Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Headline of the Day | The Word from the 43rd »

Wednesday, August 9, 2006

The Morning News

Posted by on August 9 at 8:27 AM

There’s really only one story in the world of politics this morning, and it connects directly to the Iraq War, the rise of the liberal blogosphere, and the mood of the country heading into the Congressional elections this fall.

It’s the story of last night’s upset victory by political novice Ned Lamont, who defeated 18-year incumbent Senator Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut Democratic primary. And it’s a story that’s making Democrats and Republicans alike quite nervous.

In the New York Times, Adam Nagourney sees Lamont’s win as a referendum on Iraq and a sign of the “stiff anti-status-quo winds blowing across the political landscape as the fall elections approach.”

But more than that, the results of this most closely watched primary of the year raised red flags for both parties, going into the highly competitive fall elections.

For Democrats, the result closer than polls suggested and than many Democrats had expected dramatized the fault lines in the party over the war…

For Republicans already contemplating a gloomy fall horizon, the Lamont victory suggested that many Democrats stirred by their opposition to the war and hostility toward Mr. Bush are as energized as any group of voters in years, enough so to move them to the voting booth in huge numbers.

In the Washington Post, Shailagh Murray sees a potent combination of net-roots and grass-roots support.

Six months ago, Ned Lamont’s name recognition was, within the margin of error, zero.

Over at Salon, Joan Walsh has some marching orders for the Democratic establishment:

Now, if Democratic party leaders have any courage, they’ll lock arms against Lieberman’s selfish move and repudiate him just as boldly and quickly as Lieberman declared he would run. Because Lieberman’s run is selfish, and politically stupid. His “concession” speech echoed the Beltway wisdom that he’d been defeated by Bush haters, by the “politics of polarization.” But Lamont’s victory is more than the surprise uprising of Cindy Sheehan’s Camp Casey from last summer. The country has turned against the Iraq war, and Democrats like Lieberman and Republicans like, well, most Republicans have lost the battle for the middle ground.

Lamont’s victory isn’t just a win for the antiwar wing of the party. It’s a victory for Americans who fear the recklessness of the Bush administration, who feel the wheels are falling off the truck, and who want Democrats to fix it. Mainstream Democrats who can’t see that political reality are a threat to the party.

And of course, Kos has his own marching orders.

In other news…

Israel shuts down south Lebanon.

Condi allegedly furious with Bush.

And the editor of the National Review thinks global warming is great.


CommentsRSS icon

This is all nice, and I hate to be a nay sayer, but where were all these "energized voters" in '04? Why did it take four more years of Bush shit to get people's attention?

GRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!

It's already started. MSNBC reports Lieberman formed his own "party" called "Connecticut for Lieberman"... but whoever did that was not smart enough to at least reserve the domain name for it... as this web site shows... http://connecticutforlieberman.com/

I share your frustration, Mike, but maybe there's even a silver lining to that: those few extra years of Bush ineptitude could strengthen the Dems for years to come. The last couple of years have really solidified his reputation as an awful president, for those who weren't sure in 2004, and shown the neoconservative vision to be worthless.

Eli- the Condi site doesn't appear to work...

It worked for me.

Lieberman is a loser like Santorum and deserves a funny politician name definition. Let's show this loser what people really think about politico's who support the war. Santorum was a good start. Please add this Lieberman definition to your dictionary. -

Santorum - That frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes a byproduct of anal sex.


Lieberman - noun - A clot of blood than forms on an infant's penis if the Rabbi doesn't suck the blood away quick enough. -- The Rabbi used his tongue to dislodge the Lieberman that had formed on the penis. (There are three stages required for the performance of a ritually correct circumcision in Jewish law: the removal of the foreskin; the tearing of the underlying membraene so as to expose the glans completely; and the sucking away of the blood, m'tsitsah)see- http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/mohel.htm

And so, nearly six years later, the left reappropriates the name "Sore Loserman". I wouldn't have believed it if you told me.

Don't ignore what happened in Michigan's 7th District GOP primary. A moderate incumbent lost to a conservative challenger. Hopefully the Dems can seize the opportunity to pick up a seat.

Three incumbents got felled in primaries last night.

Justice is a dish best served cold, with a large heavy axe.

I'm curious to see how Lamont polls later on, with the Lieberman thorn in his side. I'm sure Censorship Joe's minions will take their party votes with them.

I know Conn. is blue, but I'm just worried that Lamont and Lieberman will split enough votes to allow a neocon to get the election win.

I think i saw somewhere that polling for the general went like this:
Lieberman - 40
Lamont - 40
Republican cannon fodder - 13

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).