A Connecticut wrench in Democrats' plans

WASHINGTON -- The Democratic Party has high hopes for Connecticut.

Despite having one of the most liberal electorates in the country -- which strongly disapproves of the Iraq war -- Connecticut nonetheless has three Republicans in its five-member House delegation, each of whom backed President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

All three GOP House members are moderates with strong claims on the loyalty of their constituents, so the Democrats need a dramatic issue to prove that the three are, indeed, out of the Connecticut mainstream. The Democrats think they have such an issue in the war, and are preparing relentless challenges to war-supporting Republicans Christopher Shays, Nancy Johnson, and Rob Simmons.

But a funny thing happened while the Democrats were mobilizing the antiwar vote: They realized that their own party's senator, Joseph I. Lieberman, who is up for re election in November, is the Senate's most vociferous Democratic supporter of the war.

Ned Lamont, a Greenwich businessman and a Democratic activist, is mounting a challenge to Lieberman based largely on criticism of the senator's support for the war. Last week, at the state convention , Lamont officially forced an August primary election by winning the support of 33 percent of the delegates, a tally perceived by some as an embarrassment for Lieberman.

Now, the Lamont challenge has scrambled the electoral equation across the ballot in Connecticut, causing Democratic hand-wringing from Hartford to Washington.

Anger toward Lieberman isn't confined to antiwar protesters. After the 2000 election, when Lieberman was Al Gore's vice presidential running mate, some mainstream Democrats felt that Lieberman had neglected the party's interests to maintain his own image as a centrist committed to morality over politics. (The Lieberman critics have conveniently forgotten that he was chosen precisely because of that image, since his criticism of Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal was popular with soccer moms.)

Nonetheless, Lieberman came up short in the bare-knuckle partisan battle that was the Florida recount. He surprised many Democrats by brushing aside the idea that the party would challenge improperly stamped ballots from soldiers serving overseas, even though some Democrats were concerned that there wasn't enough proof that the ballots were sent by Election Day.

(Military ballots ``deserve the benefit of the doubt," Lieberman declared.)

During the Bush administration that followed, Lieberman has not only been a supporter of the Iraq war -- he has scolded some Democratic critics for placing partisan politics ahead of the national interest.

Now, as Lamont zeroes in, Lieberman is pressuring Democrats again. Officially, his position is that Lamont is a fringe challenger and that he, Lieberman, looks forward to being the Democratic nominee. But he's also refused to rule out an independent candidacy -- a signal to Democratic leaders that they'd better back him in the primary or he'll split the party's vote in November.

Since Lieberman is considered a sure bet to win the general election if he's the Democratic nominee -- while a Lamont victory coupled with an independent Lieberman run would open the door to the Republican nominee -- Democratic leaders are flummoxed. Most national Democrats, seeking to take control of the Senate, would prefer a sure Lieberman victory to the uncertainty of a three-way race.

But appeasing Lieberman also has a cost. If party leaders reconcile Lieberman's support for the war by stressing that Democrats believe reasonable people can disagree, even such a minor accommodation would drain energy from their challenges to Shays, Johnson, and Simmons.

And all evidence suggests that only a fired-up opposition can hope to defeat the three GOP mainstays.

Shays is probably the most vulnerable, because he's in the most antiwar district, but he's a likable, nine-term incumbent who has made a virtue of his independence in past elections.

He's bucked his own party to endorse Lieberman this time -- a not-so-subtle reminder that they share similar views on national security.

Johnson, 71, has been in the House for 12 terms and is associated more with healthcare -- her specialty -- than with the Iraq war.

Simmons received an enormous boost when the base-closing commission overruled Pentagon plans to shutter the submarine base in New London, allowing Simmons to say that he helped save hundreds of local jobs.

Meanwhile, last week Lamont went on the air with a TV commercial portraying Lieberman as a Bush lapdog. Many Democrats are holding their breath.

Peter S. Canellos is the Globe's Washington bureau chief. National Perspective is his weekly analysis of events in the capital and beyond.