Maryland?  You're kidding right?  Maryland Democrats may predominate but usually pretty much everything is a free for all.  No one really has any machines anymore.  Lots of individual followings but hardly anything resembling a machine.

We do have an expensive media market though.

This is a very dangerous assumption especially in a state with a Repub Gov and a majority Repub House Delegation including Rob Simmons who beat an incumbent Dem in 2000.

What about a 3-way race with Lieberman as a D, Weicker as an Independent and Shays or Simmons as an R?   I can see a Shays or Simmons win.  This has happened before in CT with Weicker winning the Governorship against major party candidates.  What is the impact of a nasty primary on the dynamics of the general election?  Have we become the left wing version of the Club for Growth enforcing our own agenda?

I am no Lieberman fan or defender but there is a very dangerous assumption in the blogosphere that there is no way we will ever lose this seat.  CT is light blue outside Presidential politics.  Bloody primaries and 3 way races could result in an R winning.

I was no fan of the conservative Southern Dems in 1980s or early 1990s but they sure beat the Tom DeLay's of the world.  As I noted before I am no Lieberman fan but we need to be looking towards becoming the majority party rather than punishing people in our party with whom we don't agree.  Keep your eyes on the prize - Congressional majority in 2006.

A machine in Pennsylvania? More like two big fiefdoms on either side of the state, and a half-dozen little ones scattered throughout.

He has noticved the brewing primary battles in MD and NY?

CT isn't going to elect a Republican Senator, even though they have no problem electing Republicans at the other statewide office?

No he can't. There aren't enough progressive voters who care who their Senator is and who aren't primarily concerned about choice or the environment, two issues Lieberman's been great on. In fact, there aren't very many at all. You'd be talking ONLY about one-issue national security progressive voters who aren't Israel-focused. Outside of the academic commuunity around Yale and Wesleyan (and a few other places) I'm not sure who you're talking about.

Plus he'll have all the institutions (i.e. labor) organizing to get out the vote, and millions of bucks. What planet do you live on?

No, don't get me wrong. I'd LOVE for someone to take him on just to bust his chops and send a message. But beat him? No way.

Put aside for the moment the idea that it sounds like science fiction and reflect for a minute exactly what kind of effect Instant Runoff Voting would have here.

Unafraid to vote in their own best interests, voters would stream to a challenger.

Lieberman, who is in power because of constituency and the old boy network - would be defeated handily.

The discussion of issues and ideas would be on a higher level , necessarily - because there would be greater freedom.

And last. Best of all. The democratic party would be reported Wide and Far as the harbinger of Change in the United States.

The Democrats can do whatever they like with their primary, its their rules. In a state where Lieberman can be elected to the party and be kissing Bush (we assume, there wasn't any tongue..) you've got a real chance to lock a seat down but more importantly such a small state, really make everyone else all around stand up and notice that the Democrats are unafraid.

Lieberman makes some good points, don't get me wrong. I am kind of a hawk and I really don't have too much trouble with him, by and by/ I guess I am an American first.  I think change, in this election, will be what wins in 2008 as well.

Granted, of course, it would take .. guts!

The CT Democratic machine party is far from progessive, but Weicker is not the answer.

In brief, Republicans get elected in Connecticut by running as Democrats - that is, away from their voting records in WDC.  Lieberman, whether you want to hear this or not, is the model around here.  The only exception is Rosa DeLauro, who comes from a city so far to the left in its politics that it probably would find itself closer to home in Europe than almost anywhere in the US.

Note: I am vehemently opposed to the neocons, disagree strongly and publicly with Joe's alignment with them, and have been working for two years to unseat Nancy Johnson from the Congress.

Imagine for a minute, what effect 50,000 Movon members in CT might have sending Mr. Lieberman some thoughtful emails and phone calls?   My guess is they could have an effect on his thinking.   If Movon wants to have an effect I suggest they try this route instead.   Democrats shouldn't attack democrats.

Take this for example:

Now, people do vary from term to term.  But that one session is quite indicative of significant long-term differences between Schumer on the one hand and Lieberman and Biden on the other, which can be found quite clearly by looking at specifics of policy they have chosen to expend significant time and energy on.

My point: There is a common problem here, but it is not simply reducible to ideological position.

Again, I agree with the general thrust of where you want to go, but doing so simply on the big-picture generalization you present is ludicrous over-selling.  It makes counter-arguments too easy to mount.

This is 100% true:

And this is 100% false (even with the quote marks):

I believe this is a very important argument to be made. Much too important to present in this manner, with so much reliance on weak links.

1988, everyone said Weicker was invulnerable.  He was a moderate republican Senator who usually voted with the Democrats.  Lieberman went harshly negative in TV ads, Weicker was abandoned by many conservative republicans because he was too liberal, and Lieberman won.  The seat went from a left-leaning R to right-leaning D.  (Anti-war people would have been much better served if Weicker held the seat.)

Weicker was still very popular and won the governorship.  At the time, the state budget was hemorrhaging, and Weicker did the only fiscially responsible thing, he instituted a state income tax.  Voters in CT will not forgive him for that, and he will never win another statewide election.  

But Lieberman is definately vulnerable, especially to a primary challenge.  Connecticut voters can be quite independent and unpredictable, especially in primaries.  In 1992, Jerry Brown, uber-liberal former California governor beat Bill Clinton in the presidential primary.  Was this the only state Brown won?  

The best strategy for knocking off Lieberman is to run an attractive candidate (veteran would be good) against him in the primary, go negative against Lieberman (associating him with Bush) and mobilize grassroots and netroots to bring voters in to the primary (turn-out is usually so low that a GOTV effort can define the election.)

Anyway, I hope it works.  Joe gotta go.  

Simmons(R) - 42%
Lieberman(D) - 35 %
Weiker (I) - 23 %

Plus, I think its easy to have litmus tests such as Iraq putting Liberman out and Weiker in, but the fact is, Lieberman is much better on union issues and the like than Weiker is.  Weiker would be just another 'limosine liberal' in the sense that while being liberal on social issues, thus feeing him of all of the litmus tests of NARAL etc(the same issues that people are attacking Casey Jr. and kicked Langevin out for), they would be great on the important economic issues.  This is why what is wrong with Kansas, is wrong with Kansas.  we have abandoned these issues at the core in favor of politicians that wont look out for hte poor, the tired, the weary and instead going for abortion- which by the way isnt even a top 10 important issue. If Roe V wade went the other way and abortion was up to the states, Abortion wouldve not become and important issue and would be legal in pretty much every state. Maybe not Mississippi + Alabama but that is pretty mcuh it. Reason: It wouldnt have galvanized the religious right behind the issue as the symbolization of their cultural jihad against 'liberal america'