Connecticut Did It - But They're Not Done

There is no oxygen left in Washington tonight. The impact of the Connecticut Senate primary tonight, Ned Lamont's victory, and Joe Lieberman's announcement of an independent run (Sore Loserman has never been so apropos), can hardly be measured. An incumbent has lost a primary 3 other times in the last 26 years. There was Bob Smith to John Sununu in New Hampshire in 2002, Sheila Frahm of Kansas in 1996 (and she was appointed to replace Dole, then lost to Brownback, so she was never elected to the Senate in the first place), and Alan Dixon of Illinois to Carol Mosely-Braun in 1992. It simply doesn't happen that often. However, THREE incumbents, Cynthia McKinney and Joe Schwarz from the House side along with Lieberman, lost tonight. The anti-incumbent trend is officially off and running. But typically, this doesn't happen. Especially to someone as well-known as a former VP candidate. You have to do a whole lot of screwing up to lose as a well-established 18-year incumbent, outspending your opponent 2 to 1, etc.

Now of course, Lieberman took 48% of the Democratic vote tonight. That won't hold in November, but he'll get a substantial amount of Republican and independent votes that should more than make up the difference. Lieberman is absolutely the overwhelming favorite to win in November.

To beat that, Lamont will have to run a completely different campaign in the general. Connecticut is still a true-blue state; to win Lamont must set out the facts of this betrayal. Lieberman had every opportunity to get the nomination and he lost. It was a hot day in August and yet voter turnout was over 50%, which is unheard of for a primary. I mean completely unheard of. So the idea that Lieberman wanted the whole Democratic electorate to have a chance to vote for him is bogus. They got more Democrats than vote in some general elections.

This is a complete betrayal of the will of the voters, an imposition based wholly on ego to change the rules and break the rules. There are laws in many states to prevent exactly this occurrence from happening; they're called "Sore Loser" laws. And that's just what we're dealing with here.

Lieberman is already hemhoragging support among his DC buddies:

[Lieberman's decision to run as an independent] was met with squeamishness among many within the party establishment who had signaled that they would not support an independent bid by Lieberman. Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh -- who, like Lieberman, has close ties to moderates within the party but is considering a 2008 presidential bid -- quickly announced he would support Lamont.

"Senator Bayh supported Senator Lieberman in the primary because of his respect for Senator Lieberman's service and their long friendship," said Bayh spokesman Dan Pfeiffer. "The Democratic voters of Connecticut have spoken, and Senator Bayh respects their choice and will support their nominee."

Evan Bayh is no wide-eyed liberal.

The Lamont team must be congratulated for a tremendous accomplishment. But now comes the hard part. The odds are very much against them to pull this off in November. But everyone should know that the only proximate cause of this mess is the loser of the Democratic primary and his enormous ego. Progressives and bloggers and MoveOn didn't force Joe Lieberman to run as an independent, sucking resources and money from contested races elsewhere into an otherwise safe seat. The only man who forced this independent run is Lieberman himself.

Lamont must completely change his campaign for the general. He must run on the theme of Sore Loserman. That's the only way to win, to appeal to the American sense of basic fairness. Connecticut is still a blue state, so if he peels off enough Lieber-Dems (and his negatives aren't that high, so there is a possibility), he has a shot. And people don't like incumbents right now. I'm guessing they like ones that run anyway even less.

I'd say it's a tremendous uphill battle the Lamont folks are facing. I'd rate it Lean-Lieberman.

Then again, Joe was up 40 points a few months ago.