I'm not so exhaustive a reader of this site to know if this point's been made and, if so, how often. So I apologize for any redundancy. I'll make it clear here that I'm not replying to any one in particular; I intend this more as a preventive warning than a response.
I want to ensure that our attention to the Connecticut race is kept in proportion to its relative importance vis a vis all the other races on our plate. I'm pleased to see so much attention devoted here to nationwide races. A glance at ActBlue's statistics on donations is more troubling - too much money is going to Lamont at the expense of far more critical races.
As of today, ActBlue records the following donation totals:
Lamont (CT): 329K
vs.
McCaskill (MO): 65K
Tester (MT): 122K
Brown (OH): 51K
Webb (VA) 176K
Casey (PA) 12K
Now, granted these totals primarily reflect donations given with primaries in mind, but the proportion of aid to Lamont vs aid to candidates going against actual members of the Republican caucus CANNOT be sustained. We need to ensure that each of these challengers, plus others (in Rhode Island, for example) get at least one dollar for each that goes to Lamont.
Lieberman annoys me, but George Allen scares me. There's no way that Lieberman's defeat is a bigger priority than Allen's - or Talent's, Santorum's, Chafee's, Burns's, or DeWine's.
So, I propose choosing a proportion for Lamont contributions vs non-Lamont contributions. My personal choice would be $1 to Lamont for $15 to other Dems, but I'll leave it to y'all to work it out.