How come the Washington Post supported Joe Lieberman but not Al Wynn?

[Eric J in MN]

In Maryland, Congressman Al Wynn, a relatively conservative Democrat, was defeated tonight by Donna Edwards, a progressive Democrat.

This was her second run.

She was endorsed by the Washington Post for both 2006 and 2008.

When Joe Lieberman was challenged by Ned Lamont in 2006, the Washington Post supported him.

Is there a policy difference between Joe Lieberman and Al Wynn?

[Hardrada]

1. Which one supports Israel more?

[Behind the Aegis]

3. What the fuck does Israel have to do with it?

Don't be shy, spell it out!

[Hardrada]

5. L I E B E R M A N

When that name and policy come up, I have to think it has something to do with getting A I P A C's stamp of approval. And so in this case.

[dmosh42]

2. I believe Wynn was the target of 'MoveOn'...

I received a notice on that some months ago, that they would give money to his opponents campaign. He was one of our 'Bushies' in disguise, so needed to be gone. The Dems have loads of candidates who need to be targetted like this.

[salin]

4. just a guess...but, perhaps

because the post tends to like a "stable" status quo - and a toppling in the the primary in the senate was seen as a sign of an upcoming upheaval (that they kept their head in the sand for) than does a house seat, where it can be written off as an anomaly. My guess is that at some point (maybe we are there) the local story line of "change" as the word du jour coming from the primaries, where the national political media's conventional wisdom over the past six to eight months have been so wrong, will pick up steam and coverage by the national political media. This way they would appear to have their thumb on the pulse of the voters (which they do not - it has taken them at least two years to "get it" - and it isn't yet clear that they do.)