Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

BMG, CT Style: Nutmeggers freaking out about Lieberman lead

By

This is interesting, a bitter post entitled “What’s wrong with the Lamont campaign?”

I wonder what would happen on BMG if Healey were to pull ahead in the polls….

Luckily, as we’ve been assured, that cannot happen, because the August and September polls show giant leads for all 3 D’s….

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • I really trust the Patrick campaign. They had a plan over a year ago (some say for two years) and they’ve totally stuck to it, successfully I might add!

      <

      p>
      If Patrick loses to Healey it won’t be because of something the Patrick campaign failed to do…

      <

      p>
      But of course, since we’re all realists here, Patrick would of course decimate Healey!

  3. The post is titled:

    <

    p>
    “What’s wrong with the Lamont campaign”
    NOT
    “What’s wrong with the Lamont campaign?”

    <

    p>
    there’s a huge difference between the two.  The poster then outlines six things that he thinks the Lamont campaign is doing wrong.  Now, you may agree or disagee with the claims, but they’re not outlandish or petty.  There’s some back and forth below, but it stayed pretty dang civil.

    <

    p>
    So, it seems to me you’re just stirring a pot of irrelevance, with a dash of mislead and more than enough snark.

    1. Frank, I was just teasing those on BMG who assure us that the “Versus Healey” September lead is so big that Gabs 21 point advantage is really no different from DP’s 13 point advantage.  Like you, I suspect, I disagree. 

    <

    p>
    2. Stom, sorry I messed up the question mark.  Sometimes I mess up the em dash, too. 

    <

    p>
    You may be reading a lot more into my post that I intended – I just found it interesting, for two reasons.  I’ll spell ’em out. 

    <

    p>
    BMG has –

    <

    p>
    a) DP supporters who say “He has a soild chance against Healey, perhaps not as high as Gabs, but a solid chance is enough” – which I think makes sense.

    <

    p>
    b) DP supporters who say “Electability is a stupid topic, it just makes me all frustrated that it comes up, because it inherently cuts against those furthest from the center” – which also makes sense (I’m a centrist, but I can understand why electability is a bad word to those more towards either the edge).

    <

    p>
    c) DP supporters who insist that DP is MORE likely to beat Healey, spinning all contrary evidence away – polls, DP’s position to the left of Gabs, and Healey’s attack ads against Gabs.  These folks, I believe, are in perma-spin cycle.  The first two groups are, in my opinion, “reality-based.”

    <

    p>
    In perusing My Left Nutmeg over a few weeks, Group C reigned for a while.  The post I linked to may have been one of the first to return to “reality-based,” as it does not attempt to contend that all the polls showing a Joementum lead are tainted. 

    <

    p>
    It was also interesting to me because while there are very interesting inside baseball analyses, there is not a single comment from a swing voter who considered Lamont and chose Lieberman. 

    <

    p>
    Obviously can’t read too much into a single thread, but wonder if centrist readers on MLN diminished over past few weeks (I know their total traffic has been huge). 

    <

    p>
    Cannoneo, elsewhere on BMG, seemed to suggest today that he could be one of those readers who enjoys give-and-take with Groups A and B, but finds Group C dominated threads a big turn-off. 

    • The editors of the site, of course, are in group C. We said so.

      <

      p>
      I know what the polls say, and I’m not ignoring that or “spinning” — at least it doesn’t seem that way to me. I honestly trust Patrick to run his campaign in a nimble, effective way. (And we think he’d be a better governor, which is much more to the point.)

      <

      p>
      Careful: People who weigh certain factors differently than you are not necessarily in “perma-spin”.

      • Exactly right – 8,000+ volunteers is something money cannot buy. It makes Patrick a most formidable candidate.

        <

        p>
        Well, if the establishment Dem party doesn’t try to torpedo a Patrick win, anyway.

        • I’m really not sniffing out a conserva-Dem revolt this time. Finneran’s gone, and from what I can tell he was really the linchpin of all that (maybe along with Bulger), simultaneously destroying the Dem “brand” with sleaze and refusing to help folks like Harshbarger.

          <

          p>
          Sal and Trav … I mean, Sal’s cuddly, and Trav’s gray and boring. Not a lot of public animosity built up towards those guys.

          <

          p>
          Am I wrong? Anyone hearing any different?

      • let me clarify –

        <

        p>
        i agree there’s a case to be made for DP as “most likely to win.”  and you made it.  quite well.  which i noted in your comments section. 

        <

        p>
        when i said perma-spin mode, i meant when instead of “weighing factors”, you don’t discount evidence contrary to your thesis, you actually vitiate it.  like the notion that healey’s TV attack ads on gabs is really a trick, and what the ad shows is that she fears PATRICK the most.  c’mon.

        <

        p>
        maybe you say jeter is MVP and i say papi.  fine.  when i mention papi hits more homers, instead of a normal response (jeter has higher average), you argue that actually HRs are a sign of weakness, the mark of an undisciplined hitter who overswings.  that’s spin. 

        • Agreed on the Healey ad. She’s running an ad against Gabs because 1. she can, and 2. she’s afraid of him, because she’s reading the same polls as everyone else. I mean, I think she’s wrong, but whatever.

          <

          p>
          Arguments suggesting that it means she’s actually more afraid of Patrick … they give me an instant headache, and I can’t even read them. Maybe it’s handling the iocane powder.

Archives