First Post-Primary Lieberman-Lamont Poll Shows Tight Race

Taegan Goddard has an early look at Rasmussen’s numbers on the Connecticut general election poll, believed to be the first survey since Tuesday’s primary.

Rasmussen Reports began polling the Ned Lamont-Joe Lieberman general election match-up last night. After 375 interviews, preliminary numbers show Lieberman ahead of Lamont by 3 percentage points. Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger is a non-factor in the single digits. The last Rasmussen survey of a three way general election found Lamont and Lieberman tied at 40% with Schlesinger at 13%. It appears Lieberman is gaining ground primarily among GOP voters.

These numbers are interesting for conversation but little more. For one thing, an incomplete sample has a huge margin or error even if it represents an across-the-board look. And it may not; who knows which 375 these represent?

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2006, Public Opinion Polls, ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is a Security Studies professor at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. legion says:

    True. But even with a crap MoE, it supports the view that Schlesinger is a non-factor, and the Lieberman is the GOP candidate in all but party registration.

  2. James Joyner says:

    legion: I don’t think that’s quite right. Certainly, Schlesinger is a non-factor but I believe the GOP would prefer to run a legit candidate. The problem, in addition to the state’s party being all but destroyed of late, is that no one of consequence was going to run against Leiberman, the presumptive Democratic nominee. Schlesinger refuses to be dumped at this point.

    So, yes, I suspect most Republicans will support Lieberman in the general at this point, given the options. But I don’t think that’s the same as him being a RIABN.

  3. Let say I am a republican in CT. I can stay home. I can vote for a guy who is sure to lose. Or I can select between two liberals, one who wants to win the war on terror and the other doesn’t seem to understand that if the US is seen running away from Iraq before the country is secure, that said running away will hurt our winning the war on terror.

    When you put the choices that way, I suspect that a lot of people are going to support Lieberman. Hindsight being perfect, I have no doubt that the GOP wishes it had put in a stronger candidate who might be able to win because the other side is split. But then, I can name 7 senate races that the GOP could have done a better recruiting job. And when the may primary was held for the GOP, it looked like Lieberman would easily win the democratic primary and the general election. Who knew the democrats would commit inter party hari kari.

  4. legion says:

    So, the best candidate the GOP can field is the incumbent Democrat. Because no actual Republican can win. But the Democrats are rejecting the guy. And the GOP is all but openly endorsing him. And he lost because he was too close to Bush. But Bush is openly supporting him. But the only way he’ll get more votes than the GOP candidate would is if he can prove to voters he’s really not like Bush at all.

    Is this a political campaign or an M Knight Shamalan movie?

    TWIIIIIIIIIST!

  5. James Joyner says:

    legion: This is a guy who votes with the Democrats, what, 92% of the time? Compared to a presumed ultra liberal Democrat and a placeholder GOP candidate with ethics issues, he’s obviously the Republicans’ best choice.

    Lieberman ran against Bush in 2000 and opposes most of his policies. But the one Bush–and the Democratic nominating electorate in CT, apparently–cares the most about, Iraq, is one where they’re in synch. Lamont is in the “leave now, no matter what the consequences” camp. Bush would prefer Lieberman? Go figure.