Swing State Project

« Tuesday Primary Open Thread | Main | My Tuesday Primary Review »

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

CT-Sen: Love Child

Posted by DavidNYC

Rahm wastes no time in harshing on Joe:

“This shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the leader of the Democratic House Congressional campaign. “This is not about the war. It’s blind loyalty to Bush.”

Calling an ex-Democrat sitting senator George Bush's "love child" is the tradmed equivalent of dropping an f-bomb. Rahm doesn't want Joe messing up our chances of taking up to three CT House seats from the GOP. He wants Joe to be forgotten like a bad hangover. With Hillary reportedly throwing down in favor of Lamont, Lieberman is going to find himself almost friendless by the end of the week. He may yet soldier on, but it's going to be very tough going indeed.

Posted at 01:15 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/mt/mt-track-ssp.cgi/2492

Comments

Anybody want to guess what the first post-primary polling will look like?

I'll guess Lieberman in the high 30s to low 40s, with Lamont about 7-10 pts behind, and poor Schlesinger piddling around in the high teens, struggling to break through the 20% barrier.

Posted by: Craig McLaughlin at August 9, 2006 01:39 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Are you sure Rahm was talking about Joe Lieberman? This is the NYT -- home of the badly misconstrued quote -- we're talking about. And worse, yet, it's Adam Nagourney. So I wouldn't count on the quote meaning what it seems to mean.

Posted by: TomT at August 9, 2006 01:44 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Nice to have Rahm on our side. Although---not to be picky here---doesn't a love child need two parents?

Love child of Dick Cheney and George Bush?

Posted by: bosdcla14 at August 9, 2006 01:54 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Re the two parents of a love child: sometimes the mother won't dish on who's the father...

Posted by: MissLaura at August 9, 2006 02:04 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

In 2004 the partisan breakdown for CT was 37-D, 30-R, 33-I. There's probably a few more Dems now probably around 39-40%. The only thing we now for sure, is that roughly 19-21% of the electorate is in Lamont's corner. The other 80% is unknown.

The two big questions are: How many of that 48% will stick with Lieberman? If he can keep the vast majority of those people in his corner, I don't see how Lamont can win. The other question is how many people will see Schlessinger as a legit. candidate. If he starts gaining momentum and looks like he could get in the mid to high 30's, your going to see Schumer, Dodd and co. really make a concerted effort to try to get Lieberman out of the race.

Posted by: safi at August 9, 2006 02:28 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Schlessinger is not going to get any momentum because the Republicans are gonna back Lieberman instead.

Posted by: RBH at August 9, 2006 02:34 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

We have our own Ned Lamont right here in NH.
Rahm is not our friend in NH. The DCCC is messing with our electoral process by throwing money at a party insider before the primary. The progressive moderate Democrat, the grassroots candidate in the 1st congressional district is CAROL SHEA-PORTER. WWW.carolforcongress.com. We have an all volunteer campaign, no paid staff and we are all activists who have lots of experience in other campaigns. We have the endorsement of the Democracy for America local group and we have really made an impact. The insiders in Concord now think that we will win the primary on Sept. 12. Endorsers of her opponent are jumping ship daily and having house parties for her. Carol Shea-Porter is going to get national attention for this inventive campaign and because she is an amazing candidate. NH has never sent a woman to Washington. It is time. Send her a pittance. Pittances add up. www.carolforcongress.com.

Posted by: beatrice at August 9, 2006 09:02 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Yes, Nagourney is always suspect. But Rahm is about as smart as it gets at this game. Nagourney calls him up for a quote on the results, Rahm is only gonna say exactly what he wants to see in print.

Posted by: DavidNYC at August 9, 2006 10:37 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment