Firstly, congratulations to all of you on Daily Kos that worked for, contributed or simply hoped for a victory by Ned Lamont. Well fought and well argued, all of you!
I said this in a short post last night - except that for me it was 4.00 a.m. in the morning, such was my eagerness to watch Ned Lamont accept his victory.
Why does it matter to a man buried deep in Wales? Does this victory in a primary in Connecticut have any resonance outside your own country?
Yes - and I will explain it below the fold.
Firstly, our media in the UK is carrying the story.
I like the headline on the BBC site that carries a sense of the isolation of Lieberman:
DEFEATED LIEBERMAN TO RUN ALONE
Perhaps I am not so keen on the focus of the first part of the story being on the position Leiberman is taking as a result of the vote but the body of the article contains the real meat for British readers:
Meanwhile Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sen Chuck Schumer of New York - the chairman of the party's Senate campaign committee - have pledged their full support for Mr Lamont.
In a statement on the campaign committee website, they said: "The Democratic voters of Connecticut have spoken... Congratulations to Ned on his victory and on a race well run.
"Joe Lieberman has been an effective Democratic senator... But the perception was that he was too close to George Bush and this election was, in many respects, a referendum on the president more than anything else."
There is no mistaking how the story is being pitched over here. I know that Ned Lamont's stand about congressional oversight, about health care and jobs is important for all of you but, as Sky News reports, it is the fact that it is a victory for those who oppose Bush that is most keenly felt here:
The political newcomer ran on a strong anti-Iraq war platform and portrayed his opponent as an apologist for the Bush administration.
O.K. I hear you say. It is nice to know that your primary has decent airtime abroad, but so what?
Well, it has played in nicely with an event on the political scene in the UK today.
Jim Sheridan, MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire North, resigned as a parliamentary private secretary at the Ministry of Defence.
He has resigned over the government policy in the Middle East, as well as voicing concerns over the use of UK airports like Prestwick to refuel US aircraft travelling to Israel.
The 52-year-old said many of his Labour colleagues believed the government's policy was flawed.
He also said he believed the Palestinian situation had been put on the back burner. The BBC quotes him as saying:
"The reason I am resigning is the current conflict in the Middle East," he said.
"I don't expect my resignation will have any significant impact on the prime minister's objectives in the Middle East, which I genuinely believe to be honourable on his part, but I don't believe they reflect the core values of the Labour Party or indeed the country."
Well, he is right that his particular resignation may not have much of a specific impact on events. After all, a PPS in the British Government is not a very high ranking political post.
Yet he is a close friend of Tony Blair's and his sudden departure from the still sycophantic group that support the Prime Minister is of significance. Not least, it gives extra momentum to the growing movement over the last two weeks within the Labour Party ranks for Blair to step down.
It also comes at a time when there is growing unrest about the Middle East in Parliament:
Pressure is growing for a recall of Parliament as the fighting in Lebanon between Israel and Hizbollah intensifies.
Up to 100 MPs - most of them Labour - are expected to deliver a letter urging a full debate within the next 48 hours.
The organisers are understood to have been in discussion with the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party.
Former Europe Minister Denis MacShane added his public backing to the calls.
He said: "MPs cannot wait until October to hear from the Prime Minister a full account of the crisis and to express the concern of our constituents.
"Hundreds of innocent Lebanese and Israelis have been killed by rockets and bombs fired by both sides.
So, whilst Lieberman ponders his fate alone, our politicians are beginning to get their act together. And both stories are running on the same day.
Rep Louise Slaughter could have written her diary on here today, about the demand for greater oversight by politicians and the growing rejection of Middle East policies, as if she was standing under Big Ben and not writing from Capitol Hill.
So thanks, all you Kossacks. You brought together two stories that help reinforce themselves on our television tonight in the UK and in our papers tomorrow. That is why your Primary was significant to us.
And what could possibly be our significance to you big guys over there? Well, how about giving you the feeling that you are on the wave of not just a national swing but are surfing a growing movement throughout the Western world? I hope you get encouragement from the stand you are taking and the leadership that are giving us all in these events. Go Kossacks!
Only those on the extreme of politics think that political change comes as one big bang. They are wrong. It comes from a growing awareness of a feeling of the need for change and it comes from not one event, however gratifying Ned Lamont's victory is, but from a series of happenings. Even from those as obscure as our Mr Sheridan nicely telling his old pal Tony Blair that he isn't fit to govern any more - despite what Arnold Schwarzenegger may have said to him.