Lessons of Lieberman's Loss.
Joementum, we barely knew ye. Okay, we knew ye a damn sight too well, but that's not what the man wrote. Anyhoo, various takeaways, as I sees 'em:
- The loss is a barometer of exactly nothing. Lieberman is unique in the Democratic Party and raised unique ire. Bum-rushing Joe was like finally barring the embarrassing uncle from family events where liquor is available. By about 2002 he'd overstayed his welcome. If we must find greater meaning, it's that Democrats have apparently not slipped completely into affectless Bush-induced catatonia. Or at least in Connecticut.
- Of all the Dems piling off the Lieberman bandwagon and onto Lamont's, Hillary Clinton gets the award for most biting rebuke: she gave Lamont five grand.
- Lieberman and his apologists call his showing impressive and above expectations. To the contrary, he is one of the only Senators in the past half-century to be defeated in a primary, and two months ago, he had a 25-point lead on a candidate who's never held public office. Yesterday I predicted the vote would be closer than people expected because people were, frankly, expecting way too much: he's a three-term sitting senator, for God's sake, and he had every Democratic politician in the country voicing public support, along with the most popular Dem in the country (Clinton) stumping for him. This isn't just a loss, it's a humiliation.
- For signs that the Dems are in a mood of change, look not to Connecticut, but Georgia, where Cynthia McKinney lost. Dems are, possibly, now fed up enough by incompetent leaders that they're willing to throw the bums out and run someone they can stand. Not exactly a national profile in courage, but when you're in the gutter, any move's an improvement.