Lorie, I believe, has again "scooped" the MSM pundits . With 3 of the 5 seats held by GOP, and especially an apparent tight race for Shays, this additional turnout by GOP to guarantee Lieberman a victory would seem to help Shays.

The scenario as I see it is that GOP voters believe Lieberman has been unfairly treated by the left-wing DEMS and since Lieberman has supported Bush on Iraq and War on Terrorism, the GOP voters are willing to switch parties since the GOP candidate has no hope of winning the Senate seat. Based on Shays distancing himself from Bush, the DEMS that vote for Liberman may be more inclined to vote for an incumbent GOP, but certainly the larger turnout of GOP that will vote for Lieberman will vote GOP for House candidates.

On the flip side, had Lamont lost the DEM primary, Lieberman would still win the Senate seat, but GOP voters would not get out to vote for him, but would be more likely to just sit on their butts and not vote. End result would be GOP incumbent Congressional candidates would have more difficult getting their voters to turnout.

Thanks Beancounter, but it is Scott's "scoop," not mine. I do agree that Scott's analysis is great.

The New York Times agreed with that assessment:

STAMFORD, Conn., Aug. 25 -- As Senator Joseph I. Lieberman begins to mount a vigorous and well-financed re-election campaign as an independent, many Connecticut Democrats say they are worried that his bid could jeopardize their party's ability to win in three hotly contested House races this fall.

Mr. Lieberman, a centrist Democrat who lost in the Aug. 8 Democratic primary to Ned Lamont, a wealthy businessman, is now running on his own line. With polls showing that many Democrats are eager for a change, Democratic officials say they expect Mr. Lieberman to campaign aggressively to win over Republican and unaffiliated voters.

If he does, Democratic strategists say, he may well attract voters to the polls who are likely to support the state's three Republicans in Congress: Nancy Johnson, Rob Simmons and Christopher Shays.

"He has a Republican vote, that's the fact," said Tom Matzzie, the political director of Moveon.org, a liberal group that is backing Mr. Lamont and the Democratic challengers in the three House races. And those voters, he said, are "likely to vote as Republicans in every race."

The key is that Democrats have to win a NET of 15 seats to take the majority. They have few seats at risk of their own besides the two in Georgia, but they must hold those AND win at least 15 GOP seats. The Connecticut seats were high on their target list, along with a few each in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana. There is very little margin for error.

Another possible "Lieberman factor" is if the Democrats reach 50 votes in the Senate. He has said he will caucus with them, but with several of his former colleagues campaigning and fundraising against him, would he feel bound by that if his vote was the one which made the difference?

The three paragraphs following the quote are part of it; I don't know what is wrong with the code.

Uh oh. If the NYT agrees, I might have to rethink the whole thing. :-)

Really, I think it just illustrates how external factors can affect the campaigns.

If a House race is close, any late factor could decide it. Statewide races can have a greater effect than national politics, as may be shown in Connecticut. Similarly, the lack of a competitive statewide race can be a factor in states like Indiana, putting greater emphasis on GOTV efforts.

The effects can be very subtle. A correspondent from Texas (but not in the district) opines that TX-22, the DeLay seat with only a write-in Republican, which has been cast "leans Democratic pickup" by all the analysts, including Scott, may in fact be well in play for the GOP. The statewide gubernatorial contest won't help Democratic turnout (their nominee is running a poor third, roughly tied with Kinky Friedman), and Lampson is disliked by Republicans and independents in the 22nd.

There are such unique local circumstances in many of the competitive races, but they are rarely well known to national pundits. On balance, they are as likely to hurt Republicans as to help, but either way the local factors will have far more effect than the Foley scandal.

The GOP GOTV strategy has been proven and improved in the last two elections. It will deploy against a backdrop of traditionally lower turnout from key Democratic constituencies in midterm elections.

In such a confluence of circumstances, predicting national results is less than scientific. When the underdog Russian expatriate Alexander Alekhine was asked, upon his arrival in Buenos Aires in 1927, of his prospects in the World Championship match against "The Chess Machine," defending champ Capablanca, to the first player to win six games, he replied: "I cannot imagine myself being able to win six games against Capablanca, but neither can I imagine him being able to win six games against me."

Alekhine shocked the chess world by winning handily.

No one could have imagined the subtle circumstances which allowed him to prevail over a player who was considered virtually unbeatable. And, so it is with the competitive House seats - whether Republicans or Democrats win in individual districts, the specific reasons for each will probably not be known to us until after the election, if at all.

The point is that predictions of minor shifts are necessarily random guesses, however educated. To forecast a major shift of thirty or more seats would be noteworthy if it came to pass. With the House so closely divided going in, it is highly probable that one party or the other will emerge with a very narrow majority.

I've thought that all along. I even wrote about it here:

Republicans are whistling past the proverbial graveyard if they think the Connecticut results bode well for them. The high turnout reflects voter anger with the war and with President Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress, meaning that Rep. Chris Shays and two other moderate Republicans in the state will likely be swept away in the tide of anger come November.

The truth is that Connecticut is a goldmine for Republicans when placed in the context of the thwarted terrorist plot of this past week. The truth is that Lieberman losing the primary means that alot of Republicans turning out to vote for Lieberman. That means that Republican turnout will be high, which gives Chris Shays, Nancy Johnson and Rob Simmons a much better shot at getting re-elected.

While I don't think this is going to happen, what will the libs think if the Senate ends up being 49-49-2? The Dem's will have thrown their opportunity to control the Senate away when they threw Liberman under the bus.

Would they be rational enough to offer him incentives to return to the party or will their irrationality increase their anger and hate for him even more?

The real person who may have saved the House was former Governor John Rowland.

He resigned under ethics investigation in 2004, allowing his LG Jodi Rell two full years to build a positive record.

He plead out and served time rather than go through a trial

Had he not, he would have subjected the GOP to two long and extraordinarily painful ordeals--his impeachment and his trial.

Ain't no way Jodi Rell be up 22 plus points three weeks out if that happened. Odds are Dem AG Dick Blumenthal would be headed for a victory of Spitzeresque dimensions, with a "Deep Impact" on the entire CT GOP.

Had Taft stepped down in OH......?????

Absolutely, Ironman. Taft has done immeasurable damage to the Ohio GOP by stubbornly hanging onto power. Is he planning to pardon himself at the end or something?

Given the circumstances, it is amazing that any Republican candidates are even in their races in the state. It will take a few years to clear out the Taft stench, but we should be looking at a very red state if we can get it done.

Well, fiddle, Jim - I was not happy seeing that New Yuck Times article from August. And I thought I'd come up with something half-way original! Oh well.

I was a registered Democrat, but the last election was the final straw for me. I changed my party affiliation to Republican last year.

In three weeks (plus one day), I'll be voting for Lieberman -- and on everything else I will be voting straight Republican.

Thanks to all the Ned Lamont kosbots.