33.4% for Lamont

1509 votes count
Ned Lamont - 505 (33.4%)
Joe Lieberman - 1004 (66.5%)

http://actblue.com/page/netrootscandidates

Lamont WRECKED Lieberman. Oh yeah.

The Connecticut blogs, along with a lot of fine people and a skilled and disciplined campaign staff, really made this happen. Oh yeah, and a special thank you goes out to Joe Lieberman, who in those last final calls to delegates surely flipped a bunch of them Lamont's way.

Lamont Links
My Left Nutmeg
Lamontblog
CT Convention
Ned Lamont blog
La Resistance
Without a Purpose
CT Bob
Connecticutblog

Tags: Connecticut, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)

Comments

43 Comments

Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Fucking AMAZING.

I want to say a special "thank you" to CTKeith and DeanFan84, who beat the "Dump Joe" drum online and really started this movement way back as early as the Democratic presidential primary in 2003.  Activists from DFA in New Haven, Norwalk, and around the state took the chance to dare to speak against Joe Lieberman and MADE THIS HAPPEN!

Congratulations!!!!!!!!!!!

by Maura in CT 2006-05-19 04:52PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Ain't won nothing yet.

Still, this is sweet. ;)

And yeah, huge props to Ed and Keith.

by tparty 2006-05-19 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

If more than 1 in 3 insiders want change, Lamont is has the potential to get 50%+1 of Democrats! This race is for real!

by Bob Brigham 2006-05-19 04:53PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Exactly right. 33.4% of the party structure is huge.

But it is not enough yet. You folks in Ct have some work to do. Beat the bushes (pun fully intended), knock on the doors, make the phone calls, take nothing for granted. Ya'll can do the whole nation and the progressive movement a great service by making sure every concerned, activist Dem comes out and votes for Ned Lamont on primary day. Beat that drum!

by Andrew C White 2006-05-19 05:20PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Agreed.

I just said that Lamont will barely lose to Lieberman in August. Right after I said it I changed my mind.

Twice the number of party insiders needed and Ned Lamont did it!

We can do this!

I just sent another $25 to Ned yesterday.

I am going to try to give another $25 ASAP! Go Ned!

by DFLer22 2006-05-19 08:47PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Is it just me of does DeLauro look a lot like Jean Schmidt?

by js noble 2006-05-19 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Freakin' sweet.

This summer should be extremely fun. I'm going to check my bank account balance and see if I can toss Ned some green right now.

by PsiFighter37 2006-05-19 04:57PM | 0 recs
Hell ya!

The Blogosphere wins one! Hot damn. Made my night. Great coverage Matt and Tim!

Actually , this would be two. Chris was first.

Better get used to it Beltway people. This is our party too.

by michael in chicago 2006-05-19 05:04PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

If Ned can get 33% of the party insiders, he could easily get over 50% of the Dem. voters.  The insiders (especially in the biggest cities) are part of Joe's machine in many cases.  The smaller cities sent a message to Joe (and to the rest of the national Dem. party): we don't want Sean Hanity/George Bush loving Dems representing us.

This is a fight worth fighting.  I'll send some more $$.

by JimPortlandOR 2006-05-19 05:04PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

According to Firedoglake, Holy Joe is threatening to use all the money for himself, to the detriment of the Dem congressional candidates, Joe Courtney (vs Rob Simmons in CT-02), Chris Murphy (vs Nancy Johnson in CT-05) and Daine Farrell (vs Chris Shays in CT-06).  

For those in a position to give not only to Lamont but in the congressional races as well, I suggest adding .33 to the donation (for Lamont's 33%) to indicate it came from a Lamont supporter.  They had to endorse Lieberman because he is so vindictive, but it doesn't appear it will do them any good, and these are three good shots at pickups.

by Mimikatz 2006-05-19 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

I've been chastised over at Kos.  They say Lamont won by '33.5%'.

0.33465871438038436050364479787939 -- you know.

by patachon 2006-05-19 05:18PM | 0 recs
Bye Joe

It's been a real pressure knowing you.

by zappatero 2006-05-19 05:36PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

This is promising.  If we could just get one real win, instead of an almost...  Maybe this could be it.

by steve expat 2006-05-19 05:49PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Oh yeah, and a special thank you goes out to Joe Lieberman, who in those last final calls to delegates surely flipped a bunch of them Lamont's way.

Shades of the Presidential primary, when any campaigning Joe Lieberman did primarily hurt Joe Lieberman.

Maybe Ned Lamont should pay for Lieberman's travel expenses to barnstorm the state. Ol' Joe will be down in Rick Santorum approval land in no time ...

by BriVT 2006-05-19 05:58PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

What's stunning about this is that even the Lieberman attempts at making people overoptimistic about Lamont's chances had him at 30ish, iirc.  I don't know too much about CT politics, but that seems like an absolutely stunning, stunning victory for Lamont.  Lieberman must've had no idea what was going to hit him.

by DanM 2006-05-19 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

This was one of the most exciting nights I have had!     My throat still kills me from screaming.     Even Lieberman people were sneaking food from Lamont, it was the best.    

Tonight sent a message.    All Democratic Politicians should beware, that we are going to take our party back, and the days of doing whatever they want is over !     (Look out Hillary!)

by Bergs 2006-05-19 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

LIEBERMAN WINS, LIEBERMAN WINS LIEBERMAN WINS, LIEBERMAN WINS TAKE THAT YOU BUNCH OF LAMONT IDIOTE. OH YEAH LIEBERMAN WINS!!!!!!!

by liebermanlives 2006-05-19 06:28PM | 0 recs
Heh.

n/t

by tparty 2006-05-19 06:32PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

unfortunately for you this isn't the night where he needs to win- and now it seems he will have a challenger

by bruh21 2006-05-19 06:38PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Face it. In all practical terms, he lost. And lost big.

This was his arena, where he could bring every single sleazy trick to bear. Blackmailing people who owe their employability to their connections. Stroking pathetic functionaries who's very identity is based on being acknowledged by people with power. I'm on a State Committee...I've seen it.

Every single possible benefit of incumbency.

And he couldn't even hold Lamont to his overestimation for expectation management. That is so amazingly huge it isn't funny.

I assure you LL, absolutely no one in the Joementum camp went home happy tonight. No one.

by ElitistJohn 2006-05-19 06:43PM | 0 recs
Also

33% is a critical number.

Put simply, it's too many to payback. If it had been 15-20%, tomorrow would have been a DeLauro fest of payback. Funds cut. People being replaced on committees and in jobs.

However, 33% means one out of three people could go against you. That means that all your threats and manipulation could add up to really being 50% + 1. Which means DeLauro has to watch her own ass. Payback could mean she gets voted out as Chair.

In other words, not only is there a primary...but absolutely no one is scared anymore. They gave it their best shot...and lost big time. Showed weakness. Now no one needs to fear retribution...too many people to pull it off. This is now a free vote.

by ElitistJohn 2006-05-19 06:54PM | 0 recs
Excellent point

And it will be VERY interesting to see how the Gubernatorial vote goes tomorrow.

by tparty 2006-05-19 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Uh no... he needed 85% + 1 to win.

LIEBERMAN LOSES, LIEBERMAN LOSES LIEBERMAN LOSES, LIEBERMAN LOSES TAKE THAT YOU LONE JOEMENTUM IDIOT. OH YEAH LIEBERMAN LOSES!!!!!!!

by teknofyl 2006-05-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
Actually...

Didn't Lamont get on the ballot? Didn't Lieberman try to stop Lamont getting on the ballot?

Seems to me Lamont won and Lieberman lost this one.

by michael in chicago 2006-05-19 09:06PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Get a brain moran!

by who threw da cat 2006-05-19 09:11PM | 0 recs
Thanks to all the volunteers

I appreciate all the hard work done by the volunteers who made this happen. It's easy for us to blog here, but only those were on the ground were the ones needed to make this happen.

and another thing.......
YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!

by Pravin 2006-05-19 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks to all the volunteers

Thanks a bunch, you should come on up, its a lot of fun.

by ATalbot 2006-05-19 07:07PM | 0 recs
So where is Liebermandies anyway?

by Scarce 2006-05-19 06:31PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Well, looks like this campaign has more legs than I thought. Congratulations.

I however, as a non-resident of Conneticut, am choosing to remain non-partisan in this debate. I will however make an appeal to everyone to go to the netroots campaign page and donate some coin, especially to Tester and Busby seeing as their elections are next up.

I also read Daschle's bid for the presidency depends on how his canidates do int heir primaries and one of them is Morrison, so go donate to Tester and help keep Daschle unemployed.  :-)

Also, Busby will need coin, this election will decide November for the insiders, activating or deactiving the base and funders for each party. Cook political report changed their ranking on it today to toss-up.

Congrats to those who worked tonight.

by Trowaman 2006-05-19 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Good Gawd. Daschle for president? Do people actually exist who think it's a good idea for him to pursue that? ... My dentist and my accountant have more fire in their bellies than Tom Daschle.

by Oregonian 2006-05-19 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Good on you Conn.

Lieberman today. Tomorrow Cantwell

by Rational 2006-05-19 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

As a strong environmentalist I feel I must ask . . .

What's wrong with Cantwell?  She has been one of the best environs in the senate from where I am sitting. She was the first to get an LCV endorsement.

Just wondering.

by Trowaman 2006-05-19 08:41PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Cantwell has a terrible relations with progressives here in Washington.
She doesn't care what we think she just demands our votes, energy and money.
She supports the war. She voted for closure on alito. She has stated that she feels that shrub should get his appointments whether it is abu Ganzalez, oily Ashcroft, rumsfield etc.

Her usual modus operandi is to vote with the rethugs on the important procedural votes in committees etc. then after she has helped greased the skids she makes a big show of voting when she knows it won't make any difference.

She did this on Cafta, alito, bankruptcy bill etc.

Next to Lieberman she is one of the most insidious turncoats in the senate.

by Rational 2006-05-19 10:56PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

I just sent another $50, and will send more when I can, great job folks..

by sjs1959 2006-05-19 08:03PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Connecticut is the right place, Lamont is the right messenger and this is the right time to make a stand within the Democratic Party.  Nothing will strike more fear inside the Dem. establishment then the fight brewing in Connecticut.  They will be talking about this one in the cloakroom, the green rooms and in the most exclusive club in the world.

That Senate seat is not going to go to a Republican.  There are sure to be great things emerge from the Lamont Campaign, I can feel the spirit even here, deep inside the heart of darkness well inside the Washington beltway.  At a book event tonight in DC Markos "Kos" Moulitsas, wearing a Lamont button, took great pleasure in announcing some preliminary results from the CT convention.  Now that Lamont has crashed the insider gate it is time to talk to the voters who don't blog but who are bearing the brunt of the thousand points of failure of the Bush administration.  

Senator Lamont?  Why not?  A change in going to come.

by howardpark 2006-05-19 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

A change IS going to come.

by howardpark 2006-05-19 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Excellent, excellent job guys!

by redstar67 2006-05-19 08:51PM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Ho'Joe must be squirming. I love the thought of Droopy Dawg crying into his cornflakes ... Maybe his man crush Sean Hannity can help him out.

by Oregonian 2006-05-19 08:55PM | 0 recs
I can't belive I signed up just to post this, but.

33.4 and 64.5 do not add up to 100.

505/1509 = 0.334658....

That rounds up to 33.5 percent, since 6 is more then 5, you round up.

by delmoi 2006-05-19 10:06PM | 0 recs
Explain me one thing...

In Colorado the party activists, i.e. those willing to attend a state convention are more liberal than the party establishment, and probably more liberal than the primary electorate.

Does this mean that in CT the delegates to the convention are more "in-the-pocket" of the establishment?

I wouldn't actually say that the rabble rousers have taken over in CO, but maybe the establishment has less of a hold on things...

by MetaData 2006-05-19 10:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Explain me one thing...

In CT, the Democratic Town Committees (which pick the delegates to the convention and which are major sources of patronage in the larger towns) dictate the pace. CT has no counties--the state is divided into 169 towns, and the DTCs are equivalent to our county parties.

So, Enfield DTC = JeffCo Dem Party. Only, in this case, imagine that the JeffCo county party chair also determines who runs for state house, or state senate.

In CO, in order to get elected to the state assembly, all you need to do is attend a poorly-attended precinct caucus, and the county assembly. Since, customarily, most counties have trouble filling their delegate slots, it's easier for a highly-motivated insurgency to take those delegate slots.

Miles wasn't the only insurgent candidate in recent history to win a state convention. Jim Nichol did it in '96 against Tom Strickland. So to assume, like ColoDem and I did, that the CO state assembly and CT convention are the same is ludicrous. The CT convention is strictly an insider parlor game, with potential real consequences. And for Lamont to get 33% of the vote there is highly troubling to Lieberman. The reactions of staffers and volunteers inside the hall were telling--they were shocked and not at all happy.  

by Rafe Noboa 2006-05-20 08:23AM | 0 recs
Re: 33.4% for Lamont

Way to go Netroots!!!

Go NED LAMONT!!!

by starwheel 2006-05-20 03:51AM | 0 recs
by riptid 2006-10-03 01:57AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------