[Update:<\/b> My bad on getting the wrong commenter. It was Walter’s Ridge, not<\/b> Hypocracyrules, who thought I got a righeous beeatch-slappin’<\/i>. I just suck with names, there’s no other excuse. Apologies to Hypocracy…]<\/b> <\/p>\n
So Red Dan, from DailyKos was polite enough to post a link to the diary he did on my Lieberman article<\/a> – surprisingly, he didn’t like it.<\/p>\n Walter’s Ridge<\/u> My favorite quote:<\/p>\n Most likely win? Based on what? One poll taken in May\/June? Based on assumptions and assertions about the CT demographic and voter makeup? How about this:<\/p>\n All Connecticut voters disapprove 72 – 24 percent<\/b> of the job President Bush is doing. Voters disapprove 73 – 23 percent<\/b> of the way the President is handling the Iraq war and say 63 – 33 percent<\/b> that going to war in Iraq was the wrong thing to do.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n That was taken from the same June 8 poll (Quinnipiac)<\/a> showing Lamont starting to cut into Lieberman’s lead in the primary and gaining significantly in a three way race for the Senate. That poll was followed up by this poll from Rasmussen<\/a> and Another poll from Rasmussen<\/a> both showing that not only is Lieberman losing ground in the primary, but he is losing ground in the Senate election race itself. And those polls were in early June.<\/p>\n \nMr. Danziger, please tell me what that says about the chances for Lamont to win should he get the nod in the Democratic Primary.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\nHypocracyrules<\/strike> sees his article as “a righteous beeatch-slappin’<\/a>”<\/p>\n