A harbinger...

With more than 80 percent of preciincts reporting, Lieberman is down 51-48 to Lamont.

Wow.

 

'member that Joe's an Indy, too, now.

 

A harbinger that pro-war Dems no longer are welcome in the party? Perhaps. Other than that, probably not.

 

And good riddance to him.

But I really thought that the polls were soft, that I lot of people were pissed at Joe and were saying things to posters that they weren't going to back up on election day.

This does shock me.

 

Really, Lyman? That's what you take from this? Considering the Democrats may well run Hilary Clinton for President?

I think pro-war candidates across the board are going to have a hard time in '06. I think this is sad for Joe. I think a lot of things, none of which were that.

 

Last poll I saw (and this was a couple of weeks ago), Lieberman wins in a three-way race as an independent.

 

I'm neither a Connecticut-ian nor an expert, but haven't people been saying Lieberman would be favored in a three-way race?

 

His name recognition alone would make him a favorite in a three-way race at this point.

Be an interesting campaign, for sure.

 

There's so much talk about all of this backlash against Congress, etc.

But seriously. Look around your state. How many incumbents are vulnerable?

The only House seat in Iowa that's remotely vulnerable is occupied by a Democrat, and it has nothing to do with the war. He'll still win, but it's close.

 

Zeke, this was a DEMOCRATIC primary. There are voters called Republicans and independents, too. They aren't quite as ravenous on this subject as the left-wing Dem base is in what allegedly is a Dem state (although it has a GOP governor and 3/5 of its Congress people).

If this were a general election, you might have a point. But in a primary, it looks to me like at least the Connecticut Dems now are demanding ideological purity. Too bad for a guy who voted with his party about 90 percent of the time in the Senate, but I guess that isn't good enough anymore.

 

Lyman, I realize it was a Dem. primary.

But if you don't think the kind of backlash that can take a guy from the VP slot in 2000 to losing his primary to a complete unknown in '06 is meaningful, I don't quite know what to say. We'll agree to disagree, I guess.

And Hawk -- who's vulnerable? Ask Tom Daschle.

 

Where'd the Joe-mentum go? lol