Is there talk in CT of a Sore Loser Law to stop a candidate

[Eric J in MN]

...who loses his party's primary from running in the general election that year?

[AZBlue]

1. Would you have posted that if it was Lamont that lost the primary, ran as an Ind & won the election?

Didn't think so.

[Eric J in MN]

4. If Ned Lamont had lost the primary, I wouldn't have wanted him

...to run in the general election.

I've donated to other candidates who lost their Democratic primaries, and I didn't want them to run in the general, and they didn't run in the general.

[Ken Burch]

5. Lamont wouldn't have run as an independent after losing the primary

And YOU KNOW IT. He promised publicly not to.

Stop being an apologist for disloyalty and arrogance.

[NewJeffCT]

9. Lamont vowed to not run if he lost the primary

Said he would support Lieberman. He had asked Lieberman to do the same, but Lieberman refused.

[TwilightZone]

2. Not in a democracy.

That would seem to defeat the purpose, wouldn't it?

In addition, general elections aren't primaries. Lieberman won - to the dismay of many of us - because his appeal was wider than one party.

[Ken Burch]

7. Many states DO have sore loser laws.

There is a strong case for Ct. to pass one this year. This is the SECOND time a defeated right-wing Democratic incumbent has defied the primary and cost his party a Senate seat(Dodd the First ran as an independent in '70 and threw the race to Lowell Weicker).

They should certainly introduce one. If nothing else, forcing Rell to veto it would make the GOP look bad and improve Democratic chances of taking the governorship next time.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

3. I haven't heard anything about it

Couldn't the problem be avoided by making the deadline for filing as a petitioning candidate earlier than/same date as the primary date? That was part of my problem with the way Joe handled this election cycle. If he were truly an independent, IMO he should have declared himself as such earlier. The way the law is now, it allows this gaming of the system.

CT Repubs now think that Joe is their go-to guy. I can only hope that he really is "a man of his word" and will vote as an independent, even though he plans to caucus with the Dems.

I'm still ticked off about the $387,000 slush fund that the FEC has apparently decided not to look into. Our local Joe-loving newspaper dropped that story pretty quickly. I hope the NY Times or another paper will follow up on that tale.

[connecticut yankee]

6. I think

he'll caucus with the Dems and vote with the Repubs as he always has.

[cmkramer]

8. He votes with Democrats far more often

than he does with Republicans.

Give it up, Lamont voters. Joe won.

[JanusAscending]

10. self delete

[Larkspur]

11. Lieberman is the 8th most conservative FORMER Dem in the senate

He was backed in 2006 by 2 thirds of the Republicans, 52% of the Independents, and 1 third of the Dems. Lieberman is NOT LONGER a Democrat. He is the leader of his own party -- CT for Lieberman.

[DFLforever]

12. I read on DailyKos that one will be introduced in CT

in the upcoming session by the Sec of State.

Don't know if it's an accurate report or not.

[DODI]

13. Yes, the SOS drafted something in August. I heard her on WTIC

a while ago talking about it. It was a fluke thisyear that Lieberman could pull this off, the primary was very early, it is usually in Sept, and the filing dates are in August - but not this year.