Lieberman Ahead of Lamont in Polls Now
Rasmussen is reporting that Joseph Lieberman (46%) now has a good lead over Ned Lamont (41%). I think this is pretty good evidence of two things that proove the DailyKos crowd wrong on two things about the Democratic primary in Connecticut.
1. It was not "people-powered" politics. People-powered politics suggests that the people as a whole voted for Lamont or against Lieberman. When polled, the people of Connecticut are saying 46 to 41 that they want Lieberman.
2. Ned Lamont is not in agreement with the bulk of the American people as DailyKos et. al. continuously says.
Here are what the facts really are in the above topics:
1. This was "foil-powered" politics that gave Lamont the Democratic nomination. It was the left wing moonbats in the self described "netroots" movement that voted for Lamont.
2. If you look at the poll you have a total of 52% against Lamont (after combining Lieberman's support with the Republican candidate). And the same applies to the DailyKos crowd. 52% of Connecticut do not see the issues the way DailyKos et. al. do. 52% of Connecticut sees the War on Terrorism and the war in Iraq differently from how Michael Moore, Cindy Shehan, and DailyKos see these issues.
Wake up moonbats. You're going to loose.
Tags: Cindy Shehan, DailyKos, Democrat, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, Iraq, Joe Lieberman, Lamont, Michael Moore, Middle East, Moonbats, Politics, Republican, Senate, Terrorism, United States, War
posted by Ed @ 9:07 AM
3 comments
3 Comments:
The problem with your first paragraph is this. You assume that because I'm not a Democrat I must be a Republican and want a republican to win every seat. Would it surprise you to learn that I have voted in Democratic primaries as recently as 2004? And that I have also voted for Democrats as recently as 2004?
This is the problem with alot people in the political arena. And both parties have this problem, but I think the Democrats have this problem worse. The problem is that people like yourself vote for a party, and not for a candidate. I ask you Repack Rider, what if you had a choice between two candidates (one Rep, one Dem)? And you agreed more with the Republican and thought him to be the better choice for the office? Would you still vote for the Democrat, simply because the other guy was a Republican? Alot of people these days would.
You also seem to be ignoring the Rasmussen poll that I'm posting. The bulk of the voters (not the endorsements) are voting for Lieberman in this poll (46 to 41). Thats a poll of the the citizens of Connecticut, not the Dem's, not the Rep's, not the Independents. The actual voters only a few days after the Democrats of the state put Lamont up as the nominee.
Even without all these holly endorsements from Clinton, DLC, etc. Lieberman is winning among all the voters.
Sure, Lamont and Dailykos et. al. may agree that we need to pull out of Iraq and that Iraq was the wrong choice and the Lamont should be sent to the Senate because of those things. But this Rasmussen poll of all the likely voters are disagreeing with you.
Yeah, yeah, and Lamont will still beat him like a rented mule.
Talk is cheap, and Lamont will be the next junior senator from Connecticut.
If talk is cheap then why do you use the first statement there in response to actual numbers?
Sure, the margins have narrowed since the primary started. You know what? That happens in races. There are very few races where that doesn't happen.
2/3 think that there were mistakes in Iraq. I can count myself among that 2/3. But what are the numbers on people who think an immediate pullout should be done? Anyone can say mistakes have been made. Bush himself has said mistakes have been made. But what are the numbers of people who actually agree with Lamont and DailyKos types that there should be an immediate pullout?
Do you mind telling me where I questioned your patriotism? Because if I did I sincerely apologize.
I don't doubt your patriotism at all. I just disagree with you on what is best for the country.
Just because you have served doesn't mean that you automatically know what is best for America. To think that is arogance on your part and suggests that you would prefer a government of nothing but soldiers and veterans. But the fact is, we have a tradition of a civilian run government.
It is also arrogance to think that military service is the only way someone can serve their country. As for myself, the bulk of my career has been spent in the judicial branch of government at both state and federal levels. If you think that isn't serving the country then you need to go back an read that oath you took when you entered the service. Then take a look at the US Constitution, in particular Article Three.
And I do know a little about the military. Why should I listen to an E-5? For those who don't know the military structure, an E-5 in the Army is the bottom of the Sergeants. There are a total of nine ranks between him an a bottom run officer (2nd Lieutenant). And he is only one step above a Corporal and two steps above a Private 1st Class. Respectible yes, since Seargeants work for a living.
But why does that make you any more qualified than me to make tactical decisions (which is what a pull out is)?
And as a citizen, which is where we have common ground, I ask you why do you feel the need to bring my manhood into things? Is it because you don't know how to argue with me on the facts? I haven't once in all this said that a pull out would be the wrong course. This is about what the voters are saying should be done.
Post a Comment
<< Home