The Hartford Courant has an article detailing a couple of backfires that have caught the Lamont campaign in recent days when they went negative. They also report one they say is coming back on Lieberman, but it doesn't seem to be in the same league at all. You're seeing the difference in an old hand at politics and an amateur.
The U.S. Senate race continued its nasty spiral Thursday, with the campaigns of Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman and Ned Lamont debating who was nastiest and loosest with the facts.
The exchanges began Wednesday with former state Treasurer Henry E. Parker, a Lamont backer, accusing Lieberman of lying about his civil rights record – an unsubstantiated charge that Parker recanted Thursday morning.
Unabashedly hoping to keep the story alive, Lieberman's campaign manager demanded Thursday afternoon that Lamont personally apologize to Lieberman for Parker's actions.
For good measure, she accused the Lamont campaign of deliberately misleading voters on Lieberman's Social Security record.
An hour later, Lamont's campaign complained that Lieberman's new television commercial slanders Lamont by falsely claiming he laid off 68 percent of his cable-television company's workforce.
The slander about Lieberman's civil rights record really will hit Lamont, I think. The other may or may not, but it certainly is very, very dubious. The one that Lamont accused Lieberman of slander with is already being turned around back on Lamont:
In his 2005 tax returns, Lamont reported earning $546,000. But the Lieberman campaign has no way of knowing his salary – the company is privately held – when the company began to downsize after 2001. The Lamont campaign says his salary as the company downsized was $188,000.
"They don't want to talk about how their new ads get their facts dead wrong and slander Ned Lamont's record as a job-creating businessman in Connecticut," said George Jepsen, chairman of the Lamont campaign.
Lieberman's campaign stood by the ad.
"If Ned Lamont would like to publicly release his company's records, we will happily review them," said Tammy Sun, a Lieberman spokeswoman. "Until they are willing to provide actual evidence to support their claim, we have no reason to believe that The New York Times is wrong."
An interesting campaign. But it does illustrate why Lamont is flailing right now.