Comments on: The Lamont fade http://punkassblog.com/2006/10/15/the-lamont-fade/ Sun, 20 Nov 2011 04:59:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.3 By: Marked Hoosier http://punkassblog.com/2006/10/15/the-lamont-fade/comment-page-1/#comment-11267 Marked Hoosier Mon, 16 Oct 2006 21:09:28 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/10/15/the-lamont-fade/#comment-11267 Republicans like to support a winning candidate too... why didn't people see republicans supporting Leiberman? Why vote for someone who you know is going to lose, in effect making someone you don't support at all (the democrat, or Lamont) win... or vote for Leiberman who is/was Democrat in name only. I don't think Lamont is to blame... it is Leiberman leaving the party that has supported him for all these years. Republicans like to support a winning candidate too… why didn’t people see republicans supporting Leiberman? Why vote for someone who you know is going to lose, in effect making someone you don’t support at all (the democrat, or Lamont) win… or vote for Leiberman who is/was Democrat in name only.

I don’t think Lamont is to blame… it is Leiberman leaving the party that has supported him for all these years.

]]> By: Bertie http://punkassblog.com/2006/10/15/the-lamont-fade/comment-page-1/#comment-11237 Bertie Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:20:15 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/10/15/the-lamont-fade/#comment-11237 It seems foolish now, but at the time of the primary some of us were actually concerned that a three-way general might even result in throwing the seat to the Republicans if everything split right. You know, the Republican with the actual R next to his name, the guy whose name starts with an S that no one remembers these days. And that might be the biggest story in these pre-election Lamont post-mortems that are going around -- hardly anyone expected that no-name R to be under 5%. I mean, a major party candidate under 5%? Huh? There just isn't any realistic scenerio for a Lamont win if that number holds -- you know that some Democrats were always going to stay with Lieberman, and that he would pick up quite a few Independents, too, and that combined with most of the state's Republicans is not beatable. (I've read that Connecticut doesn't have a one punch straight party ticket option, which might have given that no-name Republican guy a few more percent just by default.) It seems foolish now, but at the time of the primary some of us were actually concerned that a three-way general might even result in throwing the seat to the Republicans if everything split right. You know, the Republican with the actual R next to his name, the guy whose name starts with an S that no one remembers these days. And that might be the biggest story in these pre-election Lamont post-mortems that are going around — hardly anyone expected that no-name R to be under 5%. I mean, a major party candidate under 5%? Huh? There just isn’t any realistic scenerio for a Lamont win if that number holds — you know that some Democrats were always going to stay with Lieberman, and that he would pick up quite a few Independents, too, and that combined with most of the state’s Republicans is not beatable.

(I’ve read that Connecticut doesn’t have a one punch straight party ticket option, which might have given that no-name Republican guy a few more percent just by default.)

]]>