This was always my question about Ned from the very beginning:  can he be brutal, and do it smiling?  Can he order a political hit, for real, during the homestretch in a tough fight?  Will he define Leiberman's character on Lamont's terms (ie, tell the hard truth)?

I've not seen the evidence yet.  

Lamont should realize how important it is to define your opponent. The last poll of the Lamont liberman race (showing liberman with a lead) showed that most voters thought Lamont was waging a negative campaign.

And that's without even waging a negative campaign. That's all just liberman talk that sunk in in the ether. Lamont needs to turn the tables and do exactly what you prescribe. Eventually the message will sink into people. And only he can do it. The establishment of the Party sure ain't gonna do it for him.

is to raise the profile of Alan Schlesinger.

My biggest criticism of the Lamont campaign is that they are not using Schlesinger as a means to get rid of Joe.

Invite Schlesinger to debate Lamont, not just once but on five occasions. Schlesinger would gladly accept it, to raise his profile. Lamont would benefit from it. If 30% of Republicans choose their own candidate then Joe is toast.

This is a very good piece.  I agree Lamont needs to get back on message and stay away from distractions.  He ran a mistake free primary but does seem to be stumbling a little bit right now.  It is still very early in the general election cycle so he has time to get back to what worked.

Unfortunately in todays atmosphere NICE GUYS are always turned into Nice LOSERS. I think I saw this coming when Clinton sent Lamont one of her own advisors. WARNING WARNING:  Taking the High Rd will lead lamont into an election DEAD END!

Mr Eddieb
My snark is worse than my bite

Ned is done for. In over his head, and up against someone who has learned that Big Lies work.  How insufferable will it be to see Holy Joe's droopy face and hear him condescending to everyone on election night?  I have to laugh when I read all the mockery of his campaign.  Like Connecticut voters give a shit about a bad website or if his commercial had a sunset or sunrise.  Lamont better get his ass in gear. This isn't a primary.  Thousands of GOPers get to vote this time, and Schlesinger is a joke.  

And furthermore: every word out of Ned's mouth should be "What about Iraq, Joe?"

When I heard a few weeks ago that the D(L)C establishment was sending consultants to help Lamont, I expected this to happen.

Lamont might as well have let Rove send him over some advisors.

What is it with liberal bloggers who think they know exactly what candidates need to do in case? And most of the time it's things that would make them want to vote for the guy.

Ned obviously feels he needs to reach out to independent and even (ghasp) republican voters. He's still hitting on Iraq and that's what people care about.   Ned obviously thinks CT voters don't want a fire-breathing Dean type right now, and it's possible (even likely) that he's right and you're wrong. He may even have done some polling on this.

I'm so tired of this "I'm going to tell you how things are even though they have no basis other then my perception of human nature."  

Great writing, Matt. Lamont needed to come out of this primary swinging, and he hasn't.

I hate it when politicians fuck with a winning formula.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

For some reason, we Democrats always play "prevent-defense" and then lose.  Kerry is the perfect example:  he always said, "The President" when referring to Bush in 2004; whereas, the Republicans always referred to "Bill Clinton."  It doesn't seem like much, but sometimes a little respect (if left unchecked) can lead to capitulation and losing.

Kissing Joe's ass ain't gonna lead to victory for Lamont.  And Matt Stoller conveyed that brilliantly in this thread.  Stoller should be listened to by these goddam Dems running from now on.

I am sure he will give you face time since you put thousands of dollars from MyDD readers.

I wish, wish, wish someone still working for Dem candidates would remember the one lesson that 1992 taught us.  Setting aside the fact that Bubba didn't get a true majority of the vote, he won on a single issue: "It's the economy, stupid."

He was able to tie his entire message, on seemingly every issue, to that one little phrase.  There is nothing wrong with being a "single issue candidate" if that issue dominates and relates to almost the entire agenda.

The CT Senate election is about Iraq, stupid (and, by extension, Lieberman's continued position as Bush's favorite democratic lapdog--have you checked the approval numbers of the war and Bush in CT?)

Every third word out of Lamont's mouth between now and election day should be "Iraq."  And every sixth word should be "Bush-Lieberman."  The man ain't going to win many hardcore GOP votes; he should stop even caring about peeling them off.

"Where do we get the money for your education proposals Mr. Lamont?":

"We've spent over $300 billion on Joe Lieberman's and George Bush's war in Iraq.  That would pay for more than 15 million college scholarships in the state of CT.  The cost of the Bush-Lieberman Irag war would pay the salaries of more than five million new public school teachers in CT. Each day we're fighting the Bush-Lieberman war in Iraq is one more day we can't do what we need to do here in CT."

Any terrorism related question:

"Joe Lieberman and George Bush's war in Iraq have made us less safe.  And, with each day that passes, the Bush-Lieberman Iraq war creates more of the very conditions that breed hatred and terrorism.

The Bush-Lieberman Iraq war has created Al Queda cells in Iraq where the CIA admits there were none before the Bush-Lieberman War.  The Bush-Lieberman Iraq war has weakened the American ability to respond to the new threats that arise in the world, many in response to the tragic Bush-Lieberman war in Iraq.

The Bush-Lieberman Iraq war, badly concieved and executed with no plan and less direction, has diverted badly needed resources away from the brave American soliders sill tracking the REAL terror threat in Afganistan while the Bush-Lieberman Iraq war morphs into an Iraqi civil war."

Karl Rove is right about one thing in particular: Elections are about choices and the people who frame those choices to their best advantage win.  Lieberan and Lamont, on most issues, have little difference.  

If you set aside the non-starter GOP candidate, there are basically two major differences for voters in CT this fall.  One is Iraq.  The other is a willingness to roll over for Bush.  Neither one of those things are wins for Lieberman, so it's up to Lamont to frame the debate, and despite a brilliant primary campaign, I haven't seen the same spark since that victory.  The new ad is a start.

Memo to Lamont HQ:  It's Iraq, stupid.

The support of Lamont by the entrenched Democratic Senators has been tepid at best.  Ned needs to get back to really working.  He has fallen off of the front pages around the country and is slowly sliding into oblivion.  At this rate he is sure to lose.  If he is going to lose, he may as well do it by going for the brass ring and start hitting LIEberman hard on his record.  Taking on an advisor from HRC simply meant that she could scuttle his campaign quietly.  She is a JoeLoser backer, just as she is still supporting our disasterous venture in Iraq, but by attacking Rummy and backing Ned she can triangulate into a position of winning however things turn out.  I think that this is another thing where everyone that sees what is happening can see the outcome, but the one that we want to help has been beguiled by mixing at the level where he wants to be and thinking that he is there while forgetting that there is the next step to take (the election).  Currently he is only a visitor to that level.