If Lieberman Loses On Tuesday...

[RTFirefly]

Lamont site sez:

We’ve offered to send our tech guru over to fix their website problems. That was over an hour ago—no response.

UPDATE: Here’s the Google cache version of Joe’s campaign website. It’s not perfect, but it has all the content preserved.

To the extent that the Lieberman campaign can put up messages that persons trying to access www.joe2006.com can see, people are finding it kinda puzzling that none of them include a link to the Google cache.

[Cervaise]

Of course, now that his website problems are in the news, every surfer with a passing interest in politics is going to check it out, so no surprise its performance is suffering.

“Dude! Yesterday we had fifty hits an hour! Today we’re the sixth lead on Yahoo News and we’re getting fifty thousand hits an hour! Make it stop! Make it stop!”

[Squink]

@Cervaise

Of course, now that his website problems are in the news, every surfer with a passing interest in politics is going to check it out, so no surprise its performance is suffering.

The paucity of hamsters probably has something to do with Lieberman’s site woes too:

They are paying $15/month for hosting at a place called MyHostCamp, with a bandwidth limit of 10GB. MyHostCamp is currently down, along with all their clients…
-Joe’s site shares one server with 73 other sites.

Lieberman should have bought more tubes.

[elucidator]

@John Mace

…What’s your favored term-- a semantic nitpick of no consequence?..

Really got your goatee with that one, didn’t I, Bubba?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

I know a lot of people have all sorts of theories about why Lieberman is bad but I can’t help thinking that if he opposed the initial invasion and if he didn’t try to paint a rosy picture of the istuation in Iraq, he wouldn’t be having the problems he is having now.

One of the advantages of having a 2 party system is that it is supposed to improve accountability and I don’t think it would be unreasonable to hold Republicans accountable this election cycle. This means that whichever Republican runs in Ney’s spot or Delay’s spot just loses regardless of how much better they are than their Democratic counterpart. This means that Republicans generally suffer defeats in otherwise safe districts and that the next Republican candidate for President just loses if the Democrats can come up with a halfway decent candidate (easier said than done).

If we didn’t have the total ratscrew going on in Iraq, most people would either forget about or forgive incidents like Terry Schiavo, Katrina, Social Security privitization, national debt, trade deficit, immigration, etc and just vote for the better candidate, but Iraq is (and should) move more than a few votes over into the blue column.

At this point it doesn’t matter if Lieberman wins or loses, the point has been made. Hopefully this will be sufficient to inform the Democratic Party NOT to nominate Hillary Cinton (Republicans won’t vote for her and I know enough Democrats who would vote for a Republican like Powell or McCain over Clinton to think that she would be a disaster). Now we just need an electable Democratic candidate (Al Gore might work, I saw him recently and sometime between 2000 and today he has found passion and while he’s a little left of where I would like to be, he is smart and recent events have convinced me that intelligence is an important attribute in a President).

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Squink

The paucity of hamsters probably has something to do with Lieberman’s site woes too:Lieberman should have bought more tubes.

Oh, for pity’s sake. I was pretty skeptical of the claim that it was a hosting problem, given the timing; but if their web presence is so silly, it does make sense that webite visits would skyrocket in the week before the primary, and that the ISP might shut the site down if it’s overwhelming their server.

Daniel

[RTFirefly]

Meanwhile, turnout is high:

Connecticut Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz (D) said she expected turnout today of 40%, much higher than the 25% that is typical of state primaries, the AP reports.

One reason: The weather is perfect today. It’s sunny with temparatures around 85 degrees and low humidty.

If LIeberman loses the primary, there goes his “a small group of obsessed wackos can hijack an August primary” excuse for an independent run.

Maybe the whole “OMGOMG I’ve been hacked” bit is the backup excuse. MyDD claims the Lieberman site crashed the last time they had a traffic surge, back in June.

Greg Sargent of Josh Marshall’s TPM Cafe site says:

I just got off the phone with top Joe Lieberman adviser Dan Gerstein, and he acknowledged to me that the Lieberman camp doesn’t have any evidence that the Lamont campaign – or Lamont supporters – are behind the alleged hack attack on the Lieberman campaign web site.

Asked if the Lieberman campaign had any idea who might be behind the alleged attacks, Gerstein said: “We don’t.”

But Lieberman campaign manager Sean Smith has directly accused Lamont supporters of being behind it, adding: “If Ned Lamont has a backbone in his body, he will call on these people to cease and desist.” And earlier today Gerstein himself was more directly accusatory, saying outright: “Their supporters are doing these” attacks.

And having no evidence of any connection between Lamont, his campaign, or his supporters hasn’t stopped the Loserman campaign from making outlandish demands of Lamont:

the Lamont campaign Web coordinator, Tim Tagaris, had posted a statement disavowing any campaign involvement and calling on anyone doing the attacks to stop. But Gerstein said that still wasn’t enough. “We asking it to come directly from Ned Lamont and that they aggressively circulate that statement.”

The argument the Lieberman campaign appears to be making, then, is that though they don’t have any evidence that Lamont supporters are behind the attack, the candidate himself should demand a cessation of the attack from any supporters who *might *have done it.

Man, they must’ve been dealt a full hand of victim cards.

[Marley23]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

If it was hacked, that’s despicable; I hope that we can all agree on this in the most unqualified terms, and hope for prosecution of anyone involved. Such action poisons democracy.

And I think we’d also agree that the same goes for reckless and false accusations, and that’s what the charges from Lieberman’s camp appear to be. Fortunately for them, the press is reporting Lieberman’s accusations without investigating if they’re true. :rolleyes:

[DMark]

@Marley23

And I think we’d also agree that the same goes for reckless and false accusations, and that’s what the charges from Lieberman’s camp appear to be. Fortunately for them, the press is reporting Lieberman’s accusations without investigating if they’re true. :rolleyes:

According to MSNBC, A Las Vegas Website Company created the website. However, if you go to that link, they deny having anything whatsoever to do with the creation or management of Lieberman’s website, and they are based in Califonia with just an office in Las Vegas…so either Lieberman’s people have no clue who created their website, or the press got it wrong and is too busy to click and see the disclaimer.

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

Really got your goatee with that one, didn’t I, Bubba?

Whenever I travel in a foreign land I try to speak the language of the natives.

[RTFirefly]

@Kos

I won’t speculate whether this is good for Lieberman or Lamont. I have no frackin’ clue. But it certainly is good for democracy and the people of Connecticut.

-Kos, speaking about the high turnout numbers

[Squink]

Results:
http://www.statementofvote-sots.ct.gov/StatementOfVote/WebModules/ReportsLink/USSenCounty.aspx
http://www.wfsb.com/politics/9641261/detail.html

First site is official, the second has the advantage of loading reliably.

Candidate	Votes	Percent	
Ned Lamont 	29,463	56%	
Joe Lieberman 	22,898	44%	
Precincts Reporting - 126 out of 748 - 17%

[elucidator]

Brother Kos, the Greek Geek, is spot on! Every election, the low turnout makes me wonder if Tom Paine is sobbing in his grave.

If Joe “Sugarlips” Lieberman wins, he gets a sobering lesson, 'cause it won’t be by much. If Landry wins, everybody else gets a sobering lesson, and such are well deserved and desperately needed.

If the people lead, the leaders will follow.

[Squink]

If Lieberman’s going to lead, he better make his move soon.
It’s been a stern chase all night, and the end approaches:

575 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 76.87%
	Name			Party	Votes		Pct
	Lamont, Ned		Dem	109,239		51.76
	Lieberman, Joe (i)	Dem	101,818		48.24

From here

[John_Mace]

Looks pretty damn close. I bet he runs as an independent and wins. Unless he gets the Democratic powers that be to promise him another shot at that lucrative VP slot.

[Squink]

@John Mace

Looks pretty damn close.

Close? Lamont’s besting Bush’s 2004 mandate of 50.7 to 48.3%. It’s a friggin blowout!

51.8 to 48.1% with 82.6% of precincts reporting.

[John_Mace]

@Squink

Close? Lamont’s besting Bush’s 2004 mandate of 50.7 to 48.3%. It’s a friggin blowout!

Has he thought about how he’s going to spend his poltical capital yet?

[RTFirefly]

With 625 of ~750 precincts reporting, here’s what’s still out, according to AP:

#Pr. Town

23 Hartford
10 Wethersfield
10 Bristol
10 Milford
10 Wethersfield
9 Wallingford
9 Enfield
7 Branford
6 Vernon
6 Farmington
5 S. Windsor
5 Bridgeport (out of 25)

Anyplace not mentioned has 4 or fewer precincts outstanding.

Those who are up to date on their CT political geography might be able to say who’s better situated in those places. I’ve got no clue.

[RTFirefly]

Drudge is showing the same numbers as I’m seeing, but is showing it like this:

Connecticut // U.S. Senate - - Dem Primary
625 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 83.56%
Lamont, Ned 120,616 51.88% **Winner
Lieberman, Joe (i) 111,887 48.12%

Apparently someone’s projected Lamont as the winner. Not counting on it yet, though. I’d like to at least see most of Hartford reporting.

[Squink]

@John Mace

Has he thought about how he’s going to spend his poltical capital yet?

Iraq?