Here it is: the first map of the 2006 election season (click to enlarge):
There's a really interesting pattern here. Notice that most of the state is blue (Lamont). The dark blue (Lamont by more than 10%) is especially visible. This is because Lamont's strongest support came from smaller towns in Litchfield, Tolland and Windham Counties, like Salisbury, Cornwall, Stafford, Union, North Canaan, Scotland and others. Most of these towns, if you compare them to the 2004 presidential map on the sidebar, went for Bush or only barely for Kerry in 2004. They are conservative.
So why did they go for Lamont? For one, these towns have proportionally small but often much more liberal Democratic parties than the older, larger cities and suburbs where Lieberman was successful. They are not connected to the party machine, and they owe Joe Lieberman nothing. A lot of these Democrats are probably transplants from other areas.
The towns that went for Lieberman (purple) tended to be older and bigger. Aging industial areas like the Naugatuck Valley, Greater New Haven, New Britain and Enfield voted for Lieberman. There are more Democrats here, and they tend to be somewhat more conservative than their counterparts in the small towns.
The problem for Lamont is that there is no way he can replicate this feat in the general election. He won't win a third of the towns in November that he he won on Tuesday. Their overwhelming majority of Republicans and independents will vote for Lieberman or Schlesinger. Lamont needs support in the cities. Luckily, he actually did manage to win Hartford and New Haven, although by a small margin in each case, so he may get it. Lieberman, on the other hand, will hold on to his base in the Naugatuck Valley and the inner suburbs, and expand to the small towns.
This map was based on unofficial results as reported in the Courant.
I will try to have a map of the gubernatorial election tomorrow or the next day.