WEST HARTFORD, CONN. — A few moments after a black-clad jazz vibraphonist, accompanied by a drummer and bassist, malletted the notes to “Someday My Prince Will Come,” Ned Lamont, entering via a side door, quietly took the stage of the St. James Episcopal Church’s auditorium to robust applause.

Mr. Lamont was quick to invoke August 8, the date on which he will challenge a three-term incumbent senator, Joseph Lieberman. As much as the Lieberman-Lamont race will be a referendum on clashing visions of the Democratic Party and differing views on the Iraq war, it will also be a contest that hinges on voter turnout. The conventional wisdom on this point is that anti-war activists will flood the polls on primary day and pose a terrible problem for the incumbent.

The reality here may be different than the instant analysis. Mr. Lamont may be drawing enthusiastic crowds, such as the gang of more than 75 who gathered in a sweltering church hall to hear him speak on a glorious Sunday afternoon. The crowd ranged in age from those in their 60s and 70s to a twentysomething man in an army-green T-shirt and a hoop nose-ring who was killing time prior to the event reading Noam Chomsky’s “Rogue States.”

Through his actions, however, Mr. Lamont appears to be acknowledging that it will take more than passion on the part of the so-called netroots, the community of leftish bloggers who early on got behind Governor Howard Dean’s 2004 quest for the presidential nomination and caused a splash in pushing Mr. Lamont to challenge Mr. Lieberman, to ensure Mr. Lamont a primary win. For one, he has hired the innovative ad-man, Bill Hillsman, the guru behind Senator Wellstone and Governor Jesse Ventura of Minnesota and Texas gubernatorial candidate Kinky Friedman. On the grassroots front, Mr. Lamont is meeting on average with at least three groups like this a day. Operatives are on hand to take names and to distribute his white lawn signs with blue and red lettering. It has become an article of faith that the low turnout will help Mr. Lamont.

“We can make a difference on August 8. August 8 is a hot day in August. That’s why Senator Lieberman is getting a little bit anxious,” Mr. Lamont told supporters, deriding Mr. Lieberman’s willingness to run as independent should he lose the nomination. For all the excitement around Mr. Lamont, Mr. Lieberman won the official endorsement of the Connecticut Democratic Party’s convention, the Human Rights Campaign, Planned Parenthood, and the statewide AFL-CIO, the labor federation that is more than 200,000 strong in Connecticut. When it comes to the tedious but important work of getting bodies out on election day — not Internet and press buzz — old-school groups, such as the AFL-CIO still count.

Everyone forgets it now, but even before Governor Dean imploded the night after the Iowa caucuses, his eager, Internet-inspired get-out-the-vote teams failed to capture the contest for him. The victory went to Senator Kerry, whom everyone had counted out, thanks to his team of disciplined and well-seasoned political operatives.

It would be wrong to describe the two-hour gathering as a 1960s-style “be-in” with Lamont-leaning voters emoting to one another and the candidate. It was more a “consult-in” with everyone from suburban soccer moms to 80-something matriarchs asking insidery questions and offering their own political two cents. One woman asked Mr. Lamont if the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee would back him if he won. He thought they would. An 83-year-old town resident chided Mr. Lamont for his campaign’s much-fabled reliance on the Internet.

“My generation certainly in West Hartford doesn’t use the computer the way your generation does,” she said. “There are a lot of people you need to reach who are not familiar with the Web site.” And, for his part, Mr. Lamont took the criticism, vowing to put his positions into a handout and a “direct-mail piece.”

On the substance of his issues, Mr. Lamont continued his attempt to broaden his campaign appeal beyond his opposition to the Iraq War to such issues as universal health care (he supports it), the proliferation of lobbyists in Washington with “63 lobbyists for every congressman” (he opposes that), and campaign finance reform (again, supports it). To reinforce his position on the central issue of the campaign, Iraq, he pointed to the position of President Carter’s national security adviser, Zbigniew Brezinski, who advocates withdrawing military forces from Iraq so as to alleviate sectarian violence there.

“As Brezinski said the other day, just the very foreign military occupation in Iraq is delegitimizing the belief in government,” said Mr. Lamont, coupling this assertion with red meat for his supporters: “It’s very important to take the American face off this occupation and start bringing our troops home now.” He went on to say that “leaving our troops there in the middle of this bloody civil war is making the situation worse every day.” He was not asked about and did not volunteer on his own Mr. Brezinski’s recent defense of the authors of the “Israel Lobby” thesis, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, in the journal Foreign Policy.

After Mr. Lamont concluded his remarks, he got his mojo working as he greeted supporters and posing for photos with them. He thanked one burly questioner who asked him about preserving manufacturing jobs in the Nutmeg State. After the event, he was asked whether all these small gatherings could drive voters to the polling places on August 8 in the face of Mr. Lieberman’s institutional support — such as the endorsements of the mayors of Bridgeport, Waterbury, and Hartford. Such support has shown an ability to get out the vote in the past.

“I don’t know if there’s that much passion,” said Mr. Lamont of Mr. Lieberman’s supporters. “Everybody that supports Joe is sorta tactical. It’s better for the party. But it’s not the type of attitude that really gets people turning out and voting.”

On the homepage of Mr. Lieberman’s campaign Web page, www.joe2006.com, is a map of Connecticut that shows the senator’s legislative achievements for the geographic area. During the debate Thursday, Mr. Lieberman touted his work in helping to save 31,000 jobs at the submarine base in New London. What Mr. Lamont derides as tactical can also be viewed as political payback for helping to avert a real-life problem that could cripple a community. Says the mayor of New London, Beth Sabilia, of Lieberman’s work to save the base: “he worked hard for us.” The base closing, she said, “would have had a far greater impact than 31,000 jobs. I would have lost two employees of my law office if it had closed.”

It might be the case that primary day will be the time Connecticut voters overlook the solid work a senator has done on their behalf to punish him for being too close to a president they don’t like. But it doesn’t mean it makes any sense.