Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this will probably drop a few points)

Ned Lamont is CRUSHING Joe Lieberman.  Lieberman's expensive tent and lavish support and paid armies of staffers weren't enough.  His side is incredibly dejected - their crowd of thunderstick cheerers, who cheered whenever a town went lopsided for Joe, have disbanded and are chatting.  The Lieberman supporters aren't even dejected, they are bored.

Lieberman has $5 million of a smear and slime campaign coming.  This is a big win. Time to saddle up.  

Let's get Ned's back!

Simsbury just said: "We asked for a visit from Lieberman in February and we're still waiting for a call back. Simsbury proudly casts 5 votes for Ned Lamont."

Damn.

Update: Wow, Lamont's at 28%!

Final Count: 496 out of 1502 counted went for Ned. They are now asking for any changes.

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

Comments

31 Comments

Re: Lamont at 31%... And Climbing... with 100+

I think that once he started getting lots of votes, people might have realized that maybe it's not so dangerous to vote for lamont, which might explain why his percentage seems to be increasing.

by Fran for Dean 2006-05-19 04:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

Actually my favorite was the "Steamed-hamburger capital of the world".

by patachon 2006-05-19 04:35PM | 0 recs
Sweet
This is gonna be huge. Welcome to a real race.
by Chris Bowers 2006-05-19 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

Some other good ones:

New London - "Where your home is ours!" (get it? :)

Greenwich (home of Lamont and one of the most Republican towns in the state) - Not really accustomed to leading the field for the soul of Democratic party

Oxford - So small we don't have a slogan

by dmooney 2006-05-19 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count:

Booyah!

by who threw da cat 2006-05-19 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

As somebody who voted for Lieberman a number of times, but is no longer a Connecticut resident, all I can say is:  sweet.  Best of luck in the primary, Ned!

by RickD 2006-05-19 04:41PM | 0 recs
Makes my day!

Great job, everyone.

Matt, it'll be great if Ned can stop by myDD and dkos for a few minutes after the counting is completed or later tonight. A full live blog session on Sunday at dkos (well advertised apriori) would be very useful.

Go Ned!

CAPJ's dkos diary is high on the REC list already!

by NuevoLiberal 2006-05-19 04:44PM | 0 recs
Stick a fork in him

Wow, this is a huge percentage. These are the few people in Connecticut that Lieberman could put the screws to. If Lieberman can't even get the Party Establishment to tow the line then he is going to have a helluva time with Democratic voters when 88% DISAPRROVE of Lieberman's kissy pal Bush. This is an amazing victory for Lamont and not a good night to have the name 'Al From'!

by Bob Brigham 2006-05-19 04:46PM | 0 recs
P.S.

Time to throw the anvil!

by Bob Brigham 2006-05-19 04:46PM | 0 recs
This reminded me of my JSA convention

When I ran for JSA Mayor last year (JSA is a high-school political organization, and the "Mayor" job was for New Jersey's region of it), all the different high school chapters came up with various ways to identify themselves. I had always assumed that it was a sophomoric thing to do - and then I saw the Connecticut Democratic Party doing it, too! Made my day, really...

In all seriousness, looks like Lieberman was just handed a hand grenade with the date of the primary on it. The question is: does he "cut and run"? Or does he try and defuse the grenade in the primary by running leftwards?

by MrLiberal 2006-05-19 04:46PM | 0 recs
Re: This reminded me of my JSA convention

it would be amusing to see if joe morphs from "republican lite" to "lamont lite".

by truth hurts 2006-05-19 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33%

Awesome news! Go Ned!

by Andrew C White 2006-05-19 04:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

Not to rain on the parade, but wasn't around 30% the expectation?  I thought I read that on some analysis website.  Maybe I just don't understand the process, but 33% doesn't seem earthshattering.

by asearchforreason 2006-05-19 04:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

33 percent when you're dealing with an entrenched incumbent with lots of strings to pull is incredible.   There was an "expectations game" number of 30 percent or so that was reputedly put out by the Lieberman campaign so that would Lamont would look bad when he didn't hit it...except, of course, that now he did.

This is the second intraparty slugfest where I'm rooting for the challenger against an incumbent, Rodriguez/Cuellar being the first.  And as opposed to the idiocy that is Winograd/Harman.

Go Ned.

by InigoMontoya 2006-05-19 04:57PM | 0 recs
Very impressive

Why be dismissive of Winograd/Harman -- which I take to mean, Winograd -- while being supportive of the others trying to eliminate DINO's?  Do you have something other than venom to support your "idiocy" comment?

by budlawman 2006-05-19 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Very impressive

Looking at Harman's record and calling her a DINO is idiocy.  Looking at Harman's record in the context of her district and calling her a DINO is even more idiotic.

The money and effort would be better spent on behalf of Busby in the CA-50.

by InigoMontoya 2006-05-19 11:14PM | 0 recs
Harman is a DINO

She voted for the Patriot Act, she continues to vote for the Iraq war, she voted for the bankruptcy bill, she's a Blue Dog Dem (one of the few not from the deep South), she boasted of being "the best Republican in the Democratic Party", she fell asleep while being briefed in the Intel Committee about illegal NSA spying,  and only now is supporting some kind of restrictions on it, in light of her challenge in the primary and Bush's numbers in the tank.  No one has much positive to say about Harman other than she's got seniority and money, which like the proverbial jolly good fellow, nobody can deny.  Harman does not deserve the free pass in her district that her supporters are advocating, and it must be emphasized that the Rethugs have no shot at this district, and know it.

As for the configuration of her district, are you still misrepresenting that it is a toss-up, or a "very moderate district", as you did in an earlier exchange on this subject?
http://mydd.com/comments/2006/4/22/11226 /4886/3#3

As Matt Stoller said then (April 22), "59-40 for Kerry is not a moderate district."  Harman's district has moved to her left, she is scrambling now in the face of the primary to get out in front of it, and is not very comfortable or convincing in her effort.  The resources being used for Winograd will not be wasted, and are not fungible.  After the primary, when the winner in the 36th is not in need of huge resources to keep the seat blue, those resources that are "exportable" from the 36th will be used to help people like Busby and others who can make progressive change.    

by budlawman 2006-05-20 07:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Harman is a DINO

Harman:  NARAL 100, NEA 100, LCV 100, ACLU 73.
Et sequitur ad infinitum ad nauseam.  Harman ain't no DINO.

You don't like her national security votes.  We get it.  I'm not wild about a lot of them myself.   But ever-increasing salami-slicing exercises of ideological purity doesn't lead to party dominance.

Unlike Lieberman, Harman is not a cheerleader for Bush, attempting to give him a hickey, etc.

by InigoMontoya 2006-05-20 08:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Harman is a DINO

Harman may have stopped "cheerleading" for Bush, and may have been wise enough to not get photographed with her lips on his neck, but she was sleeping during her NSA briefings, and loves the Iraq war, doesn't want to set a withdrawal deadline, and still acts as the "Best Republican in the Democratic Party" that she proudly pronounced herself to be several years ago. http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/5/ 19/191321/079/18#c18

Why does replacing Harman with a truly progressive Democrat -- the only two possible outcomes in the 36th are electing "D's" -- detract from party dominance?  That's a felicitous hunger-inducing phrase with no substance.  Why not take back the House with some officials who will act like Democrats, at least in those districts where electing such folks is possible?

by budlawman 2006-05-20 08:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Harman is a DINO

Contrasting Harman to "officials who will act like Democrats" is rhetorical overkill given her voting record, a bit of tactical showmanship if one is campaigning for Winograd, but over the top otherwise.  There are many Dems who don't want to set a withdrawal deadline for Iraq...I'm not about to try to purge them, too.  

Harman is a generally reliable Democratic vote.  Moreover, when she does criticize Bush on Iraq policy, as she has done, her opinion is not unlike John Murtha's, carrying more weight with the general public because she hasn't been down-the-line anti-war.  

Imo, it's a waste of resources that I'd rather see deployed elsewhere.   Going against Cuellar and Lieberman I have no quarrel with.  Harman is a different kettle of fish.  I also predict that she'll electorally kick Winograd's rear into oblivion if the reaction of my Progressive friends on one of the local Democratic activists orgs is any indicator.

by InigoMontoya 2006-05-21 05:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Harman is a DINO

The question perhaps comes down to how one likes one's kettle of fish prepared.  Yes, Harman mostly votes party line, and she has gained a Murtha-like credibility among those who otherwise don't mind -- or even appreciate -- her kowtowing to the military industrial complex. But some issues are bigger than others, and it doesn't get much bigger than unjust war, or deprivation of civil liberties, the latter of which Harman was in a unique position to do something about, and did nothing.  In addition to voting record, which virtually any Dem in Congress can "boast" of, there is the question of emphasis and willingness to stand up and be counted among the opposition.  Harman has not done so.

As for your last cryptic point, care to enlighten with a web citation?  The local activists of whom I am aware are quite enthusiastic about Winograd.  

by budlawman 2006-05-22 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

30% was what Lieberman's flacks were touting so that they could clain Lamont didn't meet expectations when he came in under that. In fact, the Lieberman team couldn't even meet the expectations of their expectations management. Ouch. Call the political malpractice investigators!

by Bob Brigham 2006-05-19 04:58PM | 0 recs
Was 30 percent the expectation?

No, not if you are Joe Lieberman and just pulled out every stop to try and keep this primary from happening.

Nothing is ever sure in these things but I truly believe Lieberman thought he could keeo Lamont under 20 percent. More than 20 percent for Lamont is bad news for Lieberman. There is no way to spin this otherwise.

by Romberry 2006-05-19 04:59PM | 0 recs
This is big...

I can't wait to search the next FEC filings to see what Lieberman paid for his gig.  This is very exciting.

by The Southern Dem 2006-05-19 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33%

This is like when mcCarthy won 40% against Johnson in NH in 68. NO 30% wasn't expected. These are the Conneticut insiders. Not primary voters. For Lamont to get 30%+ of insiders is a disaster for Lieberman. I was expecting Lamont to get 5% to 15% max.

Right now I am astonished. This will definitely give Ned a boost in the polls. Especially if it is spun like a huge loss for Lieberman.

by JackBourassa 2006-05-19 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

Lieberman's campaign is cardboard, fakery and evasion ... won't hold up

by jimpol 2006-05-19 05:46PM | 0 recs
I give up.

As the husband of a Simsbury native, and as someone who has protested from day one that progressives had bigger priorities in 2006 than defeating a fellow Democrat, no matter how odious . . .

. . . well, there's nothing good on tv this summer, and it does look like Lamont can really finance this himself (and should), so, what the hell.

by Adam B 2006-05-19 06:09PM | 0 recs
Gracefully surrendered.

Now go kiss your wife...

by boadicea 2006-05-19 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

. . . and the whole point of this election was to Win on our Own Terms, with no compromise.  And this, I think, was the key to the massive vote we turned out, both for and against us.  The town was plunged into total hysteria for more than a month - and in the end, the opposition (the GOP & the Democrats) turned out every possible vote; they brought people on stretchers down from the hospital, they wheeled in 90-year-old vegetables, they did everything possible and they still lost the city precincts [. . .] which wasn't enough to win a county election for us . . . but I'm convinced that what we proved here will sooner or later be crucial in national politics
 

Hunter S. Thompson in a letter to Sen. Mondale, 1971.

by Fledermaus 2006-05-19 08:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Unofficial Final Count: Lamont at 33% (this wi

Im with Adam B above.

Why should I, why should we, donate to a billionaire (Lamont) ahead of the progressive, labor-backed, woman candidate for Governor in my home (red) state who is leading a better-financed, conservative corporate-lawyer Dem in a primary and will face a better-financed, more conservative dim-wit Republican Congressman in the General Election?

Would someone explain to me why, in this year and at this time, defeating Lieberman is a) going to happen b) not going to risk punting away a safe Democratic Senate seat in a year when the Senate margin will likely be one seat c) why we think Lamont is going to be such a super-special Senator even if he does win?

Why is the "netroots" elite already acting like the Club for Growth?

It would be nice to if someone who isn't on Lamont's paid staff could answer this?

by desmoulins 2006-05-20 11:41AM | 0 recs
and this is my concern

I'd rather that every dollar that goes to Lamont go to my friend Patrick Murphy (PA-8), and let Lamont finance this race himself.  

Yes, of course, I understand that getting grassroots people to "buy in" at low dollars makes people feel more connected to his campaign, more likely to give more in the future, more likely to come to the Nutmeg State and help him win.

But our first priority needs to be defeating actual Republicans, and I'd like to see Lamont and his supporters devote the funds and energy needed to make that happen as well.

by Adam B 2006-05-20 01:45PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads