Will the Lamont race be THE political litmus test on the Iraq War?

[CTyankee]

I am getting concerned that national commentators are setting up the Lamont bid as "deciding" whether or not the Iraq War is a winning issue in 06 and by extension in the 08 presidential race.

Is anyone else getting the feeling that if Lamont doesn't win, the corporate media will just seize on the "failure" of the Iraq War in deciding election outcomes, thereby ruling it out as a viable issue to run on?

Don't get me wrong: I am completely supportive of Ned Lamont. But I can almost hear the commentary if he loses his bid. The media noise machine will blare about how the war is a "losing" issue and rally repubs to get more aggressive and scared Dems to run away from it.

Or am I just getting paranoid?

[skipos]

1. I think most folks think Lamont is going to lose

because he is a newbie and Lieberman is the professional politician. I don't think anyone will claim he lost because CT likes the war. Polls show they don't.

It is obvious most Americans think Iraq is a disaster, and that won't change won way or another after this race.

[liberaliraqvet26]

2. hopefully it will. eom.

[BillZBubb]

3. I'm worried like you. The corporate media will spin it as you say.

If Lamont loses, it will PROVE that the Occupation of Iraq is not a decisive political issue. It won't mean it is a losing issue, just that weasel politicians can sidestep the issue by getting the SHEEPLE to look at other "issues". The Repugs and DINO's will breathe a big sigh of relief.

It will definitely encourage the Repugs for November and cause our already weak Democratic opposition to slide even further into complicity.

Lamont needs to win this.

[CTyankee]

4. The problem is not the war issue

For Ned it is visibility, name recognition, against an 18 year incumbent, plus other issues. For instance, Joe is taking credit for saving the Groton sub base from closure and he runs an ad with "ordinary" workers saying "Joe saved my job." Joe can't prove he did that single handedly but we can't disprove it either. It was a joint effort with the local congressman and Sen. Dodd, certainly not Joe's one man show! So that may sway Dem voters who don't know any better.

Ned is coming from behind, no question. We all knew this going in and I hope people don't get exuberant expectations. So far Ned has done stupendously well. I'm just concerned that most Dem voters won't know enough about him by August 8. Plus, I am worried that many, many voters will be on vacation and won't vote absentee ballot because it takes extra effort.

So if Ned loses, it won't be a referendum on the war issue; there will be other issues. However, as you point out, the corporate media will say "See, the war is a loser issue!"

[calico1]

5. Well I can tell you that here in CT

the media is portraying this not at all as a referendum on how much people support/not support the Iraq war, but as an unknown challenging a well known, experienced incumbent. But that is locally. You can count on at least Faux news portraying this in the way you describe. I hope most that for most of the media they see it the way the local media here is.

[CTyankee]

6. Yep, you are right. I am in New Haven and I read

the Register, the Courant and the CT Post in addition to the Boston Globe and the New York Times regularly. The local media does mention the war issue but has more nuances, like to sub base I mentioned, and other facets of the campaign.

[rucky]

7. That's the proper narrative...

which indirectly leads to Iraq.

The beltway insiders are not listening to public outcry over Iraq - or pretty much anything else. The anti-incument mood is way beyond CT.

[Sam Odom]

8. If the antiwar message won't play in CT will it play in the HEARTLAND?

I can almost hear Brian Williams saying that...

(on edit)

Sorry rucky, didnt mean to tag this to your post

[MrBenchley]

9. The Unknown Millionaire has no other issue

and he jumped into a fight in a state with a lot of defense industries (does the phrase "Arsenal of Democracy" ring a bell?)....

And remeber, he's also given the Republicans a chance at picking up a Senate seat they had no chance on earth at six months ago....

Yeah, the rest of us Democrats should be listening to what the far left thinks "strategy" is....NOT.

[CTyankee]

10. I don't think Ned would necessarily be opposed to the

defense industries. I haven't heard anything from Ned Lamont to the contrary. You do have a funny idea about our state and its denizens.

As for the Republican candidate, since he was recently outed as having used an alias whilst gambling at Foxwoods, our esteemed Republican governor and the head of the state Republican party have both asked said candidate to "reconsider" his run as Republican Senate candidate. With that kind of support, who needs enemies?

Do try to keep up, Benchley. Some day you may get it right about Connecticut.

[MrBenchley]

11. Hey, there's a reason I call him the Unknown Millionaire...

I doubt most of the mob whooping for him could pick his picture out of a photo array....

"As for the Republican candidate, since he was recently outed as having used an alias whilst gambling at Foxwoods, our esteemed Republican governor and the head of the state Republican party have both asked said candidate to "reconsider" his run as Republican Senate candidate"
Yes, I know...but then the last guy to run against Joe Lieberman was a child molester.

[CTyankee]

12. I wouldn't go there if I were you

I doubt if very many people would have picked Joe's picture out of a photo gallery. He's not a very appealing dude, to say the least!:rofl:

[MrBenchley]

13. Jeeze, I wouldn't go anywhere you're going....

but then I have actual comprehension skills when I read....

[CTyankee]

14. Well, I thought it was funny the way you put the picture thing.

Maybe you should take a trip to Connecticut to get a better idea of the way we live here. You might learn a few things, who knows...

[MrBenchley]

17. Too bad you didn't comprehend what I wrote

oft you might have found it even funnier....

[CTyankee]

19. Yeah, I did.

Not that much funnier, however. I'll still take the Almond Joy. Oh, well...

[MrBenchley]

21. It shows, haha....

[ClassWarrior]

15. You're buying into the Corporate Media spin that Iraq is a single issue.

It's the lies that took us into an illegal war.

It's torture.

It's blowing the cover on a CIA agent working on stopping WMDs.

It's a distraction from the failure to capture Osama binLaden

It's illegal spying on political enemies and ordinary citizens.

And it's much, much more.

Don't promote RW frames.

NGU.

[CTyankee]

16. You are absolutely right! In my view, it's a given that the corporate

media reduces the war to this "frame." It is much, much more as you have pointed out. I hope Ned gets a chance to elaborate more on this point, but for now he has to keep it simple and succinct.

[ClassWarrior]

18. True, but it's a simple way to take the wind out of the "he's a single...

...issue candidate" meme.

:toast:

(Sorry, that was supposed to be a reply to you CT...)

NGU.

[CTyankee]

20. But the RW media will present it that way

so we are stuck with a frame that has been presented to us. We have tried to enlarge the frame with all the issues we know are relevant but to no avail. They just roll right over us. Unless we fight really hard and expend lots of campaign time to fighting their lies. That makes it hard to establish our good issues.