[Darkwolf377]

I don't think Lieberman is so bad, so why do I want him to lose?

Maybe something to do with the Democrats being themselves, with no excuses and nowhere to hide.

[Moral Hazard]

"Driven by intense anger at President Bush and fierce opposition to the Iraq war, they are on the brink of claiming their most significant political triumph, one that will reverberate far beyond the borders here if Lieberman loses."

Wouldn't a "political triumph" require actually winning a general election?

[My2Cents]

I would think Lieberman's loss would bode ill for Hillary, who has been trying to reinvent herself as a moderate, Iraq war supporter -- it's clear most Dems are leftist kooks.

[denydenydeny]

All that's missing from the title of this story is the phrase "we hope" at the end.

[the Real fifi]

If on a longshot, Lieberman wins, will the press pontificate that the war is not an issue? LOL

[msnimje]

I think it will be great if the Democrats want to send a slate of "cut and runners" up to the plate.

[GeronL]

Do the Dems really think going to the left is a winner??

[Tzimisce]

In this race I think I'm rooting for Lieberman. Better him that the Limo Lib Lamont.

[Fresh Wind]

Maybe the moonbats secretly blame Lieberman for Gore's loss in 2000.

[Beckwith]

Right after putting his wish to paper, Dan Balz threw a penny in the Washington Post fountain.

[Buckeye Battle Cry]

It would be good for these far-left whackjobs to become emboldened and really raise a ruckus between now and November.

Let the people take a good long look at the ugly truth that is the Democrat party.

[Aegedius]

Let's keep our eyes on the ball. If Lamont wins, the anti-war whackos will have to spend more of their money in the general election, leaving less to spread around to other Democrats. Therefore, root for Lamont.