Glenn Reynolds opines (pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/76738): "Hartford Courant: Hartford Tea Party Draws Thousands. That can't make Chris Dodd feel any better" and links to the contention that 3,000 turned out at that event (link).

Obviously, letting Instapundit be the Grand Strategist for the tea parties was a huge mistake. There are about 1 million people in the general Hartford area and 3.5 million people in the state. Meaning that the attendance at the party was 0.3% of the population of the MSA and less than 0.1% of those in the state. In 2004, he got almost 1 million votes; the 3000 is 0.3% of that. His GOP opponent got half a million votes; the 3,000 is 0.6% of that. And, if he's vulnerable it's not to a Randian. Some of the possible Republicans to which he's vulnerable are discussed here, and it would be surprising if any of them would run on a platform that would make those at today's tea party happy.

In fact, given the small numbers at the party, neither Dodd nor any GOP challenger have absolutely any reason to give the "partiers" the time of day. The GOP candidate would jeopardize many more votes by going after the "tea party vote" than if he just wrote them off. The 3,000 aren't going to worry any politician; they're the write-off-able fringe. Almost none of them would vote for Dodd; some of them might possibly vote for the GOP challenger, and Dodd might slightly help himself out by trying to split the GOP vote a bit, with the "partiers" and their friends encouraged to vote for a Libertarian or similar candidate.

Now, if the Grand Strategist encouraged his readers to do something effective like asking Dodd tough questions on videotape, that would be both intelligent and effective. The Grand Strategist isn't familiar with either concept.