The idea that the Democratic primary was hijacked by bloggers and unreconstructed Yippies (look it up) may have traction in some circles. Those of you Stateside would know better than I. But how does that meme play when Joementum is stopped in its tracks by the entire Connecticut electorate in the general election?
The concept depends on the (true) idea that party primaries don't represent a cross-section of the entire population. Just as Republican primary voters are, as a group, considerably to the right of the average person, Democratic primary voters are considerably to the left. So, in a primary election, it is conceivable--indeed, it has happened not infrequently--that a well-organized and motivated sub-group of party members who are toward the extreme end of the continuum is able to nominate someone whom most of the party (let alone the general electorate) finds to be a bit...nuts. And this, the story goes, is what happened to Lieberman.
But what happens when the general election rolls around and Lamont trounces Lieberman again? How do you blame the bloggers and the radicals for that? If Lamont and the Republican garner 90% of the vote between them, people can say that it was too late to save Lieberman because an independent can't win. But Connecticut has had, in recent history, an independent governor, and Lieberman obviously has the money and name recognition, plus the establishment support, to make a serious run. In any case, if Lamont wins the election, what happens to the notion that he is an extremist whom only the left wing could support?
Come November, will the same pundits who are currently driving Zoe around the bend have to eat their words? Or (if Lamont wins) will they fail to mention that their pet theories of August have been shot down?