D+0.5
Of course what a choice, a conservative Democrat and the candidate that the crazies who thought that a right-winger was too moderate picked.
I don't really care that Lugar lost, but why do I have the feeling that those who were whining about Lieberman's primary challenge don't care about this? There's really a double standard when it comes to primaries. A lot of primary challenges in the Democratic party are actually from the right (like Ed Case).
Liberal Democratic challenger = bad.
Conservative Democratic challenger = good.
Liberal Republican challenger = empty set.
Conservative Republican challenger = good.
I think most primary challenges to incumbents are more about opportunism than anything else. People who say Congressman X has "been there too long" don't get that (1) there is a learning curve involved in government service and you basically don't know what the hell you're doing for your first couple of years and (2) as long as Congress uses seniority to determine things like committee assignments, it is usually foolish for any incumbent who's been there a good amount of time to be voted out.
I'm not concerned about ideology so much as I am about what someone brings to the table. A good chunk of what Congress does is fairly bland/routine/obscure stuff that can't be turned into an ideological battle (or shouldn't, at least). A bad congressman is bad in large part not because of their ideology but because they (1) are an obstacle to Congress being able to do its job; (2) misuse their influence for personal benefit; (3) have talent but don't use it or don't have talent but think they do.
