Welcome To CT

My Left Nutmeg

A community-driven blog featuring news and commentary on local, state, and national politics.

helphaiti

Donate to CT Dems
Enable ActBlue
for CT Races
$
John Larson
(1st CD)
$
Joe Courtney
(2nd CD)
$
Rosa DeLauro
(3rd CD)
$
Jim Himes
(4th CD)
$
Chris Murphy
(5th CD)
$
Ads on My Left Nutmeg
 
 


 
Contact Info
To contact the site admin email ctblogger at ctblogger@yahoo.com

My Left Nutmeg

MALLOY INVITES LAMONT TO SERIES OF PUBLIC DEBATES

by: Jon Kantrowitz

Wed May 26, 2010 at 11:46:54 AM EDT


This might have been a good idea- if it weren't for the paragraphs in italics (mine) - from Dan's press release - - which  lets you know what Dan thinks the "issues" are, and also the way Dan conducts business - going to the press first, not to Ned:

Dan Malloy, the Democratic Party's endorsed candidate for Governor, today invited fellow Democrat and gubernatorial candidate Ned Lamont to a series of public debates on the major issues facing Connecticut.  Malloy asked that Lamont join him in debates that would be sponsored by local media outlets in every community across Connecticut that's home to a daily newspaper; most of these communities also have local radio stations.  In addition, Malloy said he would ask new media - online news sites and blogs - to play an active role as well, in order to share the conversations with as many voters as possible.

"Every election cycle, voters and the media say the same thing - that it should be a campaign that focuses on a substantive debate of the critical issues we're facing," said Malloy.  "Well they're right, it should be that way, and it's in that spirit that I'm making this proposal.  Let's have some old-fashioned, kitchen table style debates, and let's do them in public across the state.  It's time that we put our ideas on the table, and our faith in the voters to make the best choice."

Continued Malloy, "In the past, due to the fact that I had to spend countless hours raising money, I couldn't have realistically issued this invitation.  After qualifying for the Citizens' Election Program, I'm liberated from the old way of doing things, and I want to take full advantage of it by giving the people of Connecticut a campaign they can be proud of.  And, since Ned will be relying largely on his family's wealth, he'll also have the time to do this.  He has no reason not to take me up on this offer."

Malloy said he planned to call Lamont this afternoon, and to invite him to work cooperatively to put this series of debates together.  He also said his campaign will reach out to the Connecticut Daily Newspaper Association, the Connecticut Broadcasters Association, and individual local media outlets as potential partners in the effort.

"There are some very real differences in this campaign, and we should want to talk about them as often as possible, and in public - I sure do," continued Malloy.  "Ned thinks his background as a cable executive has prepared him to be Governor.  I think my background as a prosecutor and Mayor of Connecticut's most successful city is better preparation for the job.  I'm for paid sick days, Ned's against them.  I believe deeply in the state's Clean Elections Program, Ned doesn't.  The list goes on."

"I hope he will join me in giving Connecticut a different kind of campaign - one it can truly be proud of," concluded Malloy.  "And who knows, maybe we can set a new standard for what campaigns in Connecticut are all about, and for what voters should expect from candidates.  We're all familiar with the Lincoln-Douglas debates.  Obviously I'm not putting either one of us in that company, but... wouldn't it be fun if our legacy was the Malloy-Lamont debates of 2010?"

This could have been a great idea, an effort to elevate the discourse, if not marred by the same ad hominem attacks and distortions, not to mention outright discourtesy and hostility, we have seen repeatedly in the last few days.
 

Jon Kantrowitz :: MALLOY INVITES LAMONT TO SERIES OF PUBLIC DEBATES
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Still... (4.00 / 1)
"...better than a slap in the eye with a wet fish" as a Brit I used to know would have said.

And, yes, if I had been asked I would have eliminated the reference to wealth (even though that is the reason many many Lamont supporters have given me for their decision to go with Lamont for Governor) and the "I am For/He is Against" stuff. That could have been finessed in the debate instead of putting it in the press release.

I agree that it should be fun. I agree that it could be a different kind of campaign. And of course, since my company is named New Standard Institute ...I very much appreciate the shout out in the last paragraph.

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."


Rule #1 (4.00 / 4)
The guy who asks for the debate realizes he's losing.

Rule #2,because your losing make sure you put a rediculous debate request out with your desperate campaign talking opoints within that the guy who is winning won't accept.

rule#3,Claim your "reasonable request" was rejected because the guy who is winning the election is "afraid" to debate.

When do we see the Malloy ad with lamont in a dress?


[ Parent ]
First thing I thought of (0.00 / 0)
It's a golden rule of politics:

"The Guy Who Thinks He's Losing Wants The Debates"

Connecticut Bob


[ Parent ]
Malloy = Lincoln???...hah! (0.00 / 0)

 Pretty clever Mr. Malloy, but this commentator is all over that. Did you notice that when he referenced the Lincoln-Douglas debates, he then referred to the Malloy-Lamont debates... clearly trying to subliminally get people to associate him with Abraham Lincoln... not on my watch Mr. Mayor!!!...lol  

But let justice roll down like waters...Amos 5:24a

I'm looking forward to the debates (0.00 / 0)
Lots of issues to discuss. I expect that Ned would welcome them too.  

Don't Hold Your Breath (4.00 / 2)
This is not an invitation to debate, it's a slap in the face - arrogant, rude and more for publicity than for any real intention to go forward.  

[ Parent ]
Most successful city? (0.00 / 0)
I guess all the other cities have to do is make it so expensive to live in their city the poor folk move out and commute to serve the rich left in their city.

Stamfords entire existence is built on that model.



[ Parent ]
Successful cities ... (0.00 / 0)
are desirable places to live. People who live in a desirable place can sell their homes for more money than people who live in less desirable places. That drives up real estate costs.  

You can't just "make the city expensive". People have to want to live there, and they do.

Compare it to Norwalk, another big city 10 miles up the road.  


[ Parent ]
Debates are a standard for Democratic campaigns in this state (4.00 / 1)
Why would Mr. Malloy suggest that Mr. Lamont would avoid them?  He hasn't backed down from debates before.  Everyone knows that the two gentlemen will debate.  Why suggest by his offer that Mr. Lamont would avoid them.  Again, I'm troubled by the tone of Mr. Malloy's campaign.

Tone (4.00 / 2)
I agree with the criticism of the tone of press release.

Regarding why Ned might not agree to the debates: He's the better funded candidate, and he doesn't need the free publicity as much as Malloy.

Also, Dan knows the issues better, and he's a better public speaker. That said, Dan also sticks his foot in his mouth a lot with comments that are less than classy.

Either way, I'm looking forward to the debates. Can't wait to hear them talk about budget and taxes, energy, health insurance, etc. Should be enlightening.

I also hope that new media has a role in asking questions.


[ Parent ]
They've already been talking about those issues (0.00 / 0)
The NBC30 debate had some of those issues addressed.

[ Parent ]
You forgot the biggest reason of all (0.00 / 0)
Lamont is winning the primary in every poll conducted and leading Foley by bigger margins than Malloy in the General in those same polls.

[ Parent ]
true, sort of (0.00 / 0)
Malloy feels that once people hear them debate the issues, then Malloy will start to lead in the polls.

That, plus the free publicity, both matter to Dan, I would think.

Either way, it's good for the candidates to debate. Good for all of us.  


[ Parent ]
Then I guess Lamont should tell Malloy (0.00 / 0)
there will be just one debate and that he will pick the time and place.If Malloy doesn't like it then Lamont doesn't have to any.

Kinda sucks when you're in second place in a two man race but that's where Malloy is right now.  


[ Parent ]
would suck for all of us... (0.00 / 0)
I'm still trying to figure out what Ned Lamont plans to cut from the budget in order to fund his new energy grid for the state.

Ned says:

Our state budget is a mess right now, and there's no way that we can continue the path we're on. Tackling the budget is going to be a top priority of mine, and I will streamline, modernize, and cut all the non-essential programs I can before we talk about raising revenue.
 

I would really like to know what the "non-essential programs" are. Hopefully we'll find that out in a debate.  

You wouldn't want to find out in 2011 that the new Democratic Governor is going to balance the budget -- or fund his new energy grid or transportation initiatives -- on the backs of the poor and middle class.  

I mean, we have a $5 billion hole to fix. And there's only so much cutting you can do. At some point you have to ask the hedge fund managers and investment bankers to chip in too, don't you think?  


[ Parent ]
First you WIN then you get to Govern (0.00 / 0)
are you nieve enough to believe anything any candidate says they'll do during a campaign debate.

The two guys who kept Rell and the Republicans from balancing the budget on the backs of the poor and working class over the last few years were speaker Donavan and Leader Williams.They both endorsed Lamont.

I suggest you ask any Public employee in Stamford if Malloy had a problem with balancing Stamfords budget on their backs and get back to me with what they said.


[ Parent ]
That cuts both ways (0.00 / 0)
So, what you're saying is Ned is full of crap? He won't invest in transportation and a new energy grid? Good to know you feel that way.

Donovan and Williams ... aren't they those Hartford political insiders that Ned is so sick and tired of?

Mayor's balance their budgets by cutting services and/or raising property taxes or adding businesses. More businesses have come to Stamford under Malloy's term. Malloy has been able to balance the budget while increasing the school's percentage of the city budget. That's a direct benefit to the poor and middle class. I know Stamford town employees -- teachers -- and I never heard any of them say a bad word about Dan.

I would still like to see a list of the programs that Ned -- and Dan for the matter -- would consider non-essential. I also appreciate that Dan says he supports a more fair tax system. Does he mean it?  Who knows, but if he says so and really doesn't mean it, then he's a liar and he'll have a much greater chance of losing re-election. Dan was re-elected a number of times in Stamford, so clearly he was doing something right.

I also would like to see Ned talk taxes and spending cuts and funding for his pet programs just so I can have an idea of whether he knows what he's talking about.


[ Parent ]
If that's the case, why are you supporting anyone? (0.00 / 0)
Seriously, Keith? You don't believe anything any candidate  says? If that's the case, you believe nothing Lamont says, right?

Reading this blog right now and how everyone is attacking everyone else - and the anger that is coming out over what is a basic - BASIC- press release and campaign tactic is depressing.

Hello Governor Foley - time to call a real estate agent.

DAYUM - BOTH candidates are good people and much stronger leaders than anything we have seen in Hartford in decades. Let's have a healthy debate, a fair debate, a clean campaign, keep our powder dry, our heads clear and freaking focus!


[ Parent ]
Yes (4.00 / 1)
DAYUM - BOTH candidates are good people and much stronger leaders than anything we have seen in Hartford in decades. Let's have a healthy debate, a fair debate, a clean campaign, keep our powder dry, our heads clear and freaking focus!

And one is routinely attacking the other. There is a downside to that campaign tactic.

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...


[ Parent ]
Like I said (0.00 / 0)
based on what I have seen to date from both candidates,I wouldn't be voting for Ned, but I would vote against Dan.

This is a good way to lose.

Dan has played the hand wrong (as the press release shows). He should have stopped at the first paragraph.

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


[ Parent ]
the cost of going negative (4.00 / 1)
Check out Linda's favorable/unfavorable ratings in the Q poll. She went nuclear on Simmons and Blumenthal for months, and she is coming out of her convention as the winner, but also as the most disliked politician in the state.

I can't imagine either Malloy or Lamont would want to be in a situation like that. Actually, yes I can -- I have a good imagination. But if I were on one of those campaigns, that would be a terrifying prospect to me.

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...


[ Parent ]
Actually He Did Back Out of One Earlier (4.00 / 2)
When there was a debate at UCONN law school earlier this year Ned didn't show-up. Nobody at the school knew ahead of time that he wasn't planning on showing up and he ended up being the only candidate to skip out. After the fact his campaign said there was a scheduling conflict. As a student there I thought it was strange, especially since these had been widely publicized and UCONN even paid to bus students from Storrs to the law school to see the candidates debate.

The highlighted parts don't really appear overly antagonistic to me. I think the relevance of background experience, the fact Ned is using his money, paid sick days, and the CEP are all substantive issues on which Dan and Ned seem to disagree. Ned seems to be comfortable with his positions on these issues. They are certainly things in which reasonable people could hold good faith disagreement on. I even had an opportunity to talk with Ned about the CEP a couple months ago. I encouraged him to participate but he explained his position to me and I understand it even if I don't agree with it completely.

I think the important thing with these debates and our medium is that we need to work to include and address a variety of issues on which there will be agreement and disagreement. Let us not get distracted from the bigger picture. The best way to elevate the discourse in this or any race to set the example that we aspire for everyone to be. I look forward to these debates. I think they're going to be great for both candidates and hopefully when they happen MLN will be able to play a role in getting good questions :).

Blog | Twitter


[ Parent ]
I wonder why they did not know. (0.00 / 0)
I remember being at a Lamont event a few days before and he answered a question that he could not be at that debate because of a prior commitment.  At least my understanding is that we are talking about the same debate.

because Connecticut voters count: http://www.CTVotersCount.org

[ Parent ]
Lamont Missed two that I know of (0.00 / 0)
he missed U-Conn and he missed the Non-profit forum. There maybe more  and there may not be . Debates are healthy. Let's  go.  

[ Parent ]
But I don't think self-funding should be a key issue (4.00 / 1)
Barack Obama would not have been elected had he gone along with public financing.  And with Foley's and McMahon's tens of millions (billions?), does it make sense for Democrats to unilaterally disarm?  Is adhering to the principle of public financing when Republicans, which will result in certain defeat for Democrats worth it?  I don't agree.  Should Jon Corzine of New Jersey have not used his personal wealth against his Republican challenger?  

It's a question of practicality.  As long as we see so many Republicans who are willing and able to flood the campaign with their own millions, it doesn't make sense to handcuff ourselves for the sake of a vain principle.  


[ Parent ]
Principles v. Pragmatism (4.00 / 1)
There is always this legitimate tension between principles and pragmatism. On a personal level the idea that money buys elections is rather bothersome. I know academics disagree but most people involved in or following politics believe that money does at least to a certain extent buy elections.

I suppose I'm not overly concerned about it because I think the $8.5 Million grant was based on the amount historically needed for a candidate to win an election and I think that campaign spending suffers from diminishing marginal returns. In other words, once your name and message are out there after a while there just isn't much more you can do to persuade people. Just anecdotally Tom Foley could send me 3 pieces of direct mail every day for the year, call me every hour, put up web ads, and be on my TV and I still would not vote for him. Same could probably be said for most here.

Now let me be clear, I'm not at all saying Ned should not be allowed to spend his money or that because he chooses to do so that he's corrupt. I don't believe Ned is corrupt nor that he will be. But there is a big picture issue of this idea that money buys policy results (as laid out by Prof. Lessig @ http://blip.tv/file/2884777) that does bother me and I think that the CEP is a good mechanism to fight this big picture problem. I think that for the CEP to be successful in accomplishing this goal of removing the appearance of an impact of money on policy we need to build a culture where it is expected and encouraged that candidates will participate. I think that if we do so that in the long run we as a people will be better off and I do think that's a big issue. Now I'm not saying participation should be the only factor in looking at a candidate but for me its a factor and I weigh it heavily.  

Blog | Twitter


[ Parent ]
Grant amount (0.00 / 0)
In a situation where everyone is participating, the grant amount will be either 3 million or 4.25 million (if there is a primary). Speaking just for the general election, $3 million is enough to buy about 6 mail pieces to 1 million households, or to show each person in the state an ad 30 times (a little less than once every other day.) Double it and you can get both mail and tv in those quantities. If everyone were limited to that, the Governor's race would command about the same attention (in terms of paid media) as a State Rep's race. I did a post on all of this that whizzed off the page at convention time.

Even at the high end, the CEP grant does not saturate the airwaves or clog mailboxes. At the low end, it is basically incumbency protection. The grant amounts were designed around what it historically cost for the Democrat to get creamed by Rowland or Rell or whoever. Regardless of who wins, the program needs to be fixed, and by fixed I mean "statewide grants need to be dramatically increased."

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...


[ Parent ]
Interesting Analysis (0.00 / 0)
Matt,

I missed that analysis, it is great piece of work. The only issue I would raise with it is that your methodology seems to imply that the campaign will engage in carpet bombing all eligible voters (I'm assuming that's where you got your figures from?)

If I'm running a campaign, my voter universe is not actually 800,000 for a primary or 2 million for a general election. It is going to focus mostly on primed voters (people that have voted before and are therefore likely to go to the polls again). At best it's 356,000 for the primary and ~1.1 million for the general (based on Obama primary turnout since SoTS doesn't seem to have the 2006 Gov primary results or I can't find them and Gov turnout in 2006 midterms).

On the non-primary side you slice out the solid GOP voters and your universe shrinks even more. Now the non-voters aren't going to be neglected completely and I'm not saying we shouldn't bring new voters into the fold but they're probably going to have to be reached out to in a less passive manner/medium if they're going to be converted into voters.

-Matt

Blog | Twitter


[ Parent ]
yes (0.00 / 0)
Though the priming happens the same way for state reps, so the dollars-per-voter comparison still works even though the outreach levels (for mail, especially) will be different in different segments. For every person you double up with your targeting someone else gets cut out. Obviously the timing is all wrong too -- you won't spread your ads out evenly across the entire time if you're on a budget.

On the flip side, it doesn't pay for the other parts of a campaign. The back-of-the-envelope that is kicked around a lot is that 70% of the money should go to paid media, and those graphs budget 100% of that money to TV and mail. And there's a diminishing return to targeting mail: apart from discounts for printing volume and delivery density, if you mail to 2 million people, you have to send out 1 million pieces (50%). Target to 800,000 Democrats, and you're sending 545,000 pieces (68%). 2008 primary voters are at like 74%. Send to 1827 delegates, and you're sending 1748 pieces (96%).

So yeah, it is overly simple -- I started making a javascript gubernatorial campaign budgeter for laffs, but lost my mind a very, very short way into it. That post leaves out the hard decisions to make a comparison to campaigns that we are already familiar with. (From the other angle, this was based on spending per vote cast, and the CT 2010 point was assuming 30% primary and 60% general turnout -- even simpler, but acknowledging the smaller universe.)  

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...


[ Parent ]
I think it obscures more than it reveals (4.00 / 1)
It's basically a call for class resentment. I mean, that's not very nice, but it doesn't tell us anything important about either of them. Same with sick days. If Malloy were proposing a much more bold platform or initiating direct action on these things (such as "the CEP grants need to be increased" or "I will adopt the CEP in my city as New Haven had done" or "there should not be a 50-employee floor on the sick days policy") then it would tell us something. But all this shouting over bullshit is just a distraction from the fact that there aren't any improved policy decisions being foregrounded -- just process stuff.  

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

[ Parent ]
public financing (0.00 / 0)
I think it would have been good if Lamont accepted public financing for the primary and then self-funded for the general election.

I think the primary should have been on a level playing field in terms of money.

In 2006, Lamont outspent Joe Lieberman and still lost the general election by nearly 10 percentage points--so I am not convinced that money alone will win this race.

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."--James Madison


[ Parent ]
You cannot accept for the primary and self-fund in the general. (0.00 / 0)
Lamont outspent Lieberman by 1.5%. But while money alone won't win any race, Alan Schlesinger (and Bill Curry, and Barbara Kennelly) can tell you that it's pretty important.

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

[ Parent ]
Since there were debates in the past ... (0.00 / 0)
that were sponsored by the CT Media, why would Malloy not think that they would not do it now?

I thought we were for democracy!! (0.00 / 0)
Debates are a great way to have candidates talk to us. There should also be town hall style debates so folks can ask questions of the candidates.  

[ Parent ]
Looks like you didn't understand my question (0.00 / 0)
It wasn't against debates.  It was stating that our state media has hosted them in the past and most likely will do so in the future.

Most voters in CT don't watch debates, especially during the summer.  The only ones interested in watching the debates are political junkies, the candidates' supporters and some intelligent voters looking for more information.

Most voters make up their minds or begin paying attention to what candidates say starting about 2 weeks before the scheduled election date.

Campaigns have other tactics besides debates and TV ads to reach voters.  Most candidates participant in various parades around the state and other events, like fairs, that help the candidates' visibility with voters or a chance to talk with voters one-on-one.

To reduce campaigns to an endless stream of debates between 2 candidates will bore most people, including the candidates' supporters.


[ Parent ]
Debates are not just about viewership (0.00 / 0)
It also demands that candidates take more stances on issues and tell voters what they really care about.

Yeah, 17 may be a bit many, but certainly not enough to tackle all the issues either. For example, a debate could be based solely on transportation, smart growth and land use issues in Fairfield County and in the (not so) Quiet Corner and not one question would be the same. Housing issues in Bridgeport are very different from those issues in sleepy bedroom suburbs, blah blah blah.

Campaigns where no candidates are forced to state their positions (or answer for them) are inherently undemocratic.  


[ Parent ]
I hope alternative media take the lead (0.00 / 0)
I recall the absolutely brain-dead questions from members of the "traditional media" in the past.  I recall the congressional debate in which Greenwich Time/Stamford Advocate editorial page editor Joy Haenlein participate....clueless.  Totally clueless.

Most of the traditional journalists are either uninformed, or overtly hostile.  Would anyone think it a good idea to have Ken Dixon ask questions of Democrats at a debate?  Keep Hearst out of it.


[ Parent ]
"uninformed and overtly hostile"? (0.00 / 0)
Yeah, we're not like that!

 


[ Parent ]
Interesting... (3.33 / 3)

 It is very civic minded of Dan Malloy to propose these "Lincoln-Douglas" type debates for the edification of the voters. My inner skeptic however has a different take. Usually the Convention winner, especially one who garnered 67% of the delegates, doesn't chase after his opponent for debates. This seems to validate the idea that the Malloy campaign's internal polling must show him way behind... go rank and file!!!

But let justice roll down like waters...Amos 5:24a

Too snarky. (4.00 / 1)
If you want the candidates to engage, with your input, your questions, and your invited presence, why are you trying to create controversy?

Matt Zagaja gave a very measured statement about the no-show by Ned at a previous debate, without snark. Since this is factual, and it is - after all - politics, any campaign where this occurred would be suspect of the motivations of the opposition. If the reverse had happened, the Lamont campaign would have questioned Malloy not showing up.

Again, political posturing may be distasteful and ill-advised but it is an irrefutable part of any campaign.  

Having seen many "nice guy" candidates fail for lack of an aggressive campaign, "going negative" may be the only way to win any position, from Selectman to President.  

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."


[ Parent ]
Going negative worked so well for Hillary Clinton (0.00 / 0)
Remember those good old days of 2008. /sarcasm

Course, having your chief campaign strategist -- Mark Penn -- not understand the rules of the Democratic Party's primary was a big help for Obama's team.  


[ Parent ]
Since when is being snarky a reason to rate someone a 1? (4.00 / 1)
I think someone needs to come down off their high horse.

[ Parent ]
Huh What? (0.00 / 0)
Marginal is a 2.
Trying to rein in the other high horses from the snarkdom of the kingdom.

And PS Keith: I think you had better start watchin' "The Crusher" again. The games afoot.

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."


[ Parent ]
Tessa... (4.00 / 1)

 You are quite right about the tone of Matt Z's comment. It was matter of fact and minus snark. Mine on the other hand was sarcastic and intended to be. So what?...I was making a point and chose sarcasm as my method. It is a political truism that the candidate who perceives themselves to be behind usually pushes for debates. Would anyone really believe that Malloy would push for 17 debates if he thought he was ahead?

 I look forward to the debates and they will be good for getting positions on the issues out there... but,( and I don't mean to shock or cause controversy), but I will continue to question politicians motives when I choose to.

But let justice roll down like waters...Amos 5:24a


[ Parent ]
Fair enough, Jake /nt (0.00 / 0)


"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."

[ Parent ]
Negotiating position (0.00 / 0)
5-6 would probably be ample. I doubt that more than 2 would be televised in any case, leaving the remainder to be attended by the same DTC suspects that have already enjoyed so much candidate time in recent months.

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...

Wonderful high wire act (4.00 / 3)
too bad he shit all over the audience.

Dan should have stopped after paragraph 1. Better yet, he should have

1) Called Lamont and said he would like to do it as a joint press release.
2) Worked out the details and schedule with Lamont.

If Lamont didn't agree to the debates, then he could have stated, "I will be here and at this time for debates. I have proposed these debates with the Lamont team, he can show up or not."

But using a offer to debate, with no specifics, and then beating up on Ned... more of the same shit that he has been dropping on Ned (and voters).

If I were Ned I would release a proposed debate schedule with one debate every three days in different parts of the state and play the whole "debates negotiation" in public. Either Dan agrees to the schedule or "he was never serious about debating, he just used it to attack me again."

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


I guess its blogger wars again "Lamont vs whoever may be running against him (0.00 / 0)
Calm down peeps. Its back to work before we loss our jobs.  

LMAO (4.00 / 1)
There is a 100+ comment thread before this one where I proposed debates. Not because I support any one candidate over another, but because I believe in an educated populace with something other than commercials and paid advertising mailers.

I also stated that to date I wouldn't vote FOR Ned, but based on the "throwing crap at your opponent" that Dan has employed, I would vote against Dan.

I believe in debates and educating the public.

This isn't about debates. This was just another "hit piece."

Ned should respond with a debate schedule with debates every two or three days throughout the State. A schedule that Dan won't be able to do. Then when Dan fails it can be Ned that says "Dan is afraid to debate me on the issues."

It's called rat-fucking. Dan just tried to do it to Ned, it is only fair to have it spun back on him.

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


[ Parent ]
when i read this press release (0.00 / 0)
my first thought was "heh. The Malloy campaign is reading MLN."

[ Parent ]
mine too! (0.00 / 0)
My second thought was, there is apparently a deep market for political operatives who can write press releases that get soundbyte type punches in, without going over the line and calling your opponent a crook. 'Tis a delicate tango... (I agree with famillionaire below, it's kind of standard fare, not completely over the top, though I did roll my eyes a couple times.)

If you want a laugh, read some of Sarah Palin's PR's. they read like they were written by a 7th grade class president after 2 frappuccinos and a Jolt.  

"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." - Warren Buffet


[ Parent ]
Who (4.00 / 1)
writes Malloy's stuff?  Roy O's firm?

The press release might not have been over the top in a general election, but those words, presented in that way, at this time, were inappropriate and divisive.  

If Mr. Malloy was truly serious about his marathon of debates, he'd have contacted the Lamont team first, as has been pointed out already in this thread.    

I'm remembering something I read when Malloy ran last.  After he hired Roy, someone, someplace, blogged to the effect that  "now that Occhiogrosso is on board, the Malloy campaign can officially be called the Titanic."    

Malloy and Occhiogrosso seem to bring out the worst in each other.  Malloy needs someone to rein him in, at least through the primary.  Then, if Malloy wins, unleash him and see how how his political knifefighting works on Foley.

As it stands, the picture that's being painted is not the portrait of a man I want as Governor.  


[ Parent ]
Guess we know where MLN stands on this race... (0.00 / 0)
I'm sorry, but I just don't see all the negativity being discussed in this release.
It looks fairly standard to me and pretty well done. Yes, Dan took some shots, but I don't see them as over the top at all. This is a tactical maneuver and a good one.
I don't know who is winning or losing at this point, nor the strategies of either camp, but I could have seen this or a similar release coming from either camp.

And why is Dan issuing this instead of Ned? I think it's because Dan thinks he will beat Ned easily every time they are on he stage together. True or not, I'm sure that's what the Malloy camp believes.


Who will pay for the "debates"? (0.00 / 0)
Being in favor of "debates" is insufficient.  It's like being in favor of "voting" but not  paying attention to election administration improprieties.  It's like the way that junk bonds and leveraged buyouts were going to help improve efficiency of companies and make them better run.

Infomercial, hit job, agenda fulfillment mechanism --  or impartial, well designed public opportunity?

I was not comfortable with the way at least some of the Lamont-Lieberman debates were moderated, nor with the security or lack thereof(some disruptive merry songsters come to mind....was that Hartford?).  As I recall, in at least one debate, Lieberman was repeatedly permitted to interrupt Lamont, and Lamont finally called him on it. These deliberately choreographed manipulations of debate do not serve the public and in fact deflect and detract from the opportunity to learn about stances on issues.

During the 08 campaign, I started reading about how debates are controlled when candidates were frozen out of a couple of debates at a very early stage.

At a time when competent governance and evenhanded approaches to problem solving seem to me to be critical to the wellbeing of the state and nation, well-run debates are/would be a service and well-spun debates are akin to a kangaroo court -- a pretense or sham dressed up as a legitimate forum.

If there is to be a series of debates, who will ensure that t hey are not merely paid-for opportunities to do hit jobs on candidates in a forum that is straightfacedly called a debate?  Since we do not have a public debate fund, does that mean we will be relying on newspapers and TV outlets to "sponsor", moderate and mediate the dialogue?

Just something to consider -- highly choreographed and controlled, or forums carefully designed to be fair and highlight actual relevant positions and background/experience/temperament of candidates?

Staying focused on the nature of the debates scheduled - rules made and rules followed, the conditions of the debate, and the topics of the debate -- will help make sure that they truly serve the CITIZENS of Connecticut in an hour of great need, rather than merely being tailored to serve any candidate's (or later: party's) spin and positioning.

The devil typically is in the boring details -- will we go over them with a fine toothed comb BEFORE the debate and point out the BS if it is there?  Because afterwards, explanations really are not too powerful.


What a good debate needs... (0.00 / 0)
1) A moderator with a STFU button1
2) 2/3 of the questions in the debate must come from blogs or people at the debate
3) Three people to select questions 2 hours before the debate that break down to 1/2 all three agree on and 1/2 that any two agree on. These are then randomized.
4) alternate questions with 4 min to answer 2.5 min to respond, 1 min to respond to response.
5) three "looks" randomly selected
 a: Podium (standard debate)
 b: Chair/Stool with mic (town hall)
 c: Big comfy chairs (think Oprah)
6) Floor managers (there will be silence or you will be ejected)

1 The STFU button will have electrodes attached to the balls of each candidate and if they interrupt a direct electrical shock will go to their balls at once in order to get them to STFU.

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


[ Parent ]
STFU Button Won't Really Work (0.00 / 0)
When the candidate is a woman. That is why the Republicans had to get rid of Susan Bysiewicz.

(Of course, I include myself in the ranks of non-compliance with a STFU button, witness these past few days.)(Yes, I am making jokes here, G**e)

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."


[ Parent ]
STFU Button Won't Really Work (0.00 / 0)
When the candidate is a woman. That is why the Republicans had to get rid of Susan Bysiewicz.

(Of course, I include myself in the ranks of non-compliance with a STFU button, witness these past few days.)(Yes, I am making jokes here, G**e)

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."


[ Parent ]
Sorry - (0.00 / 0)
I zigged when I should have zagged. Internet Hiccup caused dubble entry.

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."

[ Parent ]
2006 Debates... (0.00 / 0)

 the " a cappella Larouchies" disrupted the New London debate, moderated by George Stephanopoulis.

I believe the other instance you refer to was the pre-primary debate, when Joe kept talking and interrupting, prompting Ned to nail him with the classic, "this isn't Fox News, Senator."

But let justice roll down like waters...Amos 5:24a


[ Parent ]
Lamont AND Malloy.... (1.00 / 1)
Not a lot of class to go around there...

And these guys are REALLY the best the Democratic Party could come up with?   Talk about opportunities wasted....


polling data out (0.00 / 0)
It will still be a close race. I'm curious to see if Lamont will spend $$ right now. His thoery maybe to keep Malloy from spending. I understand the public financing money hasn't come in yet. I think Malloy needs to get ads out when he can. Do debates. Unsually the guy ahead doesn't  want to. I'm curious what will Ned do. Avoid so he wins or debate the issues which will let more folks see the details of their plan. Its curious that MLN isn't  really supporting debates(the costs, no one watches them etc) THEY ARE STARTING  TO SOUND LIKE THE ESTABLISHMENT. Heaven forbid. It is true debates alone do not win the day and I am assuming from the reaction that Ned would not do well with the details of his plans if he was in the public eye one on one.  

Everyone likes debates! (0.00 / 0)
Seventeen sounds pretty unrealistic though. I bet it will be five or six, with one or two making it onto TV (which will be the only ones any normal voters will ever see).

I thought it was funny that the 2006 primary debates were so little noticed by the public that even Dan Malloy forgot he participated in them.  

–7.25 / –7.28 | http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tw...


[ Parent ]
Reading these threads (4.00 / 2)
I feel like I'm back at one of those three and a half hour Board of Finance meetings in February and March,

...listening to the baggers and their distress with all the spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending.


Why do people often vote against their own interests? (4.00 / 2)
Reverse revolution

Thomas Frank, the author of the best-selling book What's The Matter with Kansas, is an even more exasperated Democrat and he goes further than Mr Westen.

He believes that the voters' preference for emotional engagement over reasonable argument has allowed the Republican Party to blind them to their own real interests.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/ame...


[ Parent ]
George Lakoff would say that Democrats lose because they ignore that emotion is a factor in voter's decisions (3.00 / 1)
Emotion is as important as reason for most voters, especially low info voters.  Voters want to feel that they can trust a candidate.  Let's face it, most issues are very difficult to understand and most voters have jobs and families that consume much of their time.  Most voters aren't members of think tanks and never will be.

Republicans learned to tell a story about their values and for a while, they at least appeared to be authentic about their values.  That is how they convinced a majority of voters to support them over the last 40 years.  

Per Lakoff, Democrats and Progressives need to do the same.  We need to tell voters our story about what our values are and why we advocate them.  And most importantly, we need to be authentic about communicating our values to voters.  Saying, like John Kerry did, "That I voted for xxx before voting against it" reinforces voters' cynicism about Democrats.  Giving laundry lists of positions and reasons for supporting an issue only turns off voters.  Democrats and Progressives need to weave their values with facts to convince voters to support them and not Republicans.  


[ Parent ]
progressives don't own the media (4.00 / 1)
Corporations do. Corporate media influence how people think -- what they value, what they fear, the information they receive. That's why progressives lose.


[ Parent ]
Yet, in places like Oregon, which has a strong anti -tax history, Progressives (4.00 / 1)
defeated the Tea Baggers and Nike CEO to convince a majority of Oregon voters to increase taxes on those making over $250,000 and increase business fees for the first time since 1931.

They did it by re-framing the tax debate, uniting various progressive groups, including unions, and Democrats to launch an aggressive campaign to save their schools and other important programs.  They were so good at it that they even out raised the corporate backed anti-tax crusade.

Their campaign is a model that other states, like Washington and Colorado are looking to emulate.

Where there is a will there is a way.  


[ Parent ]
interesting you say that (0.00 / 0)
because I've gotten the impression that many Lamont supporters are supporting Lamont for emotional reasons and not because they think he is more progressive on the issues than Dan Malloy. I still don't know which issues Lamont is more progressive than Dan on.

When I heard Lamont was running for the governorship, my immediate emotional response was to support him because I just thought he was a hero for standing up to Joe Lieberman and I had put my heart and soul in his campaign for 2006.

But when I mentioned it to my husband, he planted the first seed of doubt in my mind. He said Lamont's campaign was fueled by the antiwar movement and without this movement driving his campaign, he didn't think he had a chance of winning.

Larkspur, I know many many people who were independents (and even Republicans) who registered as Democrats in 2006 so that they could vote against Joe Lieberman. These voters didn't like Ned as much as they HATED Joe Lieberman. I don't think these voters will be as motivated to come out to support Ned in the primary in 2010.

I would also like to add that some antiwar activists didn't even like Ned because they thought he was an opportunist who was trying to exploit the anti-Iraq war sentiment to win the U.S. Senate seat. They didn't think Ned Lamont was a principled opponent of war because he supported Israel's illegal invasion of Lebanon in 2006 and when Israel dropped cluster bombs which killed mainly Lebanese civilians, he joined Chris Dodd and every other establishment Democrat to say that Israel had the right to "defend itself" even though it was clearly waging a war of aggression. These antiwar activists were also upset that Lamont did not condemn the Israeli occupation and that he supported the invasion of Afghanistan, which they also view as illegitimate.

Now, I completely understand that it is political suicide for a U.S. Senate candidate to criticize Israel or the war in Afghanistan. At the same time, I really don't think those antiwar activists who supported him in 2006 to make a statement against Joe will come out to support him in 2010.

I could be wrong, of course. As I said, I have genuine admiration and respect for many of the bloggers and activists I worked with in 2006 and if Ned Lamont wins this primary, I will be happy to work with them again--assuming, of course, they don't hold it against me that I supported Malloy in the primary. :)  

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."--James Madison


[ Parent ]
You know who sowed doubt about Malloy in my mind? (4.00 / 1)
Dan Malloy.

I was fairly neutral about Malloy since I first met him in 2006.  I just didn't find him inspiring enough for me to want to offer my precious spare time to work on his campaign.  But as soon as Dan Malloy started regurgitating Lieberman's attacks on Lamont in Nov. 2009, I knew that Malloy, like Lieberman, had no principles.  He only cares about him winning the governor's mansion.  And the fact that he's retained some of Lieberman's worse hacks on his campaign, further emphasizes my distrust of Malloy.  That is an example of what Lakoff means by emotional intelligence.

Ned Lamont has done things since 2006.  He worked with various groups to develop a plan to increase business and jobs in CT during his off campaign years that he sent to Jodi Rell, but she ignored it.  He co-chaired Obama's Presidential campaign in CT along with my state senator Don Williams.  He also attended Keith Olbermann's sponsored health clinic in Hartford and refused to make a press spectacle of it, so that he could meet individuals one-on-one and get a first-person account of the health care crisis.  I can't find an account of Dan Malloy attending that clinic.  Joe Courtney's wife, a nurse practitioner, was there offering her services and Richard Blumenthal was also there.  Joe Courtney was in Washington D.C. along with the other Reps working on HCR, but not many state pols attended this clinic even if just to offer moral support to the attendees.

Ned Lamont isn't perfect. His speaking style can be quirky, but I've always felt that Lamont has empathy towards people no matter their backgrounds or economic status.  He's got a deep well of patience and optimism that will serve him well in this campaign and as governor.  He's also a shrewder politician than he was in 2006 and he'll definitely need that this year.  I've always liked Ned Lamont and he hasn't done anything to convince me that he'd be a terrible candidate for governor or governor.


[ Parent ]
personal/emotional vs. issues/based (0.00 / 0)
I don't believe Lamont would make a terrible governor either. People here have mischaracterized my postings on this race as being "Malloy Good/Lamont Bad" and that is a complete mischaracterization. More accurately, my position is "Lamont good/Malloy better".

Anyway, I'll address all your points as best I can.

You write,

"I just didn't find him inspiring enough for me to want to offer my precious spare time to work on his campaign."

This is an entirely personal and emotional reason to vote against Malloy. I've heard Malloy speak as well and I did find him inspiring--how he was one of eight kids and overcame a severe learning disability to graduate magna cum laude from law school and later become mayor of Stamford. But even this alone isn't a reason for me to vote for Malloy.

Then you write,

"But as soon as Dan Malloy started regurgitating Lieberman's attacks on Lamont in Nov. 2009, I knew that Malloy, like Lieberman, had no principles."

Which attacks are you referring to? That Ned Lamont was a Greenwich millionaire who is trying to buy political office? That Ned Lamont is inexperienced?

I think the issue of experience is more relevant in the gubernatorial race than it was for the senatorial race. A Senator can "be his own man or her own woman" in many respects. For example, Lieberman doesn't have to consult anyone before proposing legislation that would strip US citizens of their citizenship if they get accused of a certain crime. But a governor is different--a governor has to deal with a legislature, state agencies, and municipal officials on a daily basis. In the gubernatorial race, I think the experience issue is very relevant. I don't want my state to be run like a business--it should be run like a good government. So is Malloy displaying "no principles" by raising the issue of Lamont's experience? I don't think so.

I do find it annoying that Malloy's press releases make so many references to Lamont's personal wealth. I agree he could tone that down--but I don't think calling Lamont a "Greenwich millionaire" is really a slur--it's a fact. Millionaires can be good and they can be bad. Malloy is not saying that Lamont is a liar or that he's corrupt. I don't consider this "dirty campaigning". It is aggressive campaigning and I think Malloy feels like he needs to run an aggressive campaign to overcome his cash disadvantage.

In fact, I'm actually concerned that Lamont may NOT know how to run an aggressive campaign--he outspent Lieberman by 1.5% and lost by almost 10% when he was running against a real villain.

Are there any legitimate criticisms you think Dan Malloy can raise about Ned Lamont that wouldn't qualify as "dirty campaigning"?

Besides, these attacks on Lamont WOULD NOT hurt Lamont in the general election because he would be up against Tom Foley who is ALSO a millionaire and who ALSO has limited political experience.

I think Malloy is okay as long as he doesn't hurt Lamont's chances of winning the general election if Lamont wins the primary.

Regarding Lieberman's "hacks", I presume you are referring to Roy O. When I first read your comments on Roy O., I got the impression he only worked for Lieberman and Republicans...but when I read CaptCT's comment here, I learned that Roy O. also supported Democrats that were supported by MLN--Chris Dodd, Chris Murphy, etc. I'm not sure why Malloy gets lambasted for working with some of the same people that have supported these other Democratic campaigns.

You write about Ned,

" He worked with various groups to develop a plan to increase business and jobs in CT during his off campaign years that he sent to Jodi Rell, but she ignored it."

Is this business plan a progressive one? Or is it too pro-corporatist? Thus far, I have no reason to believe that Lamont is any more pro-corporatist than Dan Malloy.

You write,

"He also attended Keith Olbermann's sponsored health clinic in Hartford and refused to make a press spectacle of it, so that he could meet individuals one-on-one and get a first-person account of the health care crisis.  I can't find an account of Dan Malloy attending that clinic. "

I don't know when this clinic was held and what Malloy's schedule was that day or even if he heard that there would be a clinic. Maybe, he was attending some other equally worthy event that day. I don't know. This comment is a plus for Lamont--but not necessarily a negative for Malloy.

You write,

"I've always felt that Lamont has empathy towards people no matter their backgrounds or economic status."

I've met Malloy and I have no reason at all to believe he doesn't have that same level of empathy for people of different backgrounds or economic status. Malloy is good on women's issues (pro-choice), good on civil rights (opposes Arizona immigration law, racial profiling, and Lieberman's expatriation act), and is against the death penalty.

I don't think Dan Malloy is anything LIKE Joe Lieberman and if Rosa DeLauro's close personal friendship with Joe Lieberman isn't used to discredit her than I don't think Malloy's prior relationship with Joe Lieberman ought to be used to discredit him.

Anyway, I still would like to get a list of specific issues on which Ned Lamont is more progressive than Dan Malloy.

I'm looking for issues-based reasons why progressives should support Ned Lamont over Dan Malloys and I haven't found them yet.


"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."--James Madison


[ Parent ]
How is this quote of mine saying I'd vote against Malloy? (0.00 / 0)

"I just didn't find him inspiring enough for me to want to offer my precious spare time to work on his campaign."

When I was neutral towards Malloy I never said that I would not vote for him.  I just wasn't inspired to offer my precious spare time to his campaign.  You put too many words where they don't belong.

You may have found Malloy inspiring and that's fine.  That shows that 2 people can have different emotional reactions to the same person without them being an attack on the candidate.  Not being inspired by a candidate is not a personal attack on that candidate.  That's just the reaction that candidate elicits in some people.  If Ned Lamont wasn't in the race, I'd feel just as cool towards Malloy as I did the first time I met him in 2006.  If he was the only Democrat in the gov's race, I'd vote for him, but I would not donate or offer my precious spare time to his campaign.  If you consider that an attack, I guess you must hate all those CT voters that don't donate or offer their precious spare time to Malloy's campaign right now.


[ Parent ]
I was just talking about this at lunch (0.00 / 0)
Another element to the tea party astroturfing, and IMHO one of the crucial aspects to GOP's coalition of social conservatives / wall street republicans / anti-tax libertarian tea partiers, is economic aspiration. Everybody wants to be a millionaire, so when some gasbag on CNBC throws a tantrum about the death tax or the gubmint possibly questioning some  bank executive's outrageous bonuses (funded courtesey of TARP), the audience isn't actually the executives who would actually be affected by those policies, it's the (white, middle aged) guy on disability or unemployment who can only fantasize about making in a lifetime what Sarah Palin gets in a check for her book advance. Joe Sixpack is ticked about property taxes to pay for socialist things like fire departments and schools, and would probably be happy enough to yell out at the local board of ed meeting, but what these astroturf groups have done is gotten Mr. Sixpack to go against his economic self interest and go to bat for Lloyd Blankfein by running ad nauseum stories about government takeovers and encroaching socialism.

While most of us roll our eyes about Palin's populist pablum, the conservative mythology has a nice prepackaged storyline to explain everything. Filthy rich people with no discernable talent (ahem, Palin) are rich ostensibly because they are being rewarded for their success. For the social conservatives receptive to the prosperity gospel, material rewards come directly from God. The logic of this is mindblowing, in that wealth can be seen as a token of righteousness, at least as long as you're a member of the tribe in good standing (hollywood producers and atheist biotech execs need not apply). So Joe Sixpack is angry about his income and local property taxes, but since he expects material rewards sometime in the near future, he probably won't be on board with a progressive tax rate. That book advance check is in the mail any day now.

"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." - Warren Buffet


[ Parent ]
The stimulas failed (4.00 / 1)
unless you are in the reality-based non-corporate community and can actually read.

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=967

Then it worked.

Of course it would have worked a whole lot better had 30% of it NOT been given away by Obama to the GOP in useless tax breaks that got NOTHING.But that's the difference between working and a total freaking success. The difference between half-a-loaf bi-partisanship and ramming through a Progresive agenda.

The problem is Joe Sixpack can't read. He also get's all his limited mis-information from corporate news sources that have no desire to show that progressiveness works.  

The question is not what you are, we already determined that, we are now negotiating price.
electrealdemocrats.com Online since 3/07 -- TimetogoJoe.com Online s


[ Parent ]
It's actually far more simple (0.00 / 0)
...the moment the voter walks into the booth it becomes "I like Sarah" or "I don't like Sarah"

If the campaign can put doubt into the minds of some, there is a chance of turning them. A chance. The rest the candidate either had or didn't have going in.

It's a yes or no referendum. Everything else is justification and rationalization. People say they want debates, issues and discussions. But they really don't care about any of that. All they want is a phrase they can quote to justify their choice.


[ Parent ]
yeah (0.00 / 0)
All they want is a phrase they can quote to justify their choice.

Drill baby, drill!!!

Oh wait...

"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." - Warren Buffet


[ Parent ]
 
0 user(s) logged on.
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Spotlight

Use the Spotlight tool to send a diary to offline journalists, with your feedback or suggestions.
(What is Spotlight?)


Search


   Advanced
My Left Nutmeg Feeds

Links


Connecticut's War Dead

Blogroll
Powered By
- SoapBlox

Connecticut Blogs
- Capitol Watch
- Colin McEnroe
- Connecticut2.com
- Connecticut Bob
- ConnecticutBlog
- CT Blue Blog
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Local Politics
- CT News Junkie
- CT Smart Growth
- CT Voices for Civil Justice
- CT Voters Count
- CT Weblogs
- CT Working Families Party
- CT Young Dems
- Cool Justice Report
- Democracy for CT
- Drinking Liberally (New Milford)
- East Haven Politics
- Emboldened
- Hat City Blog (Danbury)
- The Laurel
- Jon Kantrowitz
- LieberWatch
- NB Politicus (New Britain)
- New Haven Independent
- Nutmeg Grater
- Only In Bridgeport
- Political Capitol (Brian Lockhart)
- A Public Defender
- Rep. David McCluskey
- Rep. Tim O'Brien
- State Sen. Gary Lebeau
- Saramerica
- Stamford Talk
- Spazeboy
- The 40 Year Plan
- The Trough (Ted Mann: New London Day)
- Undercurrents (Hartford IMC)
- Wesleying
- Yale Democrats

CT Sites
- Clean Up CT
- CT Citizen Action Group
- CT Democratic Party
- CT For Lieberman Party
- CT General Assembly
- CT Secretary of State
- CT-N (Connecticut Network)
- Healthcare4every1.org
- Judith Blei Government Relations
- Love Makes A Family CT

CT Candidates
- Chris Murphy for Senate
- Susan Bysiewicz for Senate

- William Tong for Senate


Other State Blogs
- Alabama
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New York
- North Carolina
- Ohio
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin



More blogs about connecticut+politics.
Technorati Blog Finder


 
Powered By
MLN is powered by SoapBlox
 
Powered by: SoapBlox