Well, Lamont won. And decisively, no matter what spinmeisters may say--Bush won by much smaller margins, and we all know how subdued he was in claiming a mandate! Lieberman, ever true to his narcissistic self, is going to run as an independent. Now Democrats need to take a long hard look at what's coming down the pike in November, and map out a strategy.
Strategically, Lieberman's undead candidacy is no bad thing. Our extreme revulsion for the lows to which six years of Repug rule have brought our country needs a focus, an icon. Lieberman gives us that focus. What annoys us about him? Why, it's his bootlicking of the repugs, his enthusiastic and repeated cheer-leading of the rightwing noise machine, and his consensual self-pimping to lend cover to their pet projects. And yesterday, we saw the results. No, I don't mean the primary victory, I mean the outpouring of earnest, motivated on-the-ground help Lamont got from all the volunteers. As others have described elsewhere, Lieberman's money drew low-grade mercenaries who did little to actually help his ground operation.
Of course, without Lieberman, Lamont would probably coast to victory in November, and that would be sweet. It would allow us to focus time, money and energy in other races. It would be one less slope in the seemingly endless uphill struggle. But look on the bright side: how often do you get to replay a winning game, against an opponent who refuses to learn lessons from his losing strategy?
Lieberman will run on the same tired old "extreme lefty!" scare tactics. For one thing, that's just silly in a deep-blue state like Connecticut. And for another, Lamont's had to be restrained in the primary because Lieberman was, after all, the incumbent Democrat. Now he's a turncoat independent, we can unleash a stronger barrage against him! Not just the folks who backed Lamont so far, but the entire party can now unite against Lieberman.
And that, right there, is something worth its weight in gold. The Shrub is not running for election, but his buddy Lieberman is. And he's now running without Democratic cover! Of course, one could argue that actual republican candidates make better targets for such tactics as I've just implied. But actually Lieberman's the better target, since a repug can always hide behind the party loyalty excuse. That sounds juvenile, but remember Reagan's "11th commandment": thou shalt not attack a fellow republican? This sorry excuse for moral cowardice works for republicans (especially with republican voters), but not for turncoat democrats (and especially not with democratic voters)!
It becomes a rallying cry for all of us, not just CT Democrats. It gives us a single Shrub proxy to unite against, and recent experience has taught us how energizing that can be.
I've been reading some articles by DLC apologists and wingnut deadenders about how Lamont supporters (mainly the netroots) are leading Democratic lemmings off a cliff. These arguments are all specious, and almost transparently so. But it is necessary to deconstruct their arguments, since their hope is to derail the juggernaut by shifting the terms of the debate, and thus hoodwink the country. Again.
In the coming days, I will compose my thoughts on this and post here. Together this time, we can get the message out to the rest of the country!
Update: Changed the title in response to a reader's suggestion.