Two months seems like such a long time ago, doesn't it?
Four months, an eternity.
You remember our poster children back then - first, Francine Busby, and then, Ned Lamont. The latter was virtually unknown to anyone but Mrs. Lamont before DailyKos (and a good chunk of the remaining progressive blogosphere) adopted him in a righteous rebellion against the formerly Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. To wit, nearly two thousand diaries will forever occupy the Kos archives with the tags "Lamont" or "Ned Lamont."
But that was a long time ago - at a point in political history when, let's be blunt, we desperately needed to win something. Anything. And we kinda-sorta did: Lamont and Busby both occupy a spot on the November 7th general election ballot.
Kossack djneedle83 did a
great job yesterday of laying out all the reasons why Lamont should still be on our collective radar. Lamont is, as the diarist suggests, still within striking distance of putting a
real Democrat in that Connecticut senate seat. And without question, he still merits our enthusiastic support.
So why the huge drop-off in Lamont diaries since mid-August?
Sixty days ago, we were still anticipating an October Surprise of soldiers returning home just days before the election. Sixty days ago, Mark Foley held a safe seat. Sixty days ago, we were still knocking on wood every time we dared to speak of the possibility that we might win the House this November.
If you're a superstitious person, skip this next line. We are going to win the House - there is no question in my mind. Well, there is one question: how big?
In fact, the unthinkable is within reach. We adopt two or three Senate candidates the same way we did Lamont, and the entire Congress could be ours.
There are over 500 "big" races on November 7th - from the House to the Senate to Governorships. And we can count now on one hand the races that will determine whether we just win the House and the gubernatorial balance, or whether we sweep these elections completely. Lamont vs. Lieberman is not one of those races.
To be sure, we are still at that point in history when we desperately need to win something. But now, thanks to the continuing ineptitude of a scandal-ridden Republican party, we can truly zero in on a couple of races, without taking the remainder of them for granted. The difference between "good" and "great" this November lies in the fortunes of Harold Ford, Jim Webb and Claire McCaskill.
Three races - none of them involving Ned Lamont.
Three races - out of 500-plus.
Three races that bridge the gap between unlikely and unfathomable.
One man's opinion, no doubt. Today, 30 days before Election Day, I've penciled in Senate victories in Ohio, Montana, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. Read today's excellent diary from Ken in Tex for a comprehensive review of the Senate races.
Harold Ford.
Jim Webb.
Claire McCaskill.
We win two, we win it all.
Today, the issue is not Joe Lieberman or Ned Lamont or "the kiss" or a make-believe "CFL" party. Today, the issue is balance of power and whether or not we'll be able to exert some genuine oversight of the dictatorship that's evolved on Pennsylvania Avenue. The House is all but a foregone conclusion. Governorships will flip to a Democratic majority. The only question is the Senate, and then, just three races will provide the answer.
You may see the Senate races differently. That's cool - just pour your heart out for the seats you feel need our help the most.
I like Ned Lamont. I've contributed plenty and I've blogged some of those 1,875 diaries. But Ford, Webb and McCaskill deserve the same vigorous support we gave Ned. Blog. Volunteer. Donate. Let's pull out all the stops.
That doesn't mean, by any stretch, that we should diminish our House efforts. We'd be fools to count a majority before it's hatched. But we can walk and chew gum at the same time, can't we?