Now that Ned Lamont has won, some Democratic presidential candidates will be in a bind. Do they actively campaign for Lamont? Do they appear with him at campaign rallies with the crowd chanting, "Bring Them Home, Bring Them Home" as they did last night during his victory speech? It's no accident that John Edwards made sure he was the first to congratulate Lamont on his primary win. He knows this race will get national attention, and he has already repudiated his past support for the war. You can bet that Edwards, Kerry and the other anti-war candidates will want to shine in the national spotlight by actively campaigning for Lamont. But what about Mark Warner, Evan Bayh and Hillary Clinton? In varying degrees, they have all tried to keep some distance from the party's noisy anti-war wing. Appearing with Lamont may endear them to the party's base, but it would also tie them to a candidate, who, in the words of Joe Lieberman, holds views that are "dangerous for our troops, disastrous for the Middle East and really make America vulnerable to another terrorist attack like 9/11." So can Hillary afford to stay away from the race? I doubt it. The liberal blogoshere will demand that all the '08 candidates kiss the ring of Lamont, and given the muscle they've flexed in outing Joe, the Hillary folks will likely decide they have no choice but to submit.