Thoughts about Connecticut, where Joe Lieberman, who lost last week's Democratic primary to anti-Iraq war candidate Ned Lamont, seeks to retain his Senate seat by running in the general election as an independent.

Could Lieberman, who supports the war, win in November, despite the defection of prominent Democrats who endorsed him in the primary? I don't know, but I'm not yet ready to write a political obituary for this man who had the courage in 1998 to denounce Bill Clinton's behavior and the honor in 2000 of being the first Jew on a national ticket.

Count Rhode Island's Sen. Jack Reed among the Democratic names who rooted for Lieberman and now endorse Lamont. Reed says that, for all he knows, Lieberman may survive in the general election, after which he'd remain in the Democratic Caucus. But for now anyway, Reed is turning away from a man who only a few days earlier he praised highly and, indeed, still admires.

Asked on July 31 why he'd recommend that primary voters stick with Lieberman, Reed, who disagrees with Lieberman on the war, told me, "The guy is a principled public servant. He's devoted himself to his state and to the nation. He is sincere in his convictions. He's been a leader on environmental issues and on issues that resonate, I think, with working families."

So, Reed didn't mean it? He says he did mean it but that primary voters chose Lamont.

Yet Lieberman still runs and aims to continue serving as a Democrat. Is the official party imprimatur Lamont now enjoys more important than Lieberman's qualities as an individual?

Reed says that's not the way to look at it. He says Lieberman could have decided from the outset to run as an independent and take on Lamont and a Republican in November. Instead, he first chose to go into the primary and now is paying the price: "This is a system that Joe embraced. He wanted the Democratic nomination because he assumed, quite rightly, if he got that nomination he would have the support of Democrats."

If you're thinking the loser of the Sept. 12 Republican primary here -- incumbent Lincoln Chafee or challenger Steve Laffey -- might go on to run as an independent in November, forget it; Rhode Island doesn't allow such double-dipping.

Connecticut's Democratic primary clearly shows that anger about the war and about George Bush is building. More broadly, the primary was a reminder that any pol is vulnerable to a well-financed challenger with a great issue. Lamont, a wealthy cable TV executive and political novice, poured millions into his race, pounding on the war and Lieberman's coziness with Republicans.

A rap against Lieberman is that he became so smitten by the national stage -- after running for vice president in 2000 he ran for president in 2004 -- that he lost touch with Connecticut voters and became aloof. Good pols usually can scare off challengers through hard work, not only on issues but also constant fundraising, constituency visits, and cultivation of media.

It's said that Connecticut has demonstrated that moderates who seek to work with senators from the other party are going to be squeezed out by zealot voters in their own parties -- left-wing Democrats and right-wing Republicans. Rhode Island's primary between Bush supporter Laffey and maverick Chafee will offer another test of a moderate's ability to survive.

Many Republicans here are mad at Chafee. On Sept. 12 it will be evident whether there are enough of them to cast him out, just as on Nov. 7 it will be known if there are enough angry Connecticut general-election voters to give Lieberman a final farewell kiss.

M. Charles Bakst is The Journal's political columnist.

mbakst@projo.com /(401) 277-7638