It's not entirely clear to me whether Democratic chances in the district would be affected by a DeLay win or loss in Tuesday's primary... though traditional wisdom would likely state that the Democrats are better off with a wounded, though not defeated Tom DeLay."

I don't think there's any question what would be better here.  Traditional wisdom in this case is dead-on.

Running against an indicted scumbag who stinks of absolutely everything that's wrong with Washington is clearly preferable to running against a 'fresh faced' Republican like Freeman.

In a Republican district like this one, it's critical to Democratic chances of winning that traditional Republican voters be forced to think about their choices.

If Republicans have an indicted scumbag as their nominee, they're forced to consider whether or not they want to represented by a criminal.  

Any Republican who doesn't have DeLay's baggage allows those voters to fall back into their comfortable habit of simply voting for GOPers, regardless of what Lampson does (For similar reasons, the 2004 results in Hyde's district are completely irrelevant now... with a fossil like Hyde not running, it's an entirely new ballgame and a much tougher race to win).  

Stockman being in the race with DeLay as the GOP candidate improves Lampson's prospects, even if only by a little (which might be all Lampson needs), while a Republican who doesn't carry DeLay's thick, foul stench probably marginalizes Stockman's impact.

So, here's to a bruising, ugly election night that sees Tom DeLay stagger to a narrow primary victory.

Cheers.