The Great CT Democratic Primary Open Thread.
Cry 'Havoc!' - and slip the dogs of war.
By Moe Lane Posted in 2006 — Comments (85) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Pizza?
Check.
Beer?
Check.
CT Secretary of State and Voter result links (Via RCP)?
Check. Although that may change.
[UPDATE] It has: here is the relevant link.
[ANOTHER UPDATE] This blog looks like it'll be hopping on this, too.
[JOINING THE THRONG OF UPDATES]: There's also Hotline. Click through and maybe they'll link to us, the big galoots.
Ladies and gentlemen, please put your tray tables up into the full, upright position and prepare for takeoff. We're going to have a bumpy night of it. Or not.
One prediction: when the first set of results come in, the general response will be "Well, it's early yet".
Read on.
[UPDATE-A-RAMA]: Well, it's early yet. Lamont jumps out of the gate with 126 to 66. If that ratio holds up, this will be a short night.
[ZAP AN UPDATE] ...and the CT government server just crashed. This makes me perversely proud, for some reason.
[JEREMIAH WAS AN UPDATE] All hail the power of the blogosphere! Alternate results of 60/40 Lamont.
[WAS A GOOD UPDATE OF MINE] ...and here's another one, because the other one looks like it's crashing, too. Good job, Ender. Have fun at Battle School.
[IF I HAD AN UPDATE]: Here's another one - swami's, this time. Folks, it's easier for me to link 'em if they've been htmled for me.
[I SEE UPDATES]: If - if - the vote reverses after service is resumed, how long before the conspiracy theories come out?
[INSERT FUNNY UPDATE COMMENT HERE] Some movement, although CT's still slashdotted: 56/44 Lamont.
[UPDATE, UPDATE, WHO'S GOT THE UPDATE?] At 11% it's steady for Lamont. Time for a quick break.
[SHE HAD A DARK AND A ROVING UPDATE] No, no, the idea was that there was to be movement while I got a beer. Not nothing in particular happening. OTOH, it looks like MacKinney's getting spanked like a red-headed stepchild.
[YIPPIE-KI-AY, MOTHERUPDATER]: Ratio holding at 17% for Lamont.
[YOU CAN'T KEEP A GOOD UPDATE DOWN]: Totals again from the CT website... which make no bloody sense whatsover. Weren't there more votes?
[I'M REROUTING THE UPDATE THROUGH THE DILITHIUM CRYSTALS, CAPTAIN]: CTBob has numbers; darned if I know where they're coming from. The official site has 1/10 of the totals of the other ones, and I'm not sure but I think that it doesn't have any of the urban areas up yet.
[YOU WILL KNOW FEAR, YOU WILL KNOW PAIN AND THEN YOU WILL UPDATE. HAVE A NICE DAY]: Another set of numbers - and they ain't getting 'em from the official website, so don't ask me where they're getting 'em has it 52/48 Lamont, with 54% tabulated.
[OH UPDATES, COME ON DOWN, WON'T YOU COME ON DOWN]: Right now we're getting everything from 50% to 80% tabulated, with percentages ranging all over the place. Everybody agrees that Lamont's winning, but by how much is up in the air. Anybody got a chicken they don't need anymore?
[IIII HAVVVE BECOMME... COMFORTABLY UPDATED] OK, at 74% and counting it's 52% - 48%, Lamont. Even if Joe loses tonight he's going to go for the independent shot.
[WE BELONG TO THE NIGHT, WE BELONG TO THE UPDATE]: Drudge just called it for Lamont with 81% of the total. So much for staying up until 3 AM.
[PUFF THE MAGIC UPDATE LIVED BY CT]: The margins are wavering, sllloooowllly. I'm thinking that unless there's whole bunches of Lieberman votes waiting to be counted - and if CT would get its collective thumb out of its collective orifices, I might be able to tell - it's Lamont's night.
Tomorrow? Game on.
[SAY GOODNIGHT, UPDATE] Good night, folks. God only knows how long it'll take for Diebold to cook the remaining 5% or whatever, so I'm off to get some sleep. Thanks for reading.
« When Negative Ads Backfire — Comments (4) | Tea Leaves — Comments (4) »
The Great CT Democratic Primary Open Thread. 85 Comments (0 topical, 85 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
(deep bow)
Although not as much as your husband would, were I to declare kanly. :)
Moe
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
I just don't care about the outcome tonight. I should have clarified. :P
"I'm just beginning...The pen's in my hand...Ending unplanned"
On the idiotic "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" at the top of the hour (8 p.m. ET) tonight.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
what will such a concentration of hatred and stupidity produce? nonetheless, I think I'll pass (the antacid, for those who don't).
ok, so I'm watching a bit (though it's Chriss Matthews on right now, not Kos). Matthews is talking about the website hack, and how the big hurt there is the loss of the ability to email and gotv, telling people "we'll come by, have your clothes on" etc.
wha? lefties disenfranchising nudists? say it ain't so!
Kos was whining about how it didn't even matter if they won or lost because I guess they've already achieved their objective... Right.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I turned back to the computer, and then looked back to see Kos on the screen, mumble something about the incompetence of the Lieberman campaign, and ran screaming from the room (ok, I just flipped channels)
you know, the Kossacks might not be able to beat a Republican, or even power a lightbulb with their collective IQs, but I'd wager they probably double Olberman's rating share when their Dear Leader is on (admittedly, that's a lot easier task than either of the others)
I swear, if he'd been a Public Affairs officer for the War Department in 1876, he'd have pitched the Little Big Horn as a big-picture victory for the US Cavalry.
After all, Custer DID force the Sioux and Cheyenne to expend most of their ammunition. And, the Indian horses were tired after the battle.
"Who will stand/On either hand/And guard this bridge with me?" (Macaulay)
I have never heard of this show. It must not be on a network that i watch
-----------------------------------------------------------
What i have in my heart , I'll take to my grave - Hatebreed
Let's just hope Joementum doesn't end up in another Tie for Third™.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
is also liveblogging over at hughhewitt.com (at least until he gets bored)
I like lieberman and admire his willingness to stand for what he believes. Lamont, I know little of except he appears to be a bounder and an unrepentant opportunist. A lamont win will be undoubtely bad for the democrats but possibly bad for the country. A lieberman win will be better for the country and the democrats. My head is splitting over who to root for.
Link here
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
here where with 4% still same spread.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Here is a link to a CT paper with results:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2006/by_state/CT_Page_0808....
At least, until some denial of service attack takes this site down too.
If Lieberman loses the primary, runs as an independent, wins the election, then switches to Republican. Kos can say they showed him, at least he is out of the party.
Hey, Lieberman is one of the few sane Ds left.
Drudge is reporting:
Connecticut // U.S. Senate - - Dem Primary
29 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 5.88%
Lamont, Ned Dem 9,399 56.63%
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 7,199 43.37%
So Joe has gained three point 37 percentage points with nearly 6% of the results in.
A surg....ah, never mind.
Lamont winning with almost 10%
69 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 9.22%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 16,799 56.65
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 12,854 43.35
it's early yet
-----------------------------------------------------------
What i have in my heart , I'll take to my grave - Hatebreed
...And this makes me very sad, because I wanted to go there to read reports of Rethuglican dirty tricks at the polls.
Nevermind this is a race that they'll probably win in which no Republican is on the ballot. Trust me, Halliburton is ordering Diebold to swing this one to Bush.
What a PR disaster THAT would be for the Dems.
One can always hope.
With 12% reporting (20 of 158)
Johnson - 2,126 (74%)
McKinney - 745 (26%)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
189 precincts
Lamont 43,000
Lieberman 39,000
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
14%
Lamont, Ned Dem 25,969 57.79%
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 18,968 42.21%
doh! what a silly statement. "there are more registered independents than democrats in connecticut, so that favors lieberman"
yeah, but I don't know of anyone that votes straight independent ticket.
and poor alan colmes. stuck at lamont headquarters. those people probably hate him almost as much as they hate lieberman.
there's less lunatics in the general population than in the democrat primary by percentage, so THAT favors Lieberman.
49K Lamont 53%
42K Lieberman 47%
count as well
189 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 25.27%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 40,934 55.09
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 33,375 44.91
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/
Republicans To Support Indy Lieberman?
A well-connected Republican tells Kevin F. Rennie that in the aftermath of a potential Lieberman loss, you can expect clear signals from Washington Republicans at the highest level that it is OK for CT GOPers and others to openly support Lieberman in an independent bid for the Senate.
straight from kos and also heard on CT radio.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
60K Lamont 55%
50K Lieberman 45%
...without this:
Richard J. Daley 107,149 63%
Drink Good Coffee. You can sleep when you're dead.
Correction to earlier report
Lieberman won the district he grew up in -- he didn't lose there.
No report yet from his New Haven residence district.
Either the earlier figures at 34% were wrong, or these are percentages (since they work out to that anyway with the numbers given)
Lamont 54000
Lieberman 46000
...stay up until 3 AM and gibber like a madman all over the website. Admit it. :)
Moe
PS: Everyone, thanks for the linkages.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
We both know that Rove already has this race fixed, but its important that we keep up the pretence that Lamont has a shot, the better to crush his supporters when he loses.
Did I say that out loud?
45% of precincts
Lamont 76,000 54%
Lieberman 66,000 46%
much better now than CT Bob
376 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 50.27%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 70,444 52.13
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 64,700 47.87
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Best case, as far as I'm concerned, would be a very narrow win for Lamont and Joe running as an independent.
I'm still most interested in hearing what Hillary has to say tomorrow.
do i want the instant gratification of seeing the moonbats temporarily crushed by a lieberman win now? or the impending crushing that a lamont win now is a harbinger of?
52-48 is a really good percentage for the lieberman independent scenario.
404 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 54.01%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 74,396 51.98
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 68,718 48.02
...CTBob, a Lamont supporter, seems to have stopped updating his numbers.
VBG
"I can't heeeeeear you!" lol! the instant gratification of the lefties crying themselves to sleep tonight would not be a bad consolation prize after all.
would be gratifying, I still am more interested in hearing how Senator Hillary would field questions tomorrow about a loss by Joe.
with Jesse Jackson, Maxine Waters and the rest of the America-hating moonbats who are hanging out at Lamont's HQ.
Good margin for maximum Dem damage.
80% in
Lamont 117000 ------ 53%
Lieberman 103000 -- 47%
Joe needs a roughly 2-1 margin in the remaining 20% to pull this off. highly unlikely. getting near time to turn out the lights.
Seems pretty consistent -- good positioning probably for an independent Joe run.
"9:50PM - Moments before the polls closed, the Rev. Jesse Jackson stopped by the blogger's War Room to thank us for our work, and spoke for 10 minutes on the importance of this election.
It's times like this that makes me proud to be associated with the wonderful people who support Ned Lamont."
Now I'm really, really worried.
With the Rev. Jackson behind them, how can they possibly lose in November.
.....right!
Cynthia McKinney 2,607 30%
Hank Johnson 5,996 70%
:)
It boosts my confidence in the Israelis that they can apparantly fight both Hezbollah and McKinney at the same time.
From his report of a couple of minutes ago of "80 % in" he now updates with:
With 542/743 precincts
Lamont 117,678 ------- 52%
Lieberman 110,339 --- 48%
That's 73% of the precincts, by the way.
Ol' CTBob is starting to get folks angry with his numbers.
Might want to change his handle to CTBoob.
537 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 71.79%
Lamont, Ned 100,425 -------- 51.61%
Lieberman, Joe (i) 94,148 --- 48.39%
... if this race ended in a recount?
Delicious, actually.
-------------
"I don't know." -- Helen Thomas, when asked by White House spokesman Scott McClellan, "Are we at war, Helen?"
Commenters at CtBob are in despair.
Hartford hasn't come in yet, and they say that could give the win to Lieberman.
Don't know how I feel about that.
Depends on turnout. It's usually pretty low there to for general elections, never mind primaries.
This one will end up 50.5-49.0.
A perfect storm.
575 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 79.95%
Lamont, Ned 114,165 -------------- 51.75%
Lieberman, Joe (i) 106,428 ------- 48.24%
575 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 79.95%
Lamont, Ned 114,165 51.75% **Winner
Lieberman, Joe (i) 106,428 48.24%
Lieberman has to get 56% of remaining votes to win.
they're still convinced that they've lost this.
Evidently, they think that Joe could pull enough in the outstanding precincts to edge ahead.
The most positive statements there are disappointment that Lamont didn't win by a big enough lead to force Joe not to run as an independent.
Like the man said above...Perfect Storm.
Georgia, U.S. House Democratic District 4
Precincts Reporting: 58 of 167 (35%)
Hank Johnson 12098 60%
Cynthia McKinney (I) 8002 40%
Georgia, U.S. House Democratic District 4
Precincts Reporting: 58 of 167 (35%)
Hank Johnson 12098 ---------- 60%
Cynthia McKinney (I) 8002 --- 40%
Drudge/AP
Sorry-I know this is Conn. territory but wanted to throw a quick update from my state to everyone with their eyes glued to Connecticut.
10:18
28.04 %
Bouchard 59.51% 94,277
Butler 40.49% 64,136
29.17%
Walberg 57.80% 10,467
Schwartz 42.2% 7643
They're dancing like the Munchkins they are...
Enjoy kiddies enjoy.
All you have done tonight is weaken a (formerly) great political party. That's all you've done.
So sleep well tonight children...for tomorrow you will awaken to a different world.
You won't like it.
Lieberman is likely going to lose by just enough to require gobs of cash in the coming election. Keep the moonbats occupied and spending money on something that doesn't count in the grand scheme of things.
Best of all possible outcomes.
They should come out officially for Lieberman. It is known by now that Schlessinger has used a phoney identity to gamble heavily and that the GOP in Connecticut has asked him to step aside in the race. He has refused. So the GOP should go around him and throw their official support behind Lieberman's independent candidacy and encourage Connecticut Republicans to get out there in November to vote for Joe.
Back in 1988, conservatives backed Joe to get rid of the blight on the party that Lowell Weicker had become. They should do the same in 2006 in order to prevent this seat from going to someone who is beholden to the most radical fringe element of the Democrat Party.
We've stood with Joe before, let's stand with him again.
I feel very sad today. I just hope that Lieberman decides to keep fighting and conservatives should back him.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I really don't like the comments going on to a 2nd page (and dropping the *NEW* when you click to the 2nd page)
Looks like the GOP won tonight. Walberg winning big, Mckinney losing big, and Lieberman losing narrowly so he can run as an indy and suck up all the time & money of the Dems.
2006 - It's just not safe to vote Democrat
Will you shoot me if I say I don't care? Should I hide now? I'm a bad, bad republican.
"I'm just beginning...The pen's in my hand...Ending unplanned"