Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

CT Senate: The Wait Is On

HARTFORD, Conn. -- Polls in Connecticut have been closed for an hour and already a considerable crowd has gathered at the Goodwin Hotel here in downtown Hartford to celebrate (or sympathesize) with Sen. Joe Lieberman (D).

Predictions ran rampant throughout the day, but with actual votes being counted there is a sense of nervous excitement here at Lieberman headquarters. That same feeling permeated challenger Ned Lamont's chosen hotel -- the Four Points Sheraton in Meriden -- earlier in the evening when The Fix stopped in.

The national attention this race has drawn is evident all around. Banks of television cameras are set up at both sites and national television and print reporters and scattered between the two camps.

So, we wait. As I hit the send button, Lamont had a 57 percent to 43 percent lead over Lieberman with 11 percent of the vote counted. Remember not to jump to any conclusions just yet since the sample is still too small.

Stay tuned.

By Chris Cillizza  |  August 8, 2006; 9:07 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: CT Senate: Joe's Last Stand?
Next: CT Senate: Halfway to an Answer

Comments

Lamont's party was at the Four Points Sheraton. Hmmmm. 4 points...his margin of victory. Conspiracy theory, anyone?

Posted by: Patrick94114 | August 9, 2006 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Not to worry, Joe Lieberman. The Senate seat you feel entitled to may yet be yours.

Connecticut Democrats may have denied you the party's nomination, but . . .

You'll always have Bush and Rove.

Posted by: CatelynK | August 9, 2006 1:24 AM | Report abuse

WOW

Even from Australia this is exciting - how long (in hours) till a concession??

Posted by: bill | August 8, 2006 11:50 PM | Report abuse

I was telling a friend last night that no matter how big the loss, Lieberman won't leave the race now. He'll be forced out later if necessary.

I think the Courant's website may be faster. Unfortunately my browser is trying to crap out on me...why do clipboards only hold one item at a time???

625 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 83.56%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 120,616 51.88
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 111,887 48.12

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | August 8, 2006 10:30 PM | Report abuse

The spread is too close, gonna be too close, for Lamont to declare victory. Lieberman has already stated that 6 points is the threshold --umm, don't ask me why. He thinks that anything short of the magical number of 6% gives him a mandate to run as an independent.

So watch Joe run.

Posted by: Drindl | August 8, 2006 10:19 PM | Report abuse

For people keeping score at home, the WTNH site seems to be the fastest to post up-to-date results.

http://web.wtnh.com/2006voteprimary/race200.html

With 80% reporting,
Joe Lieberman X 108,683 48%
Ned Lamont 116,387 52%

Raw vote differential has widened to 7700 votes--largest so far.

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Turnout looks like about 39% to me.

Chris- If you're reading this, don't you love having a job where you're around all us eccentric political junkies?

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | August 8, 2006 10:14 PM | Report abuse

598 of 748 Precincts Reporting - 79.95%
Name Party Votes Pct
Lamont, Ned Dem 114,165 51.75
Lieberman, Joe (i) Dem 106,428 48.25

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | August 8, 2006 10:11 PM | Report abuse

Could it be using the clocks from our own computers? I doubt that makes sense.

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

The last 2 updates on the Courant site have been our first 2 upticks since 17%. I think Zathras may be right about Lieberman's inability to catch up.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | August 8, 2006 10:06 PM | Report abuse

75% reporting. Still Lamont 52-48, with about a 7,000 vote differential holding steady.

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, SandwichMan, that's really strange. This page seems like it is loading slowly--maybe the traffic is interfering with the timestamps.

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 10:00 PM | Report abuse

AP has 52-48. 55% reporting

Posted by: lylepink | August 8, 2006 9:59 PM | Report abuse

68% now reporting: still 52-48 Lamont. The raw vote differential has now surpassed 7,000.

Does anyone think Lieberman's concession speech will be any less boring than any of his other speeches?

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Wow, somehow I posted that last comment BEFORE the one I was responding to...the Lamont hackers have got the Post website messed up too!!!! :P

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | August 8, 2006 9:56 PM | Report abuse

>

That depends. Will he run as an independent? If he does, it will certainly be an atypical speech?

Posted by: Dave | August 8, 2006 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Or sanctimonious, indignant, and self-promoting?

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | August 8, 2006 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Drindl, Thanks for the URL for the election results site.

Intrepid Liberal Journal, I agree, can't remember this much excitement over an August primary ever, but then the stakes are high.

Like it or not, this primary is sending a message. Bush may be politically lonelier now than the Maytag repairman... except there isn't a Maytag anymore. Which, of course, just makes the point doesn't it.

http://whathappenedtomycountry.blogspot.com

Posted by: Truth Hunter | August 8, 2006 9:52 PM | Report abuse

trivial nitpick: Both the WFSB and WTNH have the same numbers for votes, but WFSB says there are 748 total precincts, while WFSB reports there are WTNH reports that there are 757 total precincts. This gives them different percentage reporting, even though they have the same totals. Very odd. I wonder which (if either) is correct.

http://web.wtnh.com/2006voteprimary/race200.html
http://www.wfsb.com/politics/9641261/detail.html

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 9:49 PM | Report abuse

With 55% counted, it's still Lamont 52-48 over Lieberman.

Most significantly, the raw vote differential has hardly changed since the results came up. It has been about a 5000 vote difference since the first numbers came out. This shows that the early voting was heavily in favor of Lamont, while the people voting today are almost completely split down the middle. Therefore, the results are very unlikely to change direction. It's Lamont.

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 9:43 PM | Report abuse

omigod, i'm like dying... this really is important.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 8, 2006 9:41 PM | Report abuse

With 50 % counted - it's Lieberman at 47.9 % and Lamont at 52.1 %. It's narrowing a bit...

Posted by: Andrew | August 8, 2006 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Okay, so does this mean Lieberman can beat Lamont in the general election with Joe running as an independent? Will Connecticut's Republicans defect to Lieberman's camp? What about those labor voters for Joe? Will they vote against the Democrat in the general election if Lamont wins?

Posted by: Dave | August 8, 2006 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Latest Results 9:23 PM ET Candidates Votes % of Votes
Joseph I. Lieberman 64,700 47.9%
Ned Lamont 70,444 52.1%
50% of Precincts Reporting

Posted by: Ann | August 8, 2006 9:37 PM | Report abuse

287 out of 748 districts reporting--38% --Lamont ahead 54% to 46%--go here --

http://www.wfsb.com/politics/9641261/detail.html

wow this is a horserace...

Posted by: Drindl | August 8, 2006 9:34 PM | Report abuse

I don't ever remember giving a damn about an election in August before. Not ever. Can anyone recall a primary in August with this much impact?

http://intrepidliberaljournal.blogspot.com

Posted by: Intrepid Liberal Journal | August 8, 2006 9:33 PM | Report abuse

With 38% of the votes counted, the lead has shrunk to 54-46, but there is too much ground still to be made up. It's over.

Posted by: Zathras | August 8, 2006 9:31 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company