Reply #5: Kind of disturbing.

[Impashund Ubique]

Only 6 in 10 of the voters who disapprove of this war voted for Lamont. And, apparently, 36% of the democratic primary voters will still vote for Lieberman in the general.

That picture is disturbing. I understand that Lieberman has been faithful and productive for many CT citizens during his public service career. But this is where I fault "loyalty." There is a time for loyalty and a time for competence. This is a time to demand competence and common sense.

This is one of the only two significant chances (the other being the 08 presidential election) the CT voters are going to get to have a powerful say on the most important issue of our time, and they are not ready to vote their hearts and minds on this critical matter. Which makes you wonder, "why so?" I don't think the answer is terribly complicated.

I don't support the draft, but no one can seriously contest that things would be the same if there was a draft in place right now. Lamont would have won in a landslide if people felt a stronger personal investment in this catastrophic war. They would have realized better that their vote means saving one more American life, preserving one more American family's happiness (to say nothing of what the Iraqis are going through). If there was a draft looming, people would have forgotten all about the little favors Joe might have done for them in the past or the pork he brought home.

Sometimes, you have to put personal bonds (that some in CT might feel toward old Joe) behind the greater good. Some folks have yet to understand that.

And all this from a primary in a state where only 16% of Democrats approve of Bush.

Lieberman will probably drop out though, and at this point, after watching Lamont on Hardball last night, I think he will probably be the next Senator from the state of Connecticut. This race is historic, and win or lose, Ned Lamont has already been placed in the annals of the 21st century.