Blogging as a Lamont supporter, I have to say that this sounds good for Joe today, with his numbers hitting exactly where they needed to be once he lost the Democratic primary. In the same report, it might be argued that Joe has peaked and executed well, but if Lamont can get his message out there he can close this gap.

From the Hartford Courant article

But Lieberman, who stayed in the race as a petitioning candidate, enjoys a 57 percent approval rating and has managed to capture 67 percent of the Republican vote, while keeping 35 percent of Democrats in his camp. Unaffiliated voters prefer him over Lamont 45-37 percent.

Somehow the combination of Lieberman advantages have gotten Joe to his target. From my armchair I'd say they are: 18 year incumbency, favorable national news coverage, ready PAC and lobby donations, and lastly what I think is a packaged-to-sell message of anti-partisanship.

I take some comfort in Matt Stoller's analysis.

Lieberman's been up on the air a lot more than Lamont recently, so Lieberman's apparent bleeding of support lends some credence to the theory that he's peaked.

The race does seem to have a very large pool of uncommitted voters, bigger than anything I remember.

If I'm reading this correctly, there is a 38 point battlefield for undecided and open-to-change voters.

From the Courant again:

Lieberman leads Lamont among likely voters 48-40 percent, with 8 percent undecided and roughly 15 percent of both candidates' supporters saying they still could change their minds before Nov. 7.

Lamont still has the same two tasks he's had since the primary. He needs to educate voters on what he will do in office, and why having Lieberman in office at this time in his career is dangerous.

It is my humble opinion that Lieberman's particular anti-partisanship has only one course to run - lobby-driven voting rather than platform driven representation.

I already have faith in his GOTV. I certainly hope Lamont's ads get better and more numerous.

UPDATE: This is old news, not a new endorsement. Via spazeboy below.

Sue from MyLeftNutmeg tells the tale

from the article...

As a member of the U.S. Senate, Ned Lamont would be a strong advocate for public schools, and that’s why Connecticut’s two teacher unions are endorsing his candidacy.

Rosemary Coyle, president of the Connecticut Education Association, said, “Lamont will challenge the current administration and its priorities. He understands that the answer to even better schools is not more standardized tests or vouchers. The key is adequate resources from the federal government to support universal preschool and expanded educational opportunities at every level. This is a critical time in the history of public education as the federal government imposes unrealistic requirements on schools, and it’s time that Connecticut had a champion for students, teachers and public education in the U.S. Senate.”

And before anyone gets on Ned's case about whether or not Ned was a teacher, the CEA addresses the issue very nicely:

Coyle pointed out that Lamont volunteers in a 50-year old inner-city public school, and he has said that quality public education is our best hope for providing every child the best opportunity in life. “He has felt the same frustrations teachers face, and he is listening to their concerns. Across Connecticut, his vision resonates with teachers who have dedicated their lives to helping children. He has the energy and determination to refocus our nation’s priorities. A win for Ned Lamont in November will be a win for Connecticut’s teachers and students.”

MyLeftNutmeg link

This from the campaign:

Today labor leaders representing over 193,000 working men and women across Connecticut announced the formation of Labor for Lamont. Participating unions include AFSCME, SEUI, AFT, CEA, Machinists, UAW and Teamsters.

Lamont's support among Labor continues to grow because of his support for universal health care, his commitment to fair trade and his real world experience of meeting a bottom line while providing health care and benefits to his employees.

"In my business I don't want to compete against some fly-by-night company that doesn't pay decent wages or provide health care," said Democratic Nominee for US Senate Ned Lamont. "To compete you need to know the rules and have a level playing field. That's why we need a change in our trade policies so our economic policies are working for the middle class."

"Senator Lieberman lost the AFL-CIO endorsement today," said Sharon Palmer of AFT. "Lamont fell just short of the two thirds majority needed for the full endorsement but he has over 193,000 workers standing here with him today ready to work to bring his message of change across Connecticut."

"We're proud to stand behind a candidate with the courage to stand up for change and working families," said Robert Madore of UAW. "Labor for Lamont is going to work as hard as we can for change. We will be going door to door, making phone calls and doing lit drops.

If Joe wins, if he caucuses with the GOP, it works for everyone but him.

Wouldn't the GOP will dump all the failures on him that they can if/when it comes time for PayBack2008?

Making him the SecDef would have to be radioactive, I doubt it would work in any party's Congress. Why would the GOP want to look like it is surrendering its War on Terror to the CFL party?

Don't the Democrats gain credibility, saying 'Look: he made some very bad decisions and would not change. He took his bad judgement with him across the aisle, where it was most welcome. Vote Democratic in 2008. Thank you."

Maybe Joe will see this coming and bail.

Can anyone say with any certainty that he's do the right thing with the party who nurtured him for decades? He's played the eager fool every time the GOP asks him to. He threw away his party's primary rather than stand on his hind legs and really run. He merely moped around waiting to be crowned and have the party do some hatchet work.

With every threat he makes, the Democrats look more like punching bags.

So what's the harm?

Got this from rawstory, but quotes Roll Call:

Former pols stump for Joe. However much genuine feeling is there, what is this an outlet for? Are they speaking to CT voters, current pols, and/or current and prospective lobbying clients? After all, the group:

"...is not taking any issue positions, and its support does not translate into an endorsement of Lieberman’s stance on the Iraq War or any other specific issue, organizers and the Lieberman camp stressed."

So we have a sentiment, not a movement. Vote for Joe because we vouch for him in a very non-specific way.

"It just seemed ‘Hey what’s going on here?’” he asked. “This guy is a Democrat and people should know that. We just started talking to each other and it grew.”

What is going on here? Seems to me he was a Democrat, and he would be stumping for Lamont if he were a Democrat today. He is the only member of a vanity plate party.

"A common thread among the geographically and ideologically diverse group is a sense that Lieberman was unfairly being portrayed as a 'bad' Democrat,"

Does this kind of effort on the part of the 50 matter to them more than a fair primary election does? He wasn't found to be a 'bad' Democrat, merely the one fewer Democrats from Connecticut wanted for the job.