Lieberman Lead Reaches Double Digits

I'm essentially done with the Foley issue--at least for the near term. Others are covering it and it won't mean a damn thing come election time. The best outcome is it dies quickly but the chances are slim. The worst is that it drags in numerous others--including Democrats--and we have an issue that will set back the House (and possibly Senate) for years.

In much, much more important news, Joe Lieberman has opened up a 10-percentage point lead on Ned Lamont and looks to have the election in hand:

Senator Joseph Lieberman (I) has increased his margin over Democrat Ned Lamont by eight points. He now leads the antiwar candidate 50% to 40% (see crosstabs).

Thirty-nine percent (39%) are certain of their Lieberman vote, while 30% definitely expect to pull the lever for Lamont.

GOP nominee Alan Schlesinger now attracts 6% of all voters.

Soon after losing the Democratic nomination, Senator Lieberman, campaigning now as an Independent (or "Independent Democrat"), was five points ahead. His lead then narrowed to two points in our most recent poll.

Lamont recently pumped another $1,250,000 of his own funds into the campaign in hopes of turning the tide.

Keep pumping that money in, Ned. The local TV and radio stations in CT love it. It won't help you however.

TAPPED whines as is their wont.

Unbelieveably, Teddy Kennedy came out to help Lamont:

"You know," Lieberman added, "I come from the Truman/J.F. Kennedy wing of the Democratic Party. We're socially progressive at home and we're strong in foreign and defense policy and, frankly, I don't think until the Democratic Party gets back to that balance that we're going to elect a president again."

Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy, who was in Connecticut Wednesday campaigning for Lieberman's opponent, Ned Lamont, was asked about Lieberman's comment later in the day.

If Lieberman believes that the invasion of Iraq was in keeping with the muscular foreign policy of Truman and JFK, Kennedy said, "He doesn't have it right."

Kennedy, who voted against the Iraq war resolution, said the Bush administration misled Congress and the public into supporting the war, while his brother used solid intelligence to justify a blockade of Cuba to force the removal of Soviet missiles.

Let me step in here. What intelligence did JFK use when he authorized the Bay of Pigs invasion and then abandoned the men on the beach? What intelligence did he use when he chose to send "advisors" into Vietnam, thus embroiling us in a war that would tear apart the nation?

"President Kennedy would have been very careful with the facts. He would have been very careful not to sign on for distortions, misrepresentations and manipulation of intelligence," Kennedy said. "That wasn't the Cuban missile crisis. So Joe Lieberman is wrong on this, as he is on the war in Iraq."

Um, Senator? Please allow me to break through your alcohol-induced haze and share some facts with you.

You said there were WMD in Iraq. In case you forgot, let me refresh your memory (you know, the memory that failed you when a woman lay dying in your car under the water and you forgot to call anyone and tell them--except your lawyer, but I digress.)

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002 (conveniently removed from his Senate site)