(cross-posted at Deny My Freedom and Daily Kos)
I only got 4 hours of sleep last night, but damn. Last night was something to behold, to say the least. As soon as Lieberman said that he had congratulated Ned Lamont, the entire media room (somewhat of a misnomer, as it was dominated by bloggers) exploded in cheers, raised arms, and a palpable sense of exhiliration. Sure, once we quieted down so that Connecticut Bob and his crew could keep up with Lieberman’s non-concession, it resumed into a bunch of jeers, boos, and downright hostility. Nevertheless, standing in the ballroom yesterday, watching Lamont give his victory speech, you could feel the energy of the crowd. It felt like the Democratic Party was back – indeed, Lamont’s loudest applause came when he said he was the Democratic nominee. However, due to Lieberman’s decision to run as an independent, it means that we still have a long journey in front of us to make sure Lieberman is retired come January. CT Blogger jokingly complained about not being able to do what he’s been doing the next few months, but we have to keep on keepin’ on.
The mainstream media has wasted no time in spinning this as bad news for the Democratic Party (as countless bloggers had predicted). First up in line for the wankery award is David Lightman of the Hartford Courant:
Three-term incumbent Joe Lieberman’s primary defeat, many analysts said Tuesday night, could be the start of a return to the kind of one-issue, no-nuance politics that badly wounded the party during the Vietnam era.
[…]
“This is a strong shift to the left in the Democratic Party. Moderates are now an endangered species,” said John J. Pitney Jr., professor of American politics at Claremont McKenna College in California.
Lieberman’s defeat has the potential to instantly jolt Democratic politics in three key ways: The center becomes dangerous, the blogosphere gains new stature as a political kingmaker, and Bush’s conduct of the war in Iraq is unquestionably the year’s central issue.
The media seems to be quite quick to make the comparison to the Vietnam era when it comes to the political side of things, but they don’t seem all that eager to look at the actual conflicts themselves to see why they are similar. They also are very quick to make us out to be ‘McGovernites’, whatever that entails – and it’s not just the Republicans who are saying such things, it’s people who are ostensibly supposed to be Democrats, such as The New Republic’s Martin Peretz and the ‘reformed’ Republican Marshall Wittman. This race was not about one issue. Certainly Iraq was at its core, but people were unhappy with Lieberman for many other reasons. As Josh Marshall writes, the real issue was that Lieberman was simply out of touch with his constituents – the people of Connecticut.
Lieberman got in trouble because he let himself live in the bubble of D.C. conventional wisdom and A-list punditry. He flattered them; and they loved him back. And as part of that club he was part of the delusion and denial that has sustained our enterprise in Iraq for the last three years. In the weeks leading up to Tuesday’s primary, A-list D.C. pundits were writing columns portraying Lieberman’s possible defeat as some sort of cataclysmic event that might foreshadow a dark new phase in American politics — as though voters choosing new representation were on a par with abolishing the Constitution or condoning political violence. But those breathless plaints only showed how disconnected they are from what’s happening in the country at large. They mirrored his disconnection from the politics of the moment.
Perhaps the more ludicrous notion is that this ‘endangers’ moderates in our party. Has the media not been paying any attention to the Republican Party, where the mere concept of a moderate Republican is extinct outside of the Northeast? We haven’t been the ones doing any sort of ideological purging in recent times; it’s been a GOP that has consistently been racing towards the right end of the political spectrum without any sort of regard for moderation. It should be noted, once again, that we aren’t going after all our moderates – just look at Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, or Harold Ford of Tennessee. I don’t recall that being a lapdog for the GOP was the definition of a ‘moderate Democrat’. The most absurd part of claiming we are ‘radical leftists’, though, is our support for bringing our troops home. It’s something most Americans support.
While Iraq is naturally going to be the central issue of this election – why should it not be? – we are not ‘kingmakers’ because of this triumph. One reason Connecticut is different from a place like TX-28 or OH-02 or CA-50 – all races where the blogosphere-backed candidate lost – is because of the amazing local blogging scene. Whether it be My Left Nutmeg, LamontBlog, or Spazeboy, there were more local bloggers on the scene last night than national bloggers. These are people who know each other well and have been able to coordinate their activities so that they maximize their effect. Lamont’s victory may have been aided by the larger, more-publicized blogs such as dKos, Eschaton, and MyDD, but mark my words: without the local Connecticut bloggers, this race never would have been as close as it was, much less a victory for our side. Having a vibrant blogging community already based at the site of the race made for a huge strategic advantage, and their creativity made Lieberman look worse than any of those who watched from afar could have.
Not to be outdone, Time Magazine has a clearly unbiased piece titled Why the Republicans Are Loving the Lieberman Loss:
From Washington State to Missouri to Pennsylvania, Democratic candidates found themselves on the defensive Wednesday as the Republican Party worked ferociously at every level to try to use the primary defeat of Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut to portray the oppposition as the party of weakness and isolation on national security and liberal leanings on domestic policy. Doleful Democrats bemoaned the irony: At a time when Republicans should be back on their heels because of chaos abroad and President Bush’s unpopularity, the Democrats’ rejection of a sensible, moralistic centrist has handed the GOP a weapon that could have vast ramifications for both the midterm elections of ’06 and the big dance of ’08.
[…]
Trying to look on the bright side, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued a statement this morning pointing to strong turnout in the primaries and declaring that Democratic voters “are energized.” The challenge for Dean, and his party, is to channel that energy in a direction that makes victory more likely, not less.
I haven’t been following the reactions from around the country as they apply to the individual races, but this is a complete non-issue. The other candidates can say that Connecticut chose Lamont and that they will respect that choice – supporting the democratic process should hardly be much of a stretch on our side. In Connecticut, there’s already been a unity event in which all major elected Democratic Party officials in Connecticut endorsed Lamont (even if it may have been lukewarm at best). National party leaders have done the same. This is not something to run from; it is something to be proud of and stand up for. As Rahm Emmanuel put so eloquently, it was about Lieberman being Bush’s ‘love child’. And Bush having an approval rating stuck in the 30s, is it so bad to be running against him? Of course not. As for calling Lieberman the sensible and moralistic center…well, the response to that accusation writes itself.
Although Lieberman may no longer have the support of the party infrastructure, he does have the implicit backing of the mainstream media, which has been going out of its way to paint us in as bad a light as possible. In addition, don’t expect the money Lieberman raked in at the end of the race to stop coming in. As his former chief of staff and Enron lobbyist put it, “The Washington lawyers and lobbyists in those rooms will come back for Joe Lieberman”. The taint of being a loser and the inherent unfairness in his running as an independent in the general election will be hard to lose, but don’t doubt for a moment that the senator will continue to throw all the money necessary to polish himself and tarnish Lamont as much as possible. Of course, putting pressure on Lieberman to abandon his run would be best, but his defiant speech last night makes it seem that his ego and his utter inability to put the well-being of the Democratic Party – and the country, since he believes himself to be that important – above his ambitions will make for a long three months.
While the blogosphere will get back to its regular schedule of covering other campaigns and the main issues of our day, such as Iraq, remember that we took a huge first step last night. We all celebrated in our own way, and we’ve been recapping the incredible ride that Ned Lamont and all of us have been on to date. But as I shook the future senator’s hand last night, there was no doubt in my mind that if we thought this was tough, the upcoming months in Connecticut will be even tougher. If and when you have some free time – a day off from work or the weekends, for example – come volunteer for the Lamont campaign. I know I’ll be going back this weekend, for there is much work to be done.
