bumped - Matt

First the right-wing blogosphere, then the Wall St. Journal editorial board, and now the uber-D.C. insider Stuart Rothenberg are all hysterical about the fact that Connecticut Democrats just don't seem to like their best friend Joe Lieberman that much anymore:

It doesn't seem to matter to those angry Democrats, or to Lamont, that Lieberman is widely respected for his thoughtfulness, integrity, civility and intellect. Or his overall voting record....

It isn't just that Lieberman is a centrist, however, that makes the primary challenge to him unseemly. Not all centrists deserve to be re-elected any more than all liberals or all conservatives do. Rather, it's the Connecticut Democrat's stature and character that, in another day, would make a primary challenge to him by a former Greenwich selectman laughable....

Krugman already ably debunked the "Joe as centrist" myth earlier today.

But when 33.4% of party insiders in a roll call vote are willing to put their names forward against a sitting senator, it's pretty tough to claim he is "widely respected" anymore.

(Cross-posted from LamontBlog.)

Lieberman recently "sat down" with Connecticut Local Politics to answer six questions. Actually, it was via email and it apparently took the responsive Senator over six weeks to answer all six. Still, I guess that's what passes for meaningful interaction with constituents for Joe.

Though, with over a week to answer each individual question, you'd think he'd have come up with better answers than these:

The good people of Connecticut have elected me to represent them three times and I hope I have earned their support a fourth time.

The good Democrats of Connecticut have not had a chance to elect you in a primary since 1970. Remember Democrats? The party to which you claim to belong? You have never been elected to represent Connecticut Democrats in the Senate. You defeated a more liberal candidate to win the seat in 1988. Next?

(Cross-posted from LamontBlog.)

Paul Bass, author of this weekend's NE Magazine piece that Kos links to today, has another article in the New Haven Independent about the grassroots/netroots strategy of the fledgling Lamont campaign. He followed Ned Lamont on a 120-mile trip to speak in front of 16 supporters in Killingly last week, in "the Quiet Corner" of the state, or as Bass puts it, "Little Appalachia." The way this campaign is already proving itself adept at using and motivating the netroots is apparent. Take this description of how the campaign found a lone supporter from the Quiet Corner via Daily Kos and won him over enough to volunteer for the campaign:

Grossman vented some of these frustrations one day on a national liberal blog called the Daily Kos. A Lamont staffer read his post, contacted him, told him about the Lamont campaign. The staffer invited Grossman to see Lamont up close at the event at the Killingly Community Center....

Lamont didn't pander, though. He didn't give Leigh Grossman the precise answer he was looking for on eavesdropping, for instance.

Grossman asked Lamont if electronic eavesdropping by the federal government is necessary at all. Yes, Lamont said. His beef with Bush is that Bush has done it illegally, with contempt for safeguards meant to protect people's privacy rights.

"I'm afraid in this world we are going to have to have a higher level of intelligence," Lamont said. "But darn it, the president is not going to have that authority" to make decisions about intelligence without checks and balances....

After hearing Lamont, he said he would probably volunteer for the campaign. That was probably the night's most promising sign for the fledgling Lamont express. Not because one more volunteer enlisted. (It'll take a lot more Grossmans and McNallys to mount a serious challenge.) But because of what it said about the campaign's tactics.

Bass proceeds to describe those tactics and Lamont's engagement with the technology and strategy of netroots outreach:

That's the title of Charlie Cook's latest take on the outlook for the midterms (via the Stakeholder, which highlights an excellent example of how the CW has changed from a year ago). Cook argues that if the election were held today, whether or not the Democrats would win a majority in the House would be virtually within the margin of error:

The current model predicts a net Democratic gain of 10 seats. When we factor in a four-seat margin of error, the model projects that as of today, under current conditions, and without speculating about what the national political environment may do between now and November, Democrats will make a net gain of six to 14 seats. With a bit of luck -- or a wave of any size -- Democrats might even grasp their gold ring: 15 seats.

The question is whether the national environment becomes more or less favorable for Republicans in the next nine months. And, according to Cook, writing about Boehner's election in a separate article, the coming months aren't looking good:

According to today's Times, Mayor Bloomberg (R-NY) is considering trying to actively help break the State GOP's hold on the State Senate by backing the Democratic challenger to a Republican State Senator from Queens:

As the article notes, this is in many ways reminiscent of then-Mayor Giuliani's backing of Cuomo vs. Pataki in the 1994 gubernatorial race. That move backfired after Pataki won a surprising victory. This move - while in a race for a lower office - is more likely to be successful, as well as potentially much more significant.

Why?

Another open seat for the GOP to defend in the house: Rep. Kolbe is announcing that he will not seek re-election in 2006. I am not very familiar the district, but while the DCCC doesn't list any Democratic candidates, politics1.com lists Jeff Latas, an ex-Air Force fighter pilot, as a name. Another Fighting Dem with a fighting chance!

Any other possibilities? As an open seat, AZ-08 would seem very winnable.

Update [2005-11-23 15:44:57 by thirdparty]: Here's a recent diary by Jeff on dKos.