In my years in the consulting business, I've never had the opportunity to work with Dan Gerstein, Joe Lieberman's erstwhile defender. So I hesitate to call him names, like a delusional egomaniac. But after reading his latest treatise, it's hard to think of him in any other way.

Gerstein goes on to say that there are two kinds of Democrats - Polarizers (i.e. the people who disagree with Joe Lieberman) and the "Problem Solvers." (i.e. the people who agree with Joe Lieberman). Only in the twisted mind of Gerstein can the people who want to end the war in Iraq be described as polarizers, but the folks who want to extend the conflict through the "surge" are the problem solvers (Dick Cheney, problem solver! Who knew?).

Gerstein goes on to explain that Lieberman-Lamont match-up showed what happens when these two groups fight each other, as the race "provided the party with a nearly pure real-world test of these two competing approaches." In his mind, the "problem solvers" won out.

This is where Gerstein shows he is, in fact, delusional. During the cycle, Gerstein not only worked for Lieberman, but also participated in another Democratic primary in New York. He worked for Tom Suozzi, a conservative Democrat who ran against Eliot Spitzer. Like Lieberman, Suozzi ran to the center in his primary, ostensibly to gain the vote of these "problem solving" Democrats. And like Lieberman, he lost his primary. So in primaries, Polarizers 2, Gerstein-Problem Solvers 0.

So clearly, for Gerstein to proclaim the Problem Solvers as winners, Lieberman must have really racked up a huge margin among Democrats in the General Election. Here's what he writes

"The Election Day exit polls said it all. They confirmed that Lamont's partisan, polarizing strategy failed to drive down Lieberman's Democratic vote. He won 33 percent of the Democrats, almost the same percentage he had gotten in the first major poll nine days after the primary."

Yes, you read that correctly. Gerstein admits that Lieberman got only 33% of Dems on Election Day. So "Problem Solvers" lose in the primary and then get beat in the General Election by a 2-1 margin. Yet Gerstein claims victory! With such dysfunctional math skills, no wonder the Lieberman team thinks we're winning in Iraq.

The real message, as the numbers show, is that Democrats oppose the accomodationist strategies of Gerstein and Joe Lieberman. They want Democrats who will opposed the President when he is wrong (which seems to be most of the time) and work with him when he is right, not sell out their beliefs for a quick peck on the cheek.

If Gerstein doubts my analysis (and considering his delusion, he most certainly will) he ought to listen to the speeches made before the DNC meetings this past week. Every major Democratic contender took a so-called "polarizing"tone. So either they all want to turn off Democratic voters, or Gerstein doesn't know anything about Democrats.