,no you can’t get past 2 you say??…hhhmmmm S.T.F.U!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It’s worth remembering that on election eve in Connecticut in 1988, Lieberman was at least 10 points down in the polls.
We all know what happened the next day. Unfortunately…
lord vader @ 67
Great Catch!
drinksforall @ 23
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: always look at the proportions of the sample by party compared to the proportions in the population before you trust poll results. If those internals aren’t made available, just don’t trust it at all.
As pollsters have become more directly connected with MSM vendors (you know, the hilariously-named “liberal media”), a habit of overpolling Republicans has emerged. I seem to recall Quinnipiac doing this in ‘04; I know Rasmussen and Gallup did. Be careful.
one question, one suggestion:
Didn’t Bill Clinton say when he campaigned for Lieberman in the primary that he would be back to campaign for the winner of that primary in the general?
I think Lamont needs to bring up the Supreme Court. It’s tricky and it may be too late, ’cause Lieberman will just say that he hopes blahblahblah, but Joe “Habeus What?” Lieberman wanted to vote for Alito, and if this is his last term (hasn’t he said as much?) there will be no constraints on Joe “Torture is Good” Lieberman in the very probable case that Bush gets one more crack at putting Janice Rogers Brown on the USSC. I don’t know how to word that ad, but I think it’s an important one.
what will today’s GOP News Dump bring us?
Jim at 70 — yes, Bill Clinton did say that. And yes, it has been pointed out that it was said and noted byt a lot of us — and that we are still waiting for him to make good on his promises.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 72
Thanks. I didn’t want to make the accusation till I checked on the facts.
Yay — we got our Heifer International catalog in the mail today. :)
Christy at 14:
The polls say it. I’ve given $$ several times to Ned’s campaign, and I am trying to find out what happened.
Please don’t tell me that polls lie. I am a Ph.D. professor (management and marketing) with a doc-level knowledge of polling and statistics. He’s imploding.
OT, somewhat: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..d_troops_3
I didn’t see anyone else post this story, yesterday or today, sorry if I missed it.
Carol Voisin’s campaign has tied this theme directly to Greg (Where’s) Walden and his vote AGAINST a bill that would protect financially distressed military families and veterans from harsher aspects of the means test in a bankruptcy bill. [S. 1920 (Failed 170 to 198) - Roll Call Vote #9 (1/28/04)]
Now we see that the impact is so dire for 7000 troops that their debt makes them “high risk.” How does this help America?
Quinnipiac does not use robo calling. They have a lot of part-timers which include a lot of students. One of my son’s friends worked for them this summer.
They’re given a list of questions and phone numbers. According to Q’s website the poll was conducted from the 17th to the 19th. Here are the details of the poll if anyone is interested.
I still don’t think the debates impact has been felt at all even though they say it has.
For a Happy Birthday! to Redd and Christina:
A benjamin, contributed to Charlie Brown through Act Blue.
;-)
just got off from work. better late than never!
Glenn Greenwald has another fine post up at Unclaimed Territory:
When the Repugs start babbling total inarticulate nonsense as their “plan” for success (basically “wishing on a star), time for all us good citizens to shuffle these poor ol’ Repug souls off to the nearest retirement home.
I have a question too. Are there any political campaigns out there that do e-mail canvassing?
punaise @ 71
Well…in Who-ville they say
That the Grinch’s small heart
Grew three sizes that day!
Seriously…I doubt Kim is very “sorry,” except for the sanctions. There’s progress that can be made here, if the rest of the planet shuts out the Bush administration, which as usual only wants to play belligerent political games.
fahrender @ 78
:kiss kiss:
Oh, and another little birdie told me there’s another big gun in the works, but I’m not talking about the Clintons.
This is one we all know and absolutely love.
The terrible news coming out of Iraq today should be more than enough for the defeat of Lieberman who has staunchly supported the Bush policies that have led to it.
Kimster @ 75
The DSCC and Party leadership (Reid and Schumer is my bet) assured the Lamont campaign that they could persuade Lieberman to drop out and that Lamont should hold his fire so that Their Dear Friend Joe could drop out with his dignity. Tim Tagaris has promised that this story will be told and names will be named (after the elections, which I understand even if it wouldn’t be my choice). I don’t know if they were deliberately screwing Lamont (though that’s what I think) or if Lieberman was just stubborn and arrogant (though that’s a given). The fact that only two sitting Senators (Kerry and Kennedy) have actually been to CT supports the conspiracy theory (Barbara Boxer, who is not up for re-election, is ‘trying to find time in her schedule’, from what I hear).
The new commercial with Dodd suggests that the fifteenth time that Lieberman refused to support the Democratic candidates for Congress was the charm. Idiots.
I am a Ph.D. professor (management and marketing) with a doc-level knowledge of polling and statistics.
PhD doesn’t translate to omniscient. Also check your assumptions before trying to apply models.
Kimster @ 75
With those bona fides, you should be less credulous.
Kimster at 75 — All I know is what I’ve spoken to Matt Stoller about in terms of the QPoll methodology on this particular poll — and, from what Matt has told me from on the ground in CT, there are problems with this poll for a number of reasons. (I’m sure he’ll do a post on it when he gets time.) To be honest, this morning I’m a bit distracted, havign just learned that an uncle of mine passed away late yesterday, and I’ve been on and off the phone with various relatives for the last two hours trying to find out about funeral arrangements and listening to people sob. So, I’m sorry, but if you want a long exposition about the Lamont campaign from me at the moment — other than what I’ve already posted — then you and everyone else are just going to have to wait today, I’m afraid. Because my phone is ringing…again…
Kimster @ 75
Figgers can lie and liars can figger.
Those that can, do,
and those that can’t . . .
SharonW @ 77
Thanks. I think you’re right about the debate. As someone said, the only poll that counts is Nov. 7!
Perhaps the potential 2008 presidential candidates are thinking they’ll be better off if the Dems take the House but not the Senate to preclude having the whole ball of wax going to one party. They need to be reminded about the bird in the hand being better the one in the bush (no pun intended).
Jim @ 85
Would be interested in learning where/who your source was for comment that Boxer is trying to find time in her schedule (to help Ned?) that sounds completely bonkers – she invoked wrath and fury with so many of us within her constituency that frankly I find your comments odd at least and increduous at worst.
We really ought to ignore all of this poll crap. there is no way of really knowing what is going on from listening to bean counters. The rules we need to follow and keep on following for the next two weeks and three days are:
1. Keep working in your local area.
2. If you can, keep giving money to worthy candidates.
That is all. Don’t even waste your energy on the polls. Nothing matters now but working and giving. Repugs and Dinos will do anything they can to distract us. Don’t let them do it. Stay focused!
“Please don’t tell me that polls lie. I am a Ph.D. professor (management and marketing) with a doc-level knowledge of polling and statistics.”
Kimster, if you know so much, you tell us. The Q poll is the only one out, post first debate. If you find the Q poll persuasive, please educate us about its reliability. If you had bothered to read this thread, you’d see the questions we have.
Where are you a “professor” by the way?
Sorry for your loss Christy.
windje at 89 — coming from a family where my mother taught elementary school for more than 30 years, I have to take exception to the implcations in that last bit. While I appreciate everyone taking up for Jane and I here and there, the internal sniping today has got to stop. I am dealing with a death in the family and I do not have time at the moment to keep stepping into the middle of personal crossfire.
Please, for god’s sakes people, get along today, while I try to get my grandmother to stop crying on my phone. Thanks.
(That came out a little harsh. Sorry.)
punaise @ 71
Fridays are the days I have to put my three barrels by the road for pickup (recyclables, compostables, and other trash), so I’m used to dumping the trash on Fridays. For me, it’s Friday at 5 AM; for DC trash collectors, it’s apparently 5 PM.
I’m waiting for a DC-based outfit to start up a Friday at Five website to cover the stuff that gets dumped at the end of each week.
If done well, it could really change the dynamics of the Sunday morning shows. If something gets noticed on Friday night and pushed on Saturday, the talking heads will have to prep themselves without staff on Saturday evening just to be ready.
Isn’t that a nice thought? If they’re going to dump crap on Friday afternoon, it’s only fitting to see their weekends ruined as they prepare to explain themselves.
Condolences Christy.
newspaperbrat
A poster at Kos took me to task for saying Kerry was the only sitting Senator who had been to CT. S/He pointed out Kennedy, Clark, Edwards (some people don’t read too carefully….)
This same person said that Senator Boxer is ‘trying to find time in her schedule’ (the Senate has adjourned and she is not campaigning for herself). I am a tad bit skeptical. (Also, to be blunt, how big a name is she outside of CA?).
I’m glad to hear about that unnamed and beloved big gun. I hope it’s Feingold, ’cause if it’s Gore I might just drop dead from joy and early voting doesn’t start till Monday.
Back, between vacuuming and washing floors…
Thought you netroots folks needed a boost; check out this article at USAToday:
Bloggers are a tough crowd when it comes to IE7
Believe me, bloggers are HAMMERING Fortune 1000 companies; they feel it intensely. And if the Fortune 1000 feel it, you can bet your buns that certain Senators and pollsters do too.
Keep at it, keep hammering away, work on winning. Do not let the concern trolls get to you; remember that some of the folks who are naysayers are paid to do so. There will be money out there spent on this kind of disinfo because there is too much at stake.
Now back to work here…got to figure out how to make a Funfetti birthday cake appear out of thin air.
I am sorry for your loss Christy.
Millineryman @ 95
I’ll second that
Like Christy said . .. . if you live in CT or in a nearby state, join the canvassing party on Sat. Nedlamont.com has the times and the places and the signups in the events section. Oh heck, I’m planning to do it.
Kimster @ 75. It’s not that bad. Actually I have been talking to various persons of the political spectrum, including self-described Republicans, & in some unlikely places, who are actually *more* receptive to the idea of voting for Ned than before the primary.
I think the poll probably reflects the volatility of voters at this point (wild mood swings ). Many people are much more undecided and a poll right now is like picking straws–any straw if you have too– for some voters. it’s a little crazy, so please come to CT if you can.
Condolences, Christy, to you and your family (who are, after all, our extended family).
Just catching up on a drive by while my dial up gently beeps this you tube. Yea Senator Dodd, in advance! Also yea Nate!
I have a new (to me) word for a worried negative stream of comments on a Ned thread. Campliagn. It would also apply to a post like the recent one by Arianna. I have camplaigned and pledge to put a sock in it as much as possible through election day! It’s past time for as much postive energy as possible!
On polls, with the use of polls as news (15 to 60 seconds air/ink time) and hours of follow up punditry air/ink time. We just have another example of many in media who do a poor job laying out a the basis for reporting. Failure to explain polls – date, actual questions asked, how many and where polled, who hired the pollster, etc. The word poll is used a loosely as the word blog. fwiw
((((egregious)))) I was getting pretty dizzy reading along with the camplaigners last night when your realty check popped up. One last thanks for that nudge, it turned my evening around for the better. *g*
Kimster @ 75
Really, where do you teach?
I also know polling and statistics and I can assure you that Lamont is not imploding.
Nice try
o/t but worth it.
great article by kevin tillman, pat tillman’s brother on truthdig…..
http://www.truthdig.com/report….._birthday/
Christy Hardin Smith @ 96
Awww, Christy, I’m so sorry for your loss. Please go attend to your family. The blog’s behavior should not be your biggest concern right now.
punaise @ 71
My favorite friday question!
According to Q’s website the poll was conducted from the 17th to the 19th. Here are the details of the poll if anyone is interested.
——————-
The 2nd debate did not enough play to CT audiences until last night, the 19th, at 7:00 pm.
Ridiculous.
Schlesinger’s internal polls have him polling at 20% – which is high but more realistic than the Q poll
Eureka Springs, AR @ 109
One word: Weller.
Christy, how awful. I’m sorry for your loss.
Peace, Christy
Christy, my condolences to you and your family.
Namaste, Christy. Take good care of your family.
BTW, Nina at 25 from the previous thread, who upset many with her “I told ya so” comment, has never commented here before that I can find. Some of the other mean-spirited comments about Lamont v. Lieberman from previous threads appear to be directed at Jane and probably come from Lieberfools who know her from the primary. Pay no attention to the
menboys behind the protective curtain.Is there an emoticon for “Nyah nyah nyah”?
Rayne I’d forgotten about the paid commenter jobs in the GOP. Wow, if I could get paid for all the time I spend online….
OT – the bootleg subtitled version of Mistress Choker Sherwood’s apologia. (original link via salon.com)
Pachacutec @ 33
Absolutely.
But is FDL about political discussion or only about political cheerleading? Why are people who bring up valid questions about the state of this contest as evidenced in polls trashed as “trolls?”
How does a campaign know if it is effective or not? The primary indicator is polls. The FDL community, me included, has given tens of thousands of dollars to the Lamont campaign. If polls show a trailing campaign not moving the polls, I think supporters have a right to wonder if the battle is being waged intelligently, if opportunities are being capitalized on, if adjustments are being made as needed. I don’t know the answer, but I would love to see it discussed seriously here. Maybe it’s not possible to have that discussion without devolving into second-guessing, nitpicking, and defeatism.
In my own little electoral microcosm phone banking and door-to-door canvassing for Eric Massa (NY-29), I speak to a minority of the contacts I attempt, and a majority of those are polite and friendly, but don’t really give away their leanings. So how the hell do I know if my guy is winning or losing? I just have to take it on faith that my efforts are statistically effective. A couple of days ago, when new polling showed Eric up 52-40, compared to previously down 39-43, the neighbors must have wondered what all that whooping and hollering was. Yet it still doesn’t match what I sense from my contacts, so I’m wary, and still fighting as hard.
So Connecticut people, don’t give up. It sounds like your experience is the opposite of mine, and you are seeing MORE support than the polls tell you. All I’m saying is that it shouldn’t be apostasy to question the uber campaign, which has to set the table for your efforts on the ground game.
Christy @ 96
Sorry about your uncle, and it’s going to be a really busy week, I know. We’re all on edge, I think.
Kimster, tfitznc, et al:
If the naysayers expect happy receptions here, maybe they should dig up their own comments, and look at them again: if all they have to say is ‘doom and gloom’, they shouldn’t expect people to greet them with flowers and chocolate.
Matt Stoller on the latest Q poll
EPU’d on previous thread, but relevant:
Adie @ 97
Condolences to Christy.
dab from CT @ 110
Dab, I do think this means canvassing on Saturday, don’t you think? I do get the sense of a certain volatility, but like I said even some self-described Republicans are unsure of who they will vote for and are pretty receptive to phone calls from the Lamont campaign. I kid you not.
Eureka Springs, AR @
109
Breaking news banner at MSNBC.com says Bush will “confer with his Generals about change of tactics in Iraq.”
Stay the Corpse not selling well at all less than 3 weeks prior to election day, ‘eh?
_
let’s get something straight. the only reason joe is “ahead in the polls” is because REPUBLICAN voters are supporting him. there really isn’t much ned can do about that. now, there are a couple of questions here. will those republican voters even go to the polls to vote for someone who isn’t a republican and if/when these voters are in the booth with their ballots will they really skip over the guy with the R next to his name (schlesinger) and go all the way to the bottom to find joe. makes you go hmmmmm.
BobbyG @ 122
Adapt to win! Adapt to win! AWWWWWWK!
Stoller is on fire lately.
His point about Dodd is one I’ve been wondering about: People keep harping on the need for Lieberman’s experience and seniority (ask them what good that has done, btw, and mostly you get crickets, with the occasional “New London Submarine base!!”) when he’s the Junior Senator, fercryinoutloud!
drinksforall @ 66
Well its been about 30 minutes now and “Nina” has yet to submit a single accomplishment. I guess shes (he)a paid troll as others on this fine site have alluded to.
Has anyone else found the deafening silence from the Bully Pulpit this week curious to say the least? I know CheneyBush have been out there on the campaign trail bashing us terr’rist sympathizers with those few immoral incumbents who will be seen with the Warmongers, yet it seems awfully quiet for them 18 days before Judgment Day. We know they haven’t thrown in the towel. Makes one wonder what shoe is gonna drop next.
tfitznc’s comments, IMHO, have not, in aggregate, approached the concern troll label.
I searched his (hers?) past comments and found nothing outrageous, just, as he described, a realist with his own opinions.
Folks, I know it’s been a long time, maybe 25 years now, that we’ve not been able to discuss politics with people of other minds without it degenerating into shouting, screaming and name calling.
This is the Right’s game, not ours. We have plenty of room for other opinions. Of course, we’re right, all the time, but we don’t need to rub it in.
I hope he/she comes back
EvilDrPuma @ 104
Oh my, Hugs to Christy!
Christy,
I’m so sorry for your loss
And I’m sorry if I’ve added to your workload this morning. I just can’t stand the “I told you so” gloating.
Anyway, is there another moderator who can take over the blog while you deal with your family emergency? You should be devoting 100% of your attention to your family right now.
(Passing ’round the peace pipe)
‘ere! :)
kristinejoy @ 131
Well, it’s a little early here in California, but…OK.
‘ere.
There’s a fundraiser in NYC for Ned this weekend. I intend to drink lots of champagne, throw caution to the wind and give his campaign a much bigger check than I really should!
…any FDLrs going?
Mommybrain:
Is there an emoticon for “Nyah nyah nyah”?
:~P
SharonW @
83
If this new big gun is a Democrat, I don’t think it’s going to help at this point. Ned needs to actively change minds, not just solidify the base he already has. Democratic love doesn’t work on Independents, and certainly not on Republicans.
Ned has GOT to go negative. (Can we get Bush to fundraise for Joe? That might help.)
Ooooh… Somebody say ‘ere?
:-)
mui @ 121
Yep Miu – absolutely. I’m calling this afternoon and canvassing this Saturday. Ned will be at Western CT State U on Saturday afternoon.
(By the way, how many college students has Q poll (or any of the others) been polling. Because there is a lot of college support for Ned)
ear
dab from CT @ 110
Considering that at the end of each shift the pollsters work they turn in their questionnaires, there are a lot of those polled who knew nothing of the debate yet.
And, yes, I truly think Schlesinger will make a far better showing in the polls next time around. I just love the fact that he’s now getting face-time on local news coverage of the race. The reporters wouldn’t even bother with him before which completely tied his hands considering he had no campaign funds either. That’s all changed now.
And remember, he’s just taking back his voters from Lieberman. ;)
oxide @ 135
Ned has been negative.
Don’t forget – there are more Unaffiliated than either Dems or Republicans in CT – and they are still very fluid.
Also – there are still 35% of misguided Dems voting for Lieberman – they are persuadable.
It takes Repubs leaving Lieberman and voting for Schlesinger – and some Dems & Unaffiliated leaving Lieberman for Lamont. Then Ned wins
RagingGurrl @ 133
I would like to go!!! When and where is it? Thanks!
op99, I have terrific respect for your comments.
In this case, however, this thread and the previous one, I think you are mistaking “legitimate questioning” for surrender monkeys.
scarecrow October 19th, 2006 at 7:21 pm
“Legitimate questioning” imo requires familiarirty with the details. All I see today from commenters whose handles I don’t recognize is, jumping on the bandwagon of the latest plainly pro-Joe poll and then in some cases proclaiming victory for Lieberman4Lieberman.
Now if these commenters want to roll up their sleeves and offer constructive criticism, great. All I have read so far from them is that Ned has to get more negative.
scarecrow says they’re wrong. scarecrow went to CT, to work for Ned. If someone has really strong evidence that Ned hasn’t been negative enough, I want to see it. That’s what it’s going to take to lower my trust of what scarecrow reported. In addition to scarecrow, CTBob, who I also hold in high esteem is saying the same thing. Matt Stoller is saying the same thing.
Kimster @
75
An aside and no offense intended, but there’s no shortage of Ph.D.s or professors around the FDL comments section. Or hard won life experience (which usually counts for a whole lot more.)
IMO, people who really know their stuff never find it necessary to wave their diplomas about. It usually comes over very clearly from what they are saying.
Too early for “ere in Oregon, gotta go to work, now if it was Saturday… :)
Sorry Christy for your loss. Take care of the family and leave this place to those you trust.
oxide: “If this new big gun is a Democrat, I don’t think it’s going to help at this point. Ned needs to actively change minds, not just solidify the base he already has. Democratic love doesn’t work on Independents, and certainly not on Republicans.”
I don’t think that’s true. A Feingold or Gore will work on all those D’s who are still thinking Joe is one of them. And if the Indies in CT are anything like this Indie then a big name Dem could also be a deciding factor for them. I think Stoller’s piece is right on, and people want to know what they’re getting in place of Joe. Dodd helps in that respect, thus so would a big name Dem. I think this race is going to surprise the naysayers.
Mommybrain @ 132
we’ve got a NO SMOKING (any public places) ban on the ballot in OH but… ‘ere! ;->
Tortoise @ 143
Well, he is in marketing.
Canvassing folks! Blue Army, CT has the *best* apple cider this time of the year (no offense to upstate NY). The foliage is great! &tc.
http://nedlamont.com/events
Dab@137. I used to know a number of people who did this part-time gig at Quinnipiac, and I am trying to remember what they told me. It’s a memory jog.
John Casper @ 142
I agree 100%. And I’ve been in CT a lot. Ned is going to win.
So very sorry for your loss, Christy!
We will be good. Please take care of family.
Mommybrain @ 132
Our little town recently made the LA Times with it’s little peace initiative on the ballot next month. Peace, ‘ere.
Beautifully stated.
Dr. Bong @
136
Dr.Bong, thanks for the :~p
‘ere.
Last comment. If you read Schwartz’s summary of the Q poll – it was a love letter to Lieberman. The things he stated are absolutely not supported by the data – he way overstated.
1) He said that the debates had no impact – even though most polling was done before CT residents had seen both debates
2) He said that any Republican shift was from Lamont to Schlesinger not Lieberman to Schlesinger. That’s absolute BS. Schelsinger appeals to the wingnuts who want to bomb Iran and keep immigrant children from getting public education. Don’t think those folks ever supported Ned – do you?
3) He said that everyone has made up their minds and there were no undecideds. Are you kidding me? Since when in recent elections have there been no undecideds? Lieberman is so worried about his Republican support that he has asked Sue Collins to campaign with him – and she is
4) I really question the methodology used – did they switch the order of choices for the question responses, etc.
Christy, I’m also sorry for your loss and my condolences go out to your family. Be strong.
John Casper @ 98
John Casper @ 98
dab from CT @ 140
What if the “big gun” is the very Honorable Al Gore – would that not electrify Conneticut folks? I’m just saying the very thought of this great man emerging to help Ned beat his former running mate would knock my socks off.
Too early? Do I need an intervention?
Tortoise 143
707!
oops! i promised to be good. *blush*
still…. DANG! That felt good! thanx T
If the Dems didn’t foolishly support illegal immigration then NO ONE WOULD HAVE TO GET OFF THEIR BUTTS TO HELP. The House AND Senate would be a cakewalk.
To those of you that have supported illegal immigration so far, may I just say, “Thanks alot, idiot”.
Mommybrain @ 132
heyyy man, that’s good shit….
e.c. @ 123
That’s why Lieberman is so afraid of Schlesinger and why the analysis of the Q poll was so outrageous. Because Schlesinger will appeal to the type of Republican who will actually make the effort to vote
Since Christy’s got more than plenty on her plate today, I’ll say it, even tho I haven’t the foggiest notion how to fix things…
Careful gang. Don’t “break the margins” while mom’s busy.
u know the rools. more than 3 nested, &… I think we’re pushin’ it, no?
Also, regarding polls…
I remember people saying during Kerry’s run that polling at that time didn’t include calls to cell phone numbers. For many people today, especially younger voters, their cell phone is their primary phone so these voices, probably Ned votes, are not being heard in these polls.
concern polls
flautus, do you have a link?
I just googled on Democrats supporting illegal immigration, I couldn’t find any.
kristinejoy @
156
Nah. Just some company. I read a study recently from some other country (of course) which seemed to indicate that regular peace pipe use actually causes brain cell regeneration! Now, if only I could remember where I read it… ;-)
it would be extra nice if it WERE Al Gore who is the Big Gun… he showed up in a Yes on Prop 87 commercial here in CA, and suddenly it seems we all went from confusion to clarity in 30 seconds… Gore is a sight for sore eyes…
new thread – To Heroes, Past and Present
Adie @ 161
Oh Adie thanks – am awfully embarrassed for my blunder – apologies to all for my nesting nightmare up-thread.
another intrusion by yers truly – must have the bit in my teeth today, but before someone else yanks on my reins…
don’t feed the trolls either, gang.
hey, this is fun playing grownup….
Mad Dogs @ 79
I agree. Various politicians including some Democrats have put forward this idea in the past and it was totally discredited then. It says a lot just how bankrupt the Republicans are that one of their supposedly “sane” politicians is still pushing this. It gets back to one of my arguments that you are unlikely to solve a problem if you don’t understand it. McCain clearly doesn’t.
It’s not just that we don’t and never did have an extra 100,000 troops to send. It’s that at this point what would they be used for. The situation has evolved (or devolved) a lot since 2003 when such a strategy might have made a difference. Although I have to say that given the lack and/or poor quality of the planning with everything associated with Iraq and this Administration, it probably wouldn’t have.
What McCain would like to do is refight the Second Gulf War and this time get it right, admittedly with troops that don’t exist. It’s kooky. Iraq is in the middle of a civil war and tottering on the edge of failed statehood. McCain obviously can’t deal with the past reality of a failed invasion and occupation. How can he address where Iraq is today and what we need to be doing? He’s like one of those guys who’s still refighting Gettysburg and is about as relevant.
Fresh thread, gang. This one was getting a bit long. And apologies up front to the dial up crown for all the YouTubes this morning — it’s been that sort of day here.
I belive I heard an “Al Gore get thee to Connecticut and Ned Lamont tout suite to help with the pollution problem caused by your ex-Dem who went sideways.”
Condolences to Christy and her family.
…
Joe must have let his staff go early for a playdate with us today.
It’s great that they have a dog in the hunt, isn’t it?
;>)
Sally 172
Oooohh! Dare we hope?! TERRIFIC!
Christy,
So sorry for your loss, please take all the time you need today.
We’ll behave.
Darkblack, I loved the rose you sent to Christy and Siun this week.
Thanks for everything.
Little thought experiment…how much credibility would you all assign to polls that had Ned up by 17 points – or 10 points or 7 points – and would you be quite so quick to dismiss them?
just sayin’
I get that you all are looking for the silver lining, and I hope it’s there, too, but whether or not the numbers are valid does not change the fact that these kinds of numbers exert a psychological effect on voters, and affect momentum and trends.
dab from CT @
160
Yawn. The Q-poll was a big non-story to me. It’s already irrelevant. Joe got the crap stomped out of him in two debates. Give it a week to sink in.
And the Repubs “Islamofascists” and “stay the course” soundbites seem to be tanking. “Adapt to win” went nowhere. (And sounded too much like Darwin for the GOP’s base.) I’m still hoping they pull out all the stops and declare war on “IslamoCommunistNazis”. They could also try “IslamoLiberals”. Or if they’re really desperate, “IslamoAthiests”, but I don’t think they’ll get far with that one.
Anne @ 177
actually, there was a Q poll two or three days before the primary that had Lamont up fifteen over Lieberman, and everybody said “that’s a lot of fun, but no way.” No one is saying that Lamont is ahead, we’re saying it isn’t as bad as it looks, much less over, two or three weeks ahead of the election.
Hugh, loved your whole comment, as per usual; really got a kick out of your spot on reference to refighting Gettysburg.
I wouldn’t be surprised if quite a few fundraisers for Ned are being held during the next few weeks – it’s an important race for Democrats to win!
I think the one I’m going to is at a very kind person’s apt. Boy, I’d like to be able to hold a Ned Lamont fundraiser – it would be a dance party, though – donation at door to help shuffle Leiberman off the political dance floor…
John Casper, thank you for your thoughtful comment at 142. I’m not saying that we aren’t seeing our fair share of hit and run commenters offering no content. But there are also commenters of substance worried about what available evidence says about Ned’s chances – call them realists, call them pessimists (just don’t call them late to dinner). I think those commenters being savaged is not helpful to the community. If Ned loses (which I fervently hope he doesn’t), do you want to see the “pessimists” come back and say, Nyah, nyah, I told you so?” Of course not. More likely is they abandon commenting because of their ill-treatment, which would be a real shame, IMO.
Christy,
I’m very sorry about your uncle. I raised the question about Ned’s campaign because all of the blogs I’ve seen that are pro-Ned (several are CT-based) don’t seem to have shed much light on what’s gone wrong. Neither has the news media from what I can tell.
Another question: why is it that when someone raises a question that questions the Ned’s-on-a-roll flow, they get trashed? Name your academic credentials and there’s the old ‘those who don’t do…’ refrain. Name the school I teach at, etc., etc. Oh please, enough already.
For those taking pot shots, stop shooting the messenger because you don’t like the question. Disagree with the question, fine. But stop the personal slice and dice.
“Pot shots” he he that’s funny, dude.
Christy Hardin Smith @
96
I’m sorry for your loss, and for annoying you. It wasn’t the intent.
The intent was that I just don’t like people who announce they are college professors with PhD’s telling me to park my brain, particularly when its an analysis of a poll that the writer couldn’t possibly be familiar enough with to make an authoritative comment.
I have no doubt your Mom wouldn’t have done that.
“Pot shots”
I resemble that remark!
:-)
Pot Shots, Part Deux!
Damn, now I’m too paranoid to go to the next thread.
Mommybrain @
176
De nada, M. :)
op99 @
182
Op99, several regulars here got the same treatment when they started. They didn’t stop…They persevered and continued to contribute.
Anyone who cuts and runs over some harsh language directed their way might need to check that their nethers aren’t made of candy.
op99 & Kimster,
No one is objecting to a discussion of the dynamics of the race – what the Lamont campaign is or is not doing wrong, etc.
I think what gets a negative reaction are people coming here and saying – 1) stick a fork in him he’s done, 2) the campaign is imploding, 3) withdraw efforts from CT and move on to other states, etc.
There are three weeks to the election. No one hasn’t agreed that Ned has an uphill battle and his campaign is behind. However, we are three weeks out from an election, the momentum is building, Ned has two good debates and a third one to come, great ads now playing etc, Dodd is very much onboard, etc.
Kimster – someone posted the totality of polling results for Ned. There are clearly some outliers. As a statistician and pollster you, of course, understand that state races are hard to accurately poll and this is a particularly bizarre campaign.
op99 – you were tearing into people the other night because of a comment about Condi. And you don’t understand why people have a heated discussion about a candidate they have supported for five months? No one has been bashing anyone the way people were bashed the other night. Just sayin
DB, I’m not talking about newbies, I’m talking about, oh … me, for example.
P.S. I esteem your contributions here, both artistic and verbal.
Kimster, don’t bullshit behind just “asking questions.” You’re question was locked and loaded to seriously injure Ned’s campaign.
Then you backed it up with your academic credentials. You opened the door, but now you’re whining to Christy.
We don’t know your gender, are you the only management and marketing professor at your University?
Kimster, you know so much about polling, you tell us why you think Ned’s campaing is “imploding.”
Just don’t say Ned hasn’t been negative enough. We’ve got people in CT who say that isn’t it. I’ll check back for your response.
op99 @ 191
But see, Op, you came under heavy fire last night over Rice…and here you are today. Therefore, non-candied nethers.
When I started on this ‘internet thing’…seems like a couple of months ago…probably was ;>) …the rule du jour was to ‘look before you leap’ – Check out a site, what are the contributors saying, what’s their tolerance level for input running the gamut from differing opinions to contrarianism, and so forth. Then cast those pearls and hope the hogs don’t eat you.
I don’t expect that everyone that posts here is going to agree on anything but that the Bush administration is a collection of sketchy operators – If they don’t agree to that premise, you know they walked in the wrong door. It would be like Chomsky posting at RedState.
Thank you for your compliment. I’m just trying to provide a little relief from the heavy business, with an occasional elbow strike.
;>)
kristinejoy @
188
slow diaphragmatic breathing may help….
darkblack @ 193
DB, not only does Op not have candy nethers, she has (virtual) balls of steel. But all I can do is tell you that I lurked at FDL for months before I first ventured a comment, and I was encouraged to continue because a number of the “regulars” immediately welcomed me. Maybe, given the huge growth of FDL, it’s just not possible to continue that kind of attitude toward newbies, but still, I miss it. And last time I looked, my nethers weren’t candied either. :>)
SharonW @
83
Maybe Big Al? Ooooh… hope, hope!
kristinejoy @ 184
Kristinejoy, you are seriously giggling. Here, have a date square.
HotFlash @ 197
Crap. I just ate all my kids’ snacks. Little empty wrappers of shame…
Darkblack, I have no problem with “taking fire.” But when a regular contributor threatens me with … something?, throws a temper tantrum, calls my piehole fractious and fucking, and a moderator calls me a bitch, over a valid opinion with which many agreed … sorry, but I remember when we had a higher level of discourse here.
dab from CT, I want to address your comment, I’ll leave it on this dead thread, but I can’t get to it for a few hours.
kristinejoy @ 198
Admit it, you enjoyed doing it….
(I’ve been known to eat
poptartstoaster pastries on birdwatching walks. Empty Calories Can Be Fun!)BarbaraB @
195
I think it is, BarbaraB…There will always be those who ’shoot the wounded’ owing to their individual bias on a given topic, and those who offer a friendly hand to a stranger who differs.
People sharing opinions that they are passionate about will always have its bumps, but if one has the strength of their convictions then they will prevail – in life, if not a chat board.
As to newbies…Some lack the ‘bush sense’ needed to discourse highly charged topics – Setting themselves up for “Auslander, you’re telling me I’m full of sh*t? YOU DIE!” – Dropping the big contra shoe as a particular approach to a conversational gambit leaves something to be desired in terms of collegial response.
The same could be said of regulars…Some don’t play nice in the Samurai Teahouse, even though everyone there has swords also. Call it a tactical error, at minimum.
op99 @ 199
I must confess, I believe that phrase was ’stolen’ from me… ;>)
As for the ‘higher level of discourse’…Well, there is no remedy but to bring it back on an individual level.
Crap. I just ate all my kids’ snacks. Little empty wrappers of shame…
Mmmmmmm… Twinkies!
:-)
P J Evans @ 200
Yeah, man, but they’re old enough to count now. Way older. I end up saying “I buy the food, damnit, I can eat some of it, too!”
Mommybrain @ 128
tfitznc
:-)
darkblack @ 201
And when the ad hominem attacks come from management?
Linda R – You live in California, so you can be forgiven for not understanding Connecticut politics. I live here, so let me explain it to you.
Connecticut voters are 22% Republicans, 33% Democrats and 45% Independents. You can’t win an election in Connecticut without strong support from the Independents. By and large they are non-partisan. They don’t really care about partisan issues. The very thing that drives Democratic partisans crazy about Lieberman – that he “steps on” the Democratic Party message – is something that the Independents do not care about at all. (Note that McCain drives Republican partisans crazy for the same reason.)
Now let’s look at the primary. Only about 15% of the registered voters in the state voted in the Democratic primary in August. Lamont won slightly over 1/2 of the vote. So about 8% of the registered voters in Connecticut actually voted for Lamont in August. The reason he’s losing so badly now is that he never broadened his appeal beyond that small core, very liberal, Democratic base. In Connecticut, that just doesn’t work. You have to appeal to the Independents, and like I said, they are non-partisan.
Bottom line: Lieberman will win by 10 points or more. We like our mavericks, our independents here. We had Weicker for a while. Now we have Lieberman. Dodd is a bit of an exception because he is so hyper-partisan. Lamont (a/k/a “Richie Rich”) will soon be forgotten, another victim of the Kossacks.
DB @ 201 — Thank you. You continue to be one of the treasures of the Lake. And I’m not just saying that because I agree with you (or maybe I am.) :>)
DBL, so Dodd is “hyper-partisan.”
DBL, do you understand what “the writ” of habeus corpus is?
It received “bi-partisan” support to destroy the Bill or Rights.
$267,000,000/DAY for Iraq, that’s “bi-partisan,” so I guess you figure it’s “pretty good.”
Thanks to Joe, Alito had “bi-partisan” support too.
DBL, prior to 1865, ethnic based slavery in the U.S. had very strong “bi-partisan” support too. We lost it, because of those “hyper-partisan” abolitionists.
If you want to understand Lieberman4Lieberman’s idea of “bi-partisan,” read Matt Stoller’s latest.
if this thread is still spinning: John Casper–a Valentine. thanks.
Mr. Casper – You may be right, but that’s why Lieberman is going to win and Lamont is going to lose. Connecticut is just not a partisan Democratic state.
DBL – you are so very wrong. 30,000 new voters registered to vote for Lamont. We had a 43% turn out in the election – highest ever.
Don’t know where you get your stats but they are incredibly inaccurate.
And Lieberman is no maverick. Do not even count him in the same category as Weicker. Lieberman will say anything and do anything to stay in office. He stands for nothing. Why don’t you take a gander at who is funding this run as an “Independent” – Bechtel, pharm industry, etc.
And he most certainly will not win by 10%.
It will be close but Lamont will win.
Question – have you been to Connecticut? Just curious.
threedogday @ 204
Yet another Liebertroll. They are out in force today.
Schwartz is a hack and his “conclusions” are total BS. Residents didn’t even see the 2nd debate when the results had been calculated. The first debate occurred in the middle of the day, was local, and was not publicized in advance.
Schwartz has no basis upon which to make that declaration. His own stats don’t support it.
Lieberman is DESPERATE not to have Schlesinger take away his Republican support.
The Hartford Courant had Lamont down 7. Zogby has him down 7.
The Q-Poll had Lieberman down by 15 before the primary. He lost by 4.
The Q-Poll is a joke
dab – all of this could be complete and utter fabrication, but knowing the truth is not always enough to counter the results the numbers may be generating.
As an example, I give you: two Bush presidencies and the war in Iraq. I give you the numbers of people who still think Saddam had something to do with the 9/11 attacks.
On occasion after occasion, Bush and Cheney and many others have spoken outright lies, but they morphed into truth for a lot of people because they kept repeating them over and over again.
Sad to say that the news of these poll numbers is what people will remember, and virtually no one will bother to look into the veracity or credibility of those numbers.
It most certainly is not fair, but Ned is going to have his work cut out for him if he expects to win.
dab from CT @ 190
The only person I “tore into” was Rayne and I apologized for that on the same thread. Other than that, my fervor was not against “other people” but against the practice of publishing unsubstantiated gossip and innuendo. IMO that is ethically wrong, and I believe it hurts our political cause to stoop to Rovian tactics. And that is not like an argument over whether Lamont does or does not appeal to unaffiliateds, it is an argument over fundamental values. If you look through that thread, I think you will see that the single time I strayed from defending my ideas was a gratuitous slap at Rayne, which upon reflection I was ashamed of and apologized for. While you’re at it, tally up the ad hominem attacks against me – there are quite a few. So when you say “No one has been bashing anyone the way people were bashed the other night,” please refer to said tally.
Circling back to the state of discussions about the Lamont campaign on FDL: even if it’s not exactly PC to say it on FDL, any fool can see the polls and can’t be happy about them. Whatever anybody says on FDL comments will have no impact whatsoever on how the Lamont organization runs it’s campaign, and no effect on how anyone votes – if they’re reading FDL, they’re already voting for Ned.
I think your position is, if we bring up the elephant in the room, that may depress the turnout of volunteers, voters, and campaign contributions, and thus turn bad polls into a self fulfilling prophecy. My position is, lefty blog readers aren’t stupid, and will make their own inferences about the polls with or without our help. It’s not in my constitution to stick my head in the sand about bad news, and why I’m on FDL in the first place is to draw on the insights and expertise of my political brethren and sistren.
dab, I think there is room on the same blog for you to rah-rah and me to kvetch. After all, when we get away from our computers, aren’t we both volunteering on campaigns, contributing to campaigns, and being centers of influence and information for the politically inactive? We’re on the same side.
dab from CT @ 213
You can derive the same thing from your numbers, dab. 33% Dems x 43% turnout x 52% for Ned equals 7.4%.
S/he said s/he lives there.
op99 @
207
Management is Jane and Christie, Op99.
Everyone else from the front-pager to the hit-and-run poster is a contributor, IMO.
I’m inferring (accurately, I hope) from your choice of words that you still have issues with TRex regarding how you were ’spoken’ to.
As I am only a contributor, alas, there is little I can do for you but lend a sympathetic eye or one’s own words (which, if memory serves, I did at the time).
I concur or disagree with the opinions of others as I see fit, and feel that this individual right is paramount – as is the right of the blog owner to set tone and policy.
Thus, what blog policies are set or decorums enforced or ignored is not within my purview (save that I reserve the right to ‘vote with my feet’), and I would opine that your issue is a personal one requiring discussion with the individual responsible…TRex.
If the perception that one’s needs are not being met continues, or spreads to other members of the community through repeated actions and all other attempts at remedies fail…Then one can ‘vote with one’s feet’ as well, and rightly so if subjective values are not being honored.
Ya got that right, DB. Looks like the election’s well underway, if you check the sitemeter.
I don’t “need” an apology from a three-year-old after he’s thrown a tantrum. The 3YO might “need” to give one as a step in his character development, but if I’m not his mommy, that’s not no nevermind of mine.
I’m in pretty close agreement with you overall, except “management” consists of only one, by the way you reckon it. And I did indeed take note of your input on that thread. You can read a commenter for months without necessarily “knowing” them. I got to know a lot of people that night, and may I say I’m mighty pleased to know you.
To John Casper at 192 and op99:
Let me try again. Why has Ned’s campaign imploded.
The worst crime that an academic researcher can commit is to fudge data. Profs are under intense pressure to publish, and so some, hopefully only a few, drop a few subjects from their research sample usually not to change the results of a study they may have spent a year or two working on, but so that the results reach that magical standard of statistical significance (p value of .05 or less). That’s the worst crime you can commit in academic research, tantamount to an MD committing malpractice that kills a patient. Your career is dead, no, you are dead.
Within the top tier of polling whether it be political polling or consumer polling, it’s the same thing. The act is just as heinous – even the suspicion that you are fudging data kills you professionally, and if you are the founder of your firm, kills your business permanently. Among the top tier of polling firms, this is law.
Which goes to the question of whether Quinnipac is doctoring data because of an intense dislike of Ned Lamont. Bull hockey. Polling firms live by the accuracy of their data. Their sampling models must be top notch. If not, people go someplace else.
Quinnipac did not fudge data. They may have a crappy sampling model, but I doubt that. Their reputation is too strong. And it is hard to imagine any pollster risking a hard-won reputation because of dislike for one candidate. Polling is a business that makes money based on accuracy and validity. Emotions have no place in it.
Looking at the October polls, let’s throw out the top two outliers (one with holy Joe up by 20, the other by 17). Ned’s average from the four remaining polls is 9.5 behind.
Can you show me another race where a Repub candidate is about 10 points behind at this point that is not already in the Dem win column? Notice how DeWine is behaving lately? He’s about 10 down. How about Burns’ behavior in Montana, you know the guy who said this week that Bush has a plan for Iraq but they’re keeping it secret from his opponent, Jon Tester? He’s about 10 behind.
On another point, after being trashed earlier today for daring to bring up the idea that Ned’s campaign is in deep trouble, I agree with op99. Personally attacking people who disagree with you is no way to build a community that values free speech of every kind. But it’s a great way to build a clique, the kind we all saw in high school.
For a balanced discussion of the Ned – holy Joe campaign, go to myDD.com where commenters have presented both sides, and no one got personally sliced and diced.
And John, what the heck does my gender have to do with anything?
Kimster, thanks for your response.
I raised the issue of gender, because you can disclose the institution you work at without revealing your identity. You volunteered your academic credentials. Did you think we werre just going to take your word for it? Perhaps you have a Ph.D.? Based on what I’ve read so far, it sounds to me as though were passed over for tenure. What matters here is the quality of your comments.
Kimster, the rest of the day’s threads, particularly Cujo’s analysis imo last night identify the serious problems that exist with the Q poll number. Ned’s down, but he’s not down by 17.
Kimster, the fact that you responded to my comments suggests you find value in the FDL community. That’s great, we need all the help we can get. Ignoring the very specific questions I raised, however, doesn’t buy you much credibility with me.
Kimster, this is a KILLSHOT aimed right at Ned’s campaign.
You’re plenty smart enough to know the damage this kind of comment, particularly backed up by your claims of academic credentials, and its ilk can do to ANY campaign. That’s why so many of us responded so vigorously. We weren’t attacking you so much as defending Ned’s chances of winning.
Kimster, the Q poll is the first poll released since the debates, the Foley scandal, and other massive negative polling data for the National GOP. Yet, the Q poll’s TREND is for Joe, the Republican. As I am sure you are well aware, that’s as devastating as the double digit outlier.
Based on Cujo’s and pollster.com’s analysis, Ned’s probably down about 7.5 with three weeks to go. Wrt why is Ned behind, please read the Matt Stoller’s latest at MyDD. Smiley Joe’s convinced a lot of Democrats that he’s a nice liberal Dem, working hard to be “bi-partisan,” when in reality, he’s a PAC sucking sociopath, who ignores the writ of habeas corpus, promotes torture, wars of choice to promote the GOP, and Justice Alito……. Ned’s not running a bad campaign, Joe’s posturing as a Dem with GOP money.
I hope you continue to comment at FDL. Especially when people don’t recognize your handle, nobody is going to let you waltz in and ask loaded questions without comment. rwcole is a long time and well respected commenter who has been against our support of Ned from the start. No one has banned rw and no one is banning you. Your right to state your position does not require us to have to like it or remain silent about it.
By responding to op99 and me, you separated yourself from a lot of the Liebertrolls who hit us today.
To John at 221:
Thank you for responding. The major difference that I have with you is the intent of my comment that Ned’s campaign is in deep trouble. I meant no harm by it; I stated what I believe is true and was trying to figure out why it happened. I included my credentials because I did not want to be completely blown off by the community as I wanted an answer to the question.
I’ve read Matt Stoller (who’s a top notch analyst). What’s happening in CT is very complex and terrible. Ned’s a special individual. And Joe has shown his true colors.
Concerning reporting my gender and background, John, I’ll be happy to do it when everyone else in this community does the same. I know you feel you need to have the information to establish my credibility, but credibility in a community is a two-way street. But passed over for tenure? Geez, where did that come from?
American Research Group poll out late yesterday: holy Joe leads by 12 points, 49% to 37%. Schlesinger at 8% and 5% undecided. Here’s hoping that Ned’s ground game is far, far superior.
Kimster, thanks, I am always happy to be wrong.
As for the tenure remark, it was needlessly gratuitous and I withdraw it.
I don’t care about your gender. “I raised the issue of gender, because you can disclose the institution you work at without revealing your identity.” As long as you don’t try to buttress your comments with your academic credentials, no one will ask you to confirm them. If your academic credentials are what you say, that will naturally surface in the quality and detail of your comments. Some of my favorites here at the lake are Mary (aka Mary4, Mary4ever,Mary4now) punaise, Eli, scarecrow, immanentize, lhp, Hugh, op99, Cujo, *ilson, emptywheel, Swopa, …. and many more.
John:
Thank you for your list of good bloggers. I’ve read FDL for a long time, but have not posted much at all. I’ll start, and I pledge to drop the credentials.
My gender, for what it’s worth, is female.