For the next eight hours people on this site as well as others of every political persuasion, of every political party, of all ages and opinions and professions, those of the internet and those off of it will be desperately searching for any shred of information that can be collected about the Lieberman-Lamont primary election. There isn't anything I can do to make the results come in any faster or create data to be seen earlier, (though I would, at this time, like to express my appreciation for all those who are recounting even the smallest stories about the primary). What I can do, though, is to present my view of the crucial swing vote, not in demographical terms, but in opinion terms. It's time to meet the person who will make today a joy or a pity no matter for whom you are voting - the disaffected protest voter.
Connecticut Democrats have spending decades voting for and revoting for Joe Lieberman. They have been telling pollsters that they like him because they do. They're comfortable with him. They know that he is pro-choice like they are, supportive of public schools like they are, and generally liberal like they are. And after thirty years of knowing him, they can be certain of his position on almost every issue, and even if they disagree with him, they're
comfortable with him.
The comfort is a crucial aspect of this election, because recently they have become increasingly displeased with him. His moralization never appealed to them, particularly when it evolved into a criticism of Bill Clinton or more conservative stances on issues like sex on television. But their biggest complaint is, of course, with his position on the war in Iraq. And so the old comfortable relationship began to get frayed and they wished to scare him. The biggest question of the day, though, is do these people who wanted to scare Lieberman to move a bit to the left, those who wanted to protest his stance on the war, are they really willing to elect Ned Lamont?
If one watches closely, one sees some signals that some of them are not. This is, of course, anecdotal evidence, but there appear to be indications that at least a few of these people are turing away and coming home to the one they know. There isn't any way yet to determine the extent of this group, but consider these examples.
http://www.pbs.org/... Yesterday, on the Jim Lehrher show, Gwen Ifill interviewed a woman named Gail Miller, an elderly woman who said that she was going to vote for Lamont, and even had a sign for him on her lawn, but in the recent days decided with her husband that she just wasn't willing to kick Lieberman out.
Consider Rebecca Arthur, a 50 year old Social Studies teacher found by the New York Times on Saturday ("In Bridgeport, Troubled by Lieberman and Unsure of Lamont") as an example of a Lamont voter. She says that she is displeased with his position on the war, and wants to hear that he has rethought his position on it. Her final statement? She's going to vote for Lamont because she doesn't want "[Lieberman] to feel he has a clear mandate," but she thinks he's going to win anyway.
So here's the question. What will Rebecca Arthur and the people like her do today? They've just heard over the last few days that what they thought was a protest vote, might actually nominate somebody? Are they ready to go through with that or will they pull back at the final moment? At this point, it appears that this election is close enough that what these people decide might actually determine the elction, if there are enough of them. The question that they are asking themselves is, what happens if a protest vote becomes real?