I have no problem calling Ms. Fiorina "ma'am", because we'll certainly never be calling that miserable failure "Senator". She should be asked if she's using the golden parachute money HP had to give her to get her to go away to fund the web ad.

I'd take an effective Senator over a ladylike one, anytime; only wish I could have Boxer representing me. If Fiorina wants to make an issue of that (the titles), it's probably to cover up for her own ineffectiveness as the HP executive.

Gallup shows Republicans taking a slight edge over Dems on the generic congressional ballot question, 48% to 44%. I'm still skeptical about the predictive value of generic-ballot polls a year before an election."

Just a reminder that we need to always stay on offense. Dems can start by reminding voters about the Republican health care plan and all the things they did (nothing) about health care when they were still in office. Republicans voted against eliminating pre-existing conditions in health care, against lifetime caps, against caps on out-of-pocket expenses, against cost controls, against legislation to reduce carbon emissions, against a pro-choice Supreme Court justice, ....

I think Boxer is unlikely to need much help in responding to Fiorina. I remember Boxer pulling no punches whatsoever in characterizing McCain's "suspension" of his campaign to return to Washington: "I've never seen anything so bizarre in my entire time in the Senate."

This isn't Mississippi, it's California. The notion that the electorate will hold it against you because you prefer the title of your office -- who even thought that one up?

Barbara please don't underestimate the amount of stupid in this country. Even in California.

That generic poll shows how woefully stuck our country is in the same old politics. The corruption in both parties is so pervasive it's institutionalized. We need to get out of this rut and supporting either party because it has a few honest people in it is not going to bring about the fundamental changes we need.Such as public financing of elections or recall of politicians who vote against there constituencies.

Right, and the Gallup Poll also pretended that Bush ended up with a 35 percent approval rating when he life office while every other poll has him, at best, at 24 percent. This is just part of the Corporate Medias desperation to have the REPIGS back in power so they can make ever more profits. That is the reason for the 'story lines' that the Corporate Media events that all want to pant the picture of a Repiglican come back in 2010. Of course the rational question would be BASED ON WHAT ?

I'm worried about Lamont's relationship with Wolfson. From what I remember of Ms. Clinton's campaign, he wasn't worth a whole lot. Am I wrong, I hope?

This is about the implications of previous campaigns, by Frank Rich:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/opinion/08rich.html

This is really sickening:

The Obama administration does not seem to understand that this rage, left unaddressed, could consume it. It has pushed aside the entreaties of many — including Paul Volcker, the chairman of the White House’s own Economic Recovery Advisory Board — to break up too-big-to-fail banks. Those behemoths, cushioned by the government’s bailouts, low-interest loans and guarantees, are back making bets that put the entire system at risk. Yet last Sunday, we once again heard the Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, on “Meet the Press” dodging questions about the banks in general and Goldman in particular with unpersuasive bromides. “We’re not going to let the system go back to the way it was,” he said.

Surely he jests. On Monday morning, a business-savvy Democratic senator, Maria Cantwell of Washington, publicly questioned Geithner’s fitness for his job, given his support of loopholes in proposed regulations of the derivatives that enabled last year’s collapse. On Tuesday, Congressional Democrats, with the White House’s consent, voted to gut the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the post Enron-WorldCom law passed in 2002 to prevent corporate accounting tricks and fraud. Arthur Levitt, the former Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, told me on Friday it was “surreal” that Democrats were now achieving the long-held Republican goal of smashing “the golden chalice” of reform. If investors cannot have transparency, Levitt said, “the whole system is worthless.”

What the hell are "Democrats" doing with this? They are going to pay if it keeps up, not just from conservatives who are out to get them anyway but from progressives, sensible centrists and pragmatists who want to stifle Wall Street, and populist types.

Gandalf, true, this could be a primary ploy aimed at the cross section of voters that Fiorina needs to win based on seeming like she is ultra-conservative. But as a general election strategy? It seems like the wrong state (and honestly, I'm not sure it would work anywhere).

And speaking of Connecticut, Ned Lamont has brought on Howard Wolfson, a longtime Hillary Clinton aide, to help advise his gubernatorial campaign

Where there goes Lamont's chances. Seriously, Clinton ran a horrible primary campaign and was out manuevered by a bunch of relative newcomers at almost every turn. Why do Democrats keep hiring political consultants from campaigns that failed?

From what I remember of Ms. Clinton's campaign, he (Wolfson) wasn't worth a whole lot. -- Texas Aggie, @12:58

Not in Mark Penn's stratosphere, but expensive enough. A lot of people continue to think that "expensive" is a synonym of "good value". Lamont being an executive would likely think so too. See: banks and their sky-high bonuses for worthless shits. Who, nevertheless, are called "best and brightest".

Texas Aggie:
You are correct. And if you remember, Wolfson was one of those clowns that Hillary "lent" to Lamont after he defeated Holy Joe in the primary and before the general election. Frankly, Lamont can do better.

Oh my... Fiorina's "Call me Barbara" ad is right here, on Wash Monthly's PA. How very timely :)

And speaking of Connecticut, Ned Lamont has brought on Howard Wolfson, a longtime Hillary Clinton aide, to help advise his gubernatorial campaign

What, Joe Trippi's not available? If you're gonna hire a sure loser anyway, Joe's your best bet.

I'm still trying to imagine how someone gets a whole website out of that "Senator vs. ma'am" charge. I don't want to go look, but I really can't picture an entire page, much less more than one.

Nice to see that Carly has a sharp eye for the most important issues affecting Californians today. Sheesh.

Why am I seeing a Carly Fiorina ad on this site? If that's how she's spending her money, we won't be caller her senator.

Open mouth, insert foot... lol