One, congratulations to Ned Lamont. I hope he wins, and if I were a Nutmegger, he would have my vote.
That said, I'm not asking any leaders to strip anyone of anything. Joe Lieberman is currently holding a seat he was elected to as a Democrat. He has not left the caucus for organizational purposes. At least until January, he is Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT).
On top of that, I'm not demanding anything of the parties vís a vís funding. As much as I support the nominee, and as much as I want Lieberman to drop this indie nonsense, the GOP candidate is not credible, and that means that whoever wins the general election will be a member of the Senate Democratic Caucus. The party doesn't fund races where our nominee is a gazillionaire, and we certainly don't spend precious party dollars where control of a seat is not at stake. To me, that means we don't spend another red cent in Connecticut.
This seems like a raw deal for Ned Lamont, but it's also what's best for the party. We cannot bear (or maybe I can't bear) two lame-duck years with a rubber-stamp Congress. Lamont donor money may not be portable, but DSCC, DNC, and 527 dollars most certainly are. As unfair as it may seem, I think we need to turn away from this race as a party, and turn towards red seats we can turn blue, and blue seats we can keep from turning red. If Planned Parenthood has, say $100,000 to spend, I want it spent on Montana, Virginia, Minnesota, or Ohio. Not in Connecticut.
This doesn't mean we condone Lieberman's actions. Indeed, I wholeheartedly endorse public calls from Democratic leaders for Lieberman to withdraw. For all his faults, on a partisan level, this is the first disloyal thing I've ever seen Lieberman do. I hope we can appeal to him to bow out with honor, rather than clinging to a seat that belongs to Connecticut voters and for which he failed to garner a nomination. But no money. We need it for races where we might lose the seat and our chance at the majority.
I know that this is an unpopular view here, and if this was during a Democratic administration or a Democratic Senate majority, I might not agree. But I feel like we have too much at stake to spend precious party resources on a race where the winner is guaranteed to be in our caucus next year.
EDIT: Because of the room left open for interpretation by his "Connecticut for Lieberman" filing, I have altered the following sentence accordingly-- "He <strike>has not switched parties, and</strike> he has not left the caucus for organizational purposes."