Quite a few Lieberman supporters, mostly Republican, think he is some kind of shoo-in for the general election. I think they are overlooking the dynamics of party politics. Bill Clinton (and Hillary) will support the Democratic nominee, expedient or not. They really have no choice. All the Democrats will support Lamont from Harry Reid to the congressional and gubernatorial nominees.

Lieberman will have a lot more trouble raising money from traditional Democrats and will have to rely on special interests, mostly Republican. As it becomes more clear that Lieberman is running mainly with Republican support, Democratic voters will peel off and support Lamont. This becomes partly self-fulfilling because Lieberman now needs to appeal to Republican voters, too, and his anemic attempts to bash George W. Bush won't sell in that market.

None of this even takes into account that prominent Democrats are going to begin calling on Joe to withdraw, some publicly and some privately, and that he looks like a hell of a sore loser and all losers have the stench of defeat about them. If Lamont's campaign is smart enough to be gracious, praise Lieberman and invite his voters to back the party's nominee, Joe will look increasingly bad. They are smart enough to do that. Joe, meanwhile, goes on Good Morning America and smears the Democrats who voted against him. Like I said, looking increasingly bad.

Joe is doomed.

And as for committee assignments, I suppose the leadership can appoint whomever they like, but putting a guy with an (I) after his name in position over possibly-more-senior (D)s would seem like begging for a mutiny.

The point of #3 is somewhat the same, push for party unity behind the party's nominee to deny Lieberman the ability to campaign on the support of party leaders, again like he did in his primary. The same goes for #4, deny Lieberman the use of special interest and labor endorsements.

Basically Kos is advocating cutting Lieberman's independent run off at the knees as early as possible, probably to force him to withdraw, so Lamont can focus on his GOP competitor.

That sort of "discipline" cost the GOP control of the Senate in 2001, when Jumpin' Jim Jeffords took his ball and went home. And they have learned their lesson, allowing the likes of Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe to have important committee chairmanships.

As to the rules, I honestly don't know. Presumably, one can call onesself a "Democrat" in the Senate while calling onesself an "Independent" (or whatever party line he chooses to run on) on a ballot. Indeed, my understanding is that Lieberman is running as an Independent in Name Only (IINO?)already pledging to caucus with the Dems. That could certainly change, though, if the party leadership got stupid.

.. As I said yesterday, this site has no official viewpoint on this. I personally, however, will use my posting privileges to campaign against Ned Lamont. I'll admit to considering Joe Lieberman the lesser of two evils, but that he definitely is. ...

And this isn't about being a 'sore winner'. This is about the _exact same_ sort of party loyalty that has kept the GOP strong in Congress for the last years... How is what Kos is calling for any different from the sort of discipline Rove, et al have forced on the GOP members?

the Clinton's will do exactly what AIPAC tells them to do

That's why I follow with "Most Democrats with presidential aspirations will likely follow suit."

There are politicos who don't do that. Arguably, Lieberman is one of them. Tom Coburn in Oklahoma is another. But those guys are rare, indeed.

You say this as if there is another US politician, of either party, on the planet who would do otherwise.

Liberal bloggers jumped on Ned Lamont's bandwagon before he even owned one. Now the anti-war crusade...