Malloy to Lamont: What's changed?"

I still hear Malloy whining about Ned's money (4.00 / 1)

His convention presser wasn't much different than the rest of his campaign's rhetoric about Lamont.  He's also lying about Lamont's stance on CEP and on paid sick days again.

I'm enrolled in an online Web Design program and the first part is studying the basics of graphic arts.  (Note: I'm not an artist.  I'm a programmer, but I have to take classes in basic graphic arts to get my certificate in Web Design).  I was reviewing both Lamont's and Malloy's mailings sent to me over last 1-2 months and from what I've been learning in my graphic arts classes, my overall critique is that whoever is designing Malloy's mailings is either incompetent or a secret Lamont supporter.  I assume the former is more likely.

Ned Lamont is at least getting his money's worth out of the graphic artists on his team.  His high popularity ratings and rise in the polls after losing the Convention nomination prove my point.

Emphasizing CEP probably worked for Malloy with some DTC's and Convention delegates, but it won't work with rank and file Democrats and Independents, who are more concerned about their jobs and the economy than whether a leading candidate funds his own campaign or uses CEP.  And since the Republican nominee is self-funding, Malloy's argument will continue to be trumped by Lamont's argument that a Democrat should not have to campaign with 1 arm tied behind his back.

Malloy may only be running against Ned Lamont right now, but Ned is actually running against Tom Foley as well as Malloy.  Ned won't let Tom Foley bypass him in the polls again.

I think Lamont should ignore Malloy's calls for endless debates and continue to talk directly to voters.  The more that Malloy complains about Ned not debating him makes Malloy look snippy and negative.  When the media outlets send invites to Ned to debate Malloy, then he should negotiate the details and accept the invite.

---

by: Larkspur @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 17:21:48 PM UTC

? (4.00 / 2)

What does graphic artists have to do with Malloy's call for Lamont to have debates? If Malloy is wrong with Lamont's stance on CEP, then Lamont is more than capable to call Malloy out on his misleading statements in a debate/forum.

Now that the convention is over, and the field of candidates are decreased, now would be a good time where both candidates stand on the issues side by side as opposed to dueling press releases and Lamont and Malloy cheerleaders going back and forth hurling insults on MLN.

---

by: ctblogger @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 17:41:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I watched the debates that were run prior to the Convention (0.00 / 0)

didn't you?

---

by: Larkspur @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 18:45:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes (4.00 / 1)

And IMO, there is a difference between a "debate" between a laundry list of candidates, where each individual has a brief moment to comment, and a debate/forum between the two individuals who are left standing after the convention.

There is nothing wrong with debates/forums during the summer as they help inform the public. Now, that being said, even Stevie Wonder can see why Malloy is taking this approach and I'm sure if Dan was the frontrunner, you wouldn't hear him demanding debates his opponent.

Again, in fairness, the tactic Malloy is using is nothing new as Lamont used it against Lieberman back in 2006. I know because I was there (note the person's hand in Bob's referenced videoclip).  

---

by: ctblogger @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 19:41:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Larkspur, I don't understand this (0.00 / 0)

I was reviewing both Lamont's and Malloy's mailings sent to me over last 1-2 months and from what I've been learning in my graphic arts classes, my overall critique is that whoever is designing Malloy's mailings is either incompetent or a secret Lamont supporter.  I assume the former is more likely.

Please explain your critique.

I have been receiving mailings from both candidates, and have certain issues but not the same conclusion. Can you give specific examples?  

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

---

by: tessa @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 17:28:56 PM UTC

There were 2 really bad ones (0.00 / 0)

The one with an eye chart on the front and the other one with an upside-down image of the state of Connecticut with the words "Dan Malloy turned Stamford around" and if you turn it over it says "He has the experience to turn Connecticut around".  

It should be obvious why the eye-chart mailing is a terrible image to use for a guy who claims poor name recognition is the main reason for why he trails Ned Lamont in the polls.  For those who didn't see it or forgot about it, the eye chart starts with "A, New, Vision,..." with each word a different size from large at the top to tiny at the bottom.  The last line on this image in tiny letters is "Dan Malloy for Governor".  This image basically says to the viewer, who has to strain to read that line, that Dan Malloy is not very important.

When you open this brochure, the dark blue background is overpowering to the eyes and makes it very difficult to read the words.  A light background with dark letters is the easiest on the eyes to read.  The viewer would need a well lighted room to read words on a dark background.  In a room with indirect lighting, this brochure is difficult to read and would make a viewer quit reading it without finishing what Malloy was trying to say.

The only good thing in this brochure is the line of pictures at the top of the inside fold. They present an image of Malloy caring about people, but the dark blue background gives a cold and impersonal feeling that overpowers what the top line of pictures are trying to convey.

The 1st page on the inside fold of the brochure uses an asymmetrical design.  Malloy has highlighted in a white background and black letters a quote from the Hartford Courant - "This is what leadership looks like: Dan Malloy's commitment to Connecticut's landmark Citizens Election Program."  Malloy emphasized what was important to him -- his CEP decision versus Ned's self-funding -- instead of what is important to the people of Connecticut.  Malloy's stances on jobs, taxes, schools utility costs and ethical standards is drowned out by the dark blue background or "negative space" as its called in my class text "Design Basics".

The last page of this brochure has the same problem as the inside fold with the dark blue background, but its slightly easier to read because the letters are thicker and larger.  His photo in the bottom right corner is overwhelmed by the dark blue background.  The top of the page is in white and the post office is most likely grateful for that.

The 2nd brochure that I mentioned is the worse design.  If the viewer follows the proposed line of sight after reading "Dan Malloy turned Stamford around" he/she will turn upside-down the front cover to read "He has the experience to turn Connecticut around."  Then the viewer will open the brochure and see the inside fold upside down.  This forces the viewer to make an extra step and turn the inside fold right side-up.  A lot of viewers don't have the time or patience to do the extra work that this brochure design requires.  This brochure will most likely lose viewer interest as soon as they open the inside fold and see it upside-down.

The 2nd brochure has similar problems as the eye-chart one with the use of the dark blue background, but at least the 2nd page on the inside fold uses a white background and its a lot easier to read the words, but if the viewer sees the words upside-down then the words are not easy to read.

The problem with Malloy's brochures is that he's assuming viewers want to read his stuff.  Most viewers have time constraints and other things that are important to them, so when you make it difficult to read your message you are most likely going to lose that viewer's interest and in the future they may just toss your brochures because you will have trained them that your message is hard to read.

The other thing about Malloy's brochures is that his stark use of dark blue and white is not much different than using black and white.  His brochures give off a cold and impersonal feeling to the viewer.  He could have used some off-white backgrounds where he had text to give a warmer and more inviting feel to his message as well as make it easier for the view to read his message.  The instances where he uses a light blue background doesn't help.  It only adds to the cold impersonal feeling and only makes the text slightly easier to read.  

Lamont's color scheme is very warm and inviting.  One of the criticisms of Ned is that he's stiff and aloof.  You wouldn't get that from his brochures.  Along with his color scheme ,the use of fading in and out helps promote a warm and inviting feel that welcomes the viewer to read the brochure.  Also Ned's brochures are easy to read, so the viewer is more likely to stay longer reading his message.  Lamont's message talks about what's important to the people of Connecticut and what his vision is to get Connecticut out of our problems and not about his problems.  He doesn't assume that the viewer will read his brochure just because he sent it.  His design gives the viewer a reason to pause and read his message.  In the future, Lamont is more likely to retain viewers because his design helps them read his message.

---

by: Larkspur @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 18:41:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Enough (4.00 / 2)

Look, I'm going to cut in on this real quick as I can see where this is going.

The comments are not a place to have a off-topic flame war...period. It's one thing to debate on a topic that had something that was remotely to the essence to the original post but this while thing about Malloy and Lamont's brochures is ridiculous and HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY POST!.

Enough...

---

by: ctblogger @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 19:35:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Didn't mean to start something, Al (0.00 / 0)

I apologize. I thought I was asking a reasonable question since the design of lit is somewhat off-topic, but the conclusion that a Lamont supporter was sabotaging Malloy needed explanation.

I would have scans of the lit to go with the analysis but it still seems off topic.

To me.

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

---

by: tessa @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 19:53:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I thought you would have seen those mailings since I got them too (0.00 / 0)

Any way, my analysis of those mailings was primarily based upon what I've been learning in my graphic arts classes.  

---

by: Larkspur @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:43:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not to drag it on (0.00 / 0)

But Malloy's mail was crappy in the conventional way, while Lamont's was (with the exception of one conventionally crappy piece with a terrible photo) very slick and refined but looked so close to identical that I couldn't tell you if they wrote new text or not for all the different pieces. However, they helpfully numbered them so you can tell you have a different piece in your hands from the previous one.

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

---

by: mattw @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 03:18:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Do people want to see lit? (0.00 / 0)

I got probably 40 pieces of mail from all the candidates before the convention. Harris is the only one to send me something after. But it'd be very interesting to do a lit exchange or archive as either an MLN thing or as a sister site. The down side is that (as with Bob's videos of Ned and Susan) there's the possibility it just becomes fodder for future attacks. Maybe the benefits of curiosity-satisfying would outweigh the negatives, though.

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

---

by: mattw @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 03:14:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tessa... (0.00 / 0)

it is certainly your business to apologize, if you feel the need. But good grief; all you did was reply to a comment and ask for Larkspur to elaborate.  

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

---

by: Jake Blount @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 14:20:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

ctblogger... (0.00 / 0)

your comment sounds high-handed, authoritarian and censorious... nothing wrong with tangents from time to time... I'm certainly not going to wonder if you approve of any comment I choose to make.  

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

---

by: Jake Blount @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 13:53:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

and another thing... (0.00 / 0)

Tangents are as much a part of a free wheeling discussion as a fish in water. If people begin to self- censor, based on whether they will incur the umbrage of a front pager, we have lost something.  

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

---

by: Jake Blount @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 14:27:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And regarding Ned's 2006 call for kitchen table debates with Lieberman (4.00 / 1)

Lieberman ignored him until the media sponsored debated in July.  Lieberman also had never done any Town Hall style meetings with Connecticut constituents during his 18 years as senator; whereas, both Lamont and Malloy have already been in multiple debates prior to the Convention.  That's a big difference between Lieberman 2006 and Lamont 2010.

---

by: Larkspur @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 17:29:24 PM UTC

Incorrect (4.00 / 2)

Lieberman participated in a NAACP senatorial forum in 2006 with Lamont and Alan Schlesinger (I videotaped it). Not defending LIEberman and if I'm correct, the NAACP event was the last time Joementum took questions from the public in a forum.

Malloy is not comparing Lamont of 2010 to Lieberman of 2006 but rather Lamont of 2006 to Lamont of 2010m, which IMO is fair game.  

---

by: ctblogger @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 17:37:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was referring to the primary season, not the general election one (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Larkspur @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 18:42:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Your exact words (4.00 / 2)

Lieberman also had never done any Town Hall style meetings with Connecticut constituents during his 18 years as senator.

Your reference to Lieberman had nothing to do with primary season or general election season but rather that Lieberman, in his 18 years in office, never did a town hall style meeting.

To recap, your original statement was incorrect, and your attempt to clarify was also incorrect.

---

by: ctblogger @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 19:30:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In 2006, Lieberman was finally forced into debates, but prior to that he had no opponent (0.00 / 0)

so he never saw a need to do town hall style meetings with Connecticut constituents.   Compare Lieberman to Russ Feingold, who makes it a habit to tour his state when he's back home from Congress, and prior to 2006, I would like you to show me where Lieberman ever held a town hall style meeting with his constituents.  I know for a fact that he never came to Northeast CT until 2006, and we were just a short bus stop for him.

And since his reelection, I haven't heard of Lieberman doing town hall style meetings with his constituents.

---

by: Larkspur @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:36:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Here we go again (0.00 / 0)

---

by: bhogan @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 18:29:21 PM UTC

For the record... (4.00 / 4)

I wasn't contacted to see if my video could be used in a Malloy ad.  I'm more or less okay with it; but really, it is nice to be asked.

Denise Merrill's campaign asked permission to post a video I made recently. I appreciated the gesture.  

Anyway, it's not that big a deal; I'm supporting Ned Lamont, but the video will stay online and remain available. After all, it IS what Lamont said four years ago.  Different circumstances, though...I don't know if Lieberman made any round table appearances with Lamont prior to the primary; Dan and Ned had something like 20 joint discussions so far.


Connecticut Bob

---

by: Bob Adams @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 19:07:46 PM UTC

Your video (0.00 / 0)

Made it into the Republican deposition of Susan Bysiewicz as well. Easy oppo, I guess.

I'm not in a good spot to watch video at the moment -- did they credit you, at least?  

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

---

by: mattw @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 20:57:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Really? (0.00 / 0)

I didn't see Susan's depo...there was a mention of one of my videos?  

Connecticut Bob

---

by: Bob Adams @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 01:30:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

yep (0.00 / 0)

A whole line of questioning based on comments made at the Milford DTC. They referred to it as an "august body."

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

---

by: mattw @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 01:33:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think there is a difference... (0.00 / 0)

...between a campaign linking to your video that's available to the public on YouTube and a campaign ripping your video off and using it in their piece.

In terms of Malloy, he simply provided a YT link to your post therefore there isn't really a problem as in essence, by providing a link to your video, he gave you an attribution (it's the same as if a campaign did a hyperlink to your video). Now, if Malloy's camp ripped your video and re-published it without your permission, then they're in the wrong (I've gone through this several times with campaigns where I told them to take the videos down).

You're right, it's is what Lamont said four years ago and thus, the issue is fair game. Whether or not the issue will ever gain traction or make a difference in the public's eye is another issue.  

---

by: ctblogger @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 23:52:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why would you say... (4.00 / 3)

Also what's noticeable in Malloy's latest release is a dialing back in his negative tone towards Lamont which have been topic of passionate debate on this site.

It seems to be a continuation of that negative tone.

Frankly, I don't find debates very valuable compared to issues pages and individual candidate interviews in front of activist groups for getting information about these people. Send me some mail that says what you want to do. Dan Malloy sent me an 8-page mailer with 3-4 pages of meaningful information. Ned a 6-page version of his "business plan." These cats can deliver us information if they want to, and will not be prevented from obfuscating if they want to just because they're on a stage before the editorial board of the Newtown Bee.

Why one candidate would need a different candidate next to them to reach voters with information seems bizarre -- even if they did 17 debates with 1000 people at each (and for each debate to be even half that well attended is exceedingly unlikely), it would be seen by 2% of the Democrats in the state. I mean, it's a ritual, like flag bunting and lawn signs, so it's going to happen no matter what. But if it was essential to voters, hey would have seen the last televised debate, and more than 1.5% would have held some opinion of Rudy or Juan.

So now, we're debating debates instead of issues. More trivia. Pass.

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

---

by: mattw @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 21:15:04 PM UTC

aha (0.00 / 0)

I guess (per Jon K's post) that the idea is to have it only in towns with daily newspapers, so the Newtown Bee is out.  

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

---

by: mattw @ Tue Jun 01, 2010 at 22:20:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If Lamont supporters have faith in their candidate, (0.00 / 0)

I would think they would welcome the opportunity to debate Dan Malloy so their candidate has an opportunity to showcase his skills and knowledge. It's much more useful to voters to watch their candidate debate and have his ideas challenged directly by the opposing candidate than to listen to some stump speech given to a roomful of supporters, who may not be as critical.

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

---

by: sufi @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 01:22:26 AM UTC

As an Undecided Voter (0.00 / 0)

I would like to see a series of debates to hear where Lamont and Malloy really stand on the issues and more importantly, the mechanics behind their plans to get the state back on course.

---

by: snorwich @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 01:37:33 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

to undedcided voters (0.00 / 0)

yes a think a one on one debate on substantive issues help.

---

by: bhogan @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 01:41:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

As a Lamont supporter (4.00 / 2)

I hope Ned will simply turn his back to Dan Malloy and his negative style of campaigning.

CTBlogger might think this latest email is a "softening" from Team Malloy. Me, I think it's more Ned-baiting, nasty in its tone, and ridiculous in its seeming assertion that Malloy approached Ned, "to debate", in a gentlemanly fashion and in good faith.

I know Ned. He's not a chicken, and he isn't scared of debate. Not even debating the almighty Dan Malloy.

However, I don't think the Lamont campaign should involve themselves with Dan and Roy O.'s manipulative bull-shit.

Note the obvious. Team Malloy still doesn't want to treat Ned as a Democratic peer. The condescension is readily apparent.

---

by: AndersonScooper @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 09:55:28 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Peer (0.00 / 0)

Opinions are mixed about whether prim! aries help parties. Some say they draw attention to candidates and issues, but others say they can be divisive.

"I wish there wasn't a primary," said former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, the endorsed Democratic candidate for governor who is facing a party challenge from Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont. "I think that this is the best chance for a Democrat in a generation, and dissipating resources and intensively dividing the party is not a good thing."

Lamont, who defeated then-Democratic U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman in a 2006 primary - only to lose in the general election after Lieberman ran as an independent - defended his primary challenge.

"If you stick to your message, stick to your issues, say what you want to do, I think it's going to be great for the Democrats," Lamont said. "It's good for voters to give them a choice."

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

---

by: mattw @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 13:40:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

huh? (0.00 / 0)

If Malloy didn't consider Lamont a peer, he wouldn't invite him to a debate. Again, I think debates are good for the public and it's just bizarre that Lamont supporters wouldn't want to bring on the debates. Having a public debate is so much better than merely having candidates go about and talk to voters because when candidates set up events to meet voters, the kind of voters that usually show up are those who already support the candidate and are less likely to challenge the candidate's ideas.

Every candidate should be willing and able to present their ideas and defend them in a debate with their opponent. It's really as simple as that.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:30:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Malloy is "inviting" Ned to debate him because he trails by double-digits in the polls (4.00 / 1)

and needs an inexpensive way to raise his name recognition.

I'm sure one or two of the media outlets will sponsor a formal debate prior to the primary that both will attend.  Most likely it will hold it a few weeks before the primary.  Right now, most ordinary voters aren't even thinking about the primary.

---

by: Larkspur @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:40:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

whatever his motivation (0.00 / 0)

Whatever Malloy's motivation might be, debates are GOOD for voters and progressives should support them. Again, if you have faith in your candidate, you should welcome the debates regardless of the motivation of the opposing candidate.

Candidates should be able to present and defend their ideas in a public forum. It would be good for Ned to get practice doing this during the primary season so he is ready in case he has to run in the general election.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:45:23 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Information is good for voters (4.00 / 2)

And debates are just about the slowest and least accessible means of obtaining information in the universe.

What's worse is that the vast majority of people who even hear about these debates are not going to hear from the candidates, but rather the post-game analysis of the event from people like Kevin Rennie and Neil Vigdor and Ken Dixon and Rick Green and so on. It'll be like listening to static through a foot of insulation.

Yeah, there will be debates, and perhaps as many as 2% of Democratic voters will be able to go to them, thus ensuring that a trivial share of the electorate has the opportunity to judge the performative qualities of the candidates in a live setting. Surely that has a value. And debates and bean-feeds and agricultural fairs will always be with us. But there's nothing stopping either of these people from just transmitting the information they wish to share directly to us instead of bickering (still) over process.

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

---

by: mattw @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 03:06:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I guess there would be a better form than debates.... (0.00 / 0)

MLN

Yes, MLN.

Let's do what the special interests do.

1) get readers of MLN to contribute questions [now]
2) open the questions to a public vote [6/26-6/25]
3) take the top 25 questions and provide them to the candidates [6/26]
4) all questions and answers will be posted to MLN on 7/9
5) if a candidate wants to "respond" to any answer provided by the other candidate they have until 7/15 to respond
6) on 7/19 all response will be posted
7) on 7/26 a "fact check" will be posted for any candidate responses (validating that the response are factually accurate, and if not, why not)

This is very do-able.

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

---

by: Met00 @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 04:09:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

LMAO (4.00 / 1)

And debates are just about the slowest and least accessible means of obtaining information in the universe.

Do you think that having Joe Lieberman, in a debate, say, "I want to make sure we elect a Democratic President in 2008" was a good thing to have documented for eternity?

Do you think having Chris Shays, in a debate, say that Abu Ghraib was just a sex scandal, might have given voters a better indication of his abilities as a U.S. Congressman?

Just saying. Sometimes I think the level of hypocrisy here is just off the charts.

Even if you don't want to hear 17 debates, don't you want to hear how these candidates plan to resolve the big issues facing the state? Or whether they understand the issues well enough to address them?

I think most people here have already made up their minds who they're voting for, so the debates are pointless.

But for those of us who haven't, debates matter. I'm looking forward to them -- and I hope there are a sufficient number. More debates allow candidates to discuss more issues in depth. You can spend one entire debate on education. Another on energy. Another on health care. Another on jobs. Another on the budget and taxes. Another on transportation. I can go on.

So, the more opportunities to cover each of these issues in-depth, the better.

 

---

by: CaptCT @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 13:02:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How many of those debates did you see? (0.00 / 0)

Maybe you went to a debate or two. All I saw were the spicy clips that were later used in attack ads.

What hypocrisy? I hate having to watch a 30-minute video when a 300-word post would have sufficed. Or even a 3000 word transcript! I actually hate it enough that I have disabled Flash and Youtube at home since getting my new computer in November. The amount of genuinely new information that there is to be gleaned from one of these things is quite small, and it is a combination of laziness and editorial apathy that we're so often forced to watch and watch and watch to in the end learn nothing new at all.

In support of this thesis, I submit to you that in 20+ joint appearances and many dozens of other web videos from other public presentations, neither of our two candidates have given us any idea of what tax rates they would prefer to the current status quo. Will 20 more hour long videos give us this information? Or is not presenting this hard information an actual intentional strategy that will not vary whether the medium is a candidate's website, their mailers, TV ads, or their public presentations in a debate setting? I believe very strongly that the latter is the case. Do you disagree? Are you interested in watching 20 hours of debates to find out?

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

---

by: mattw @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 23:05:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can't speak for all Lamont supporters (3.75 / 4)

Sufi, but if I had to guess, I'd say that most (myself included) welcome debates between Ned and Dan between now and the Primary.

I happen to think that 17 debates is overkill.

I also don't think that Dan proposed these debates in good faith.  If he had, I believe he would have at least contacted the Lamont campaign before going to the press with a proposal like this.  

The Malloy campaign has to know that there will be debates.  Of course there will be a couple of debates.  In my opinion, this proposal was put out there to make it look like Ned Lamont doesn't want any debates, but that he can be "shamed" into doing the one or two that were going to happen anyway.

In any case, I just wanted to say that Lamont supporters aren't opposed to debates and that I don't think Ned is afraid of debates.  

|Spazeboy.net|Spazeboy's Guide to Political Videoblogging|

---

by: spazeboy @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 20:51:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

respect your position (1.00 / 1)

spazeboy, I respect your position and agree that, perhaps, 17 debates is "overkill"--but that's not what people here were saying. People here were basically saying, "Ned is leading in the polls and, therefore, doesn't 'need' to debate and only 'losers' call for debates". I do not agree with that position nor do I agree that only one debate is sufficient. In my view, at least 5 debates would be ideal--one in every congressional district.

Also, Ned Lamont was late to the televised "debate" on nbc. He canceled participation in the UConn law school forum last minute, and then skipped a non-profit association forum in Manchester. Now, I don't know if Lamont had legitimate reasons for being late to or missing these debates or whether HE was not acting in "good faith"--but, on the face of it, it doesn't look good. It looks as though Ned Lamont is either scared or thinks its beneath him to present and defend his ideas in a public debate simply because his campaign had the money to put more tv ads out this spring causing him to lead in the polls.

Leads can be temporary and there is a lot of time between now and August.

In 2006, Lamont outspent Lieberman by 1.5% and lost by nearly 10%. Thus, I am not convinced that money alone can help him win this time--but if he can win the primary with the antiwar movement propelling his campaign, I will be more convinced that he can win the general election

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

---

by: sufi @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 03:47:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What a load of crap.... Sorry! (4.00 / 2)

Now, I don't know if Lamont had legitimate reasons for being late to or missing these debates or whether HE was not acting in "good faith"--but, on the face of it, it doesn't look good. It looks as though Ned Lamont is either scared or thinks its beneath him to present and defend his ideas in a public debate simply because his campaign had the money to put more tv ads out this spring causing him to lead in the polls.

Damn Sufi, with you as a Democratic "friend", why even bother fighting the Republicans?

You make all these false presumptions about Ned, solely to justify your decision to support Malloy?

Frankly, I'm okay with your decision. Put please quit putting down one of the best Democrats to grace the state in the past 20 years.... Thanks!

---

by: AndersonScooper @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 09:19:11 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

not putting Ned down (0.00 / 0)

I only said Lamont may have had legitimate reasons for missing those debates but it didn't look good. It doesn't. Many other Lamont supporters, including you, have said much more damaging things about Dan Malloy than I ever said about Ned Lamont. As I said, I think Ned would also make a great candidate--but I think he could run his campaign much more effectively than he is now and it doesn't look good when his supporters claim that he doesn't 'need' to debate Malloy merely because he is leading in the polls. Debates serve a public interest and progressives should support them.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 12:10:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

clarification (1.00 / 1)

Lamont supporters may claim that his campaign is already "effective" because he is currently leading in the polls. As I said, leads can be temporary and there is still plenty of time between now and August and I don't think Malloy has even really begun advertising on tv.

Regardless, it's really bad form to miss debates. I hope Lamont had a legitimate reason and, if anyone can tell us what it was, I would be happy to retract my comments above.

It should be pointed out that over time, many Lamont supporters have variously referred to Malloy as a "liar" who has "no principles" or "small" or whatever--these epithets are much worse than anything I have said about Ned.

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

---

by: sufi @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 12:34:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

btw, your style fits in perfectly with Dan Malloy! (0.00 / 0)

no text

---

by: AndersonScooper @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 14:05:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What have I said bad about Dan Malloy, -- this cycle? (3.50 / 2)

Really hoping that together we can avoid any more of those "DeStefano in a dress" ads.

But yeah, you definitely impugned Ned's motives in a fairly nasty way.

Now I don't know if Sufi has legitimate reasons,.... or whether SHE was not acting in "good faith" -- but on the face of it, it doesn't look good. It looks as though Sufi is either... or thinks it beneath her....

Look, of course Ned will debate Dan, and I wish you'd quit pushing this dishonest notion that he somehow won't. The debates will happen, just not entirely according to Team Malloy's insistences.

---

by: AndersonScooper @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 14:04:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Stop defending the indefensable (4.00 / 1)

Faux News style rhetoric.

AndersonScooper nails it with the replacement of your name for Lamonts. It was a Faux News style attack and you were called out on it.

Feel free to tell us all why we should support YOUR chosen candidate. Tell us what positions he has taken and how that has moved you. But continued use of Faux News style snarkie-ness will only do more harm than good in this forum. AS called you out here (as did I) and Bob called you out for it in another thread you started.

Continued use will only hurt "Brand Sufi" and your selected candidate in the long run.

And consider that if we didn't care about you, we wouldn't be throwing up these flags to try to warn you to cease and desist with the Faux News style and rhetoric. Our posts in this case are not about Ned/Dan, but about how you are coming off in presentation. If we didn't give a shit about you, we would keep our mouths shut.

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

---

by: Met00 @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 17:54:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

brand sufi? (4.00 / 1)

I didn't realize I had a "brand", Met00. In any event, my INTENT, was not to impugn Ned's motives and my apologies if it came across that way. I just hope Ned does not miss debates in the future or if he does, I hope there is an effort to reschedule them. I don't think being late to a debate to the nbc debate is a huge deal, Ned could have just been stuck in traffic so I regret I mentioned that particular incident.

I agree that that the 17 debates Malloy is calling for is a bit much--but I also think it's wrong for some people here to claim there should be no debates or only one debate simply because their candidate is leading in the polls. Debates are a good and healthy part of our democracy and I agree with all your suggestions on fact-checking.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 23:32:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Branding... (0.00 / 0)

We all manage our own "brands". How we present ourselves to the world. Recently in another thread I had suggested a bunch of MLN'rs who could be used as resources by NPR. Because of the "brands" they have created on MLN I felt that they could be open minded and opinionated (yes, you can be both). In that post I even went so far as to recommend you (in spite of our disagreements on the Middle East) as one of the people that should be on NPR.

If, after the last few days, I were asked again, I wouldn't have recommended you. That is called "damaging the brand."

I would highly recommend rethinking how you are supporting Dan, and move from the Faux News style rhetoric to focusing on why he deserves support based on his accomplishments and vision. Let the reader compare or contrast Dan .v. Ned from their perspective based on your positive input on your selected candidate.

Just my $0.02 as someone who has debated with you before and walked away disagreeing with you in the end, but respecting the style and substance you brought to the debate.

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

---

by: Met00 @ Fri Jun 04, 2010 at 00:24:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Dan Malloy tops Ned Lamont on being late to a debate (0.00 / 0)

He was about 45 minutes late to the Candidates Forum held in Killingly in Feb 2010; whereas, Ned Lamont, Susan Bysiewicz and Nancy Wyman all showed up on time or a bit early.

I watched that NBC30 debate you speak of and yes Ned was about 5-7 minutes late to it, but when he joined the debate he had a good and strong response and quickly fit in with debate forum.  While Ned was absent, the other candidates got more time to speak, so it was Ned's loss for being late.

---

by: Larkspur @ Fri Jun 04, 2010 at 06:13:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

We're approaching Summer and most voters are thinking about vacation not political debates (0.00 / 0)

The only ones interested in debates are political junkies and future general election opponents.  

---

by: Larkspur @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:30:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So? (0.00 / 0)

You can also make the argument that most people are on vacation in August and the only ones who would make the effort to vote in the primary are "political junkies". Does that mean we shouldn't have primaries in August?

If we have primaries in August, we should have debates before then. There is no legitimate excuse for Lamont not to debate Malloy and if he backs out of the debates, he just ends up looking like a coward who can't defend his ideas. It doesn't matter what Malloy's motivation is--debates are good for voters, especially the kind of voters that vote in primaries.

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

---

by: sufi @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:48:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What on earth are you talking about (4.00 / 2)

how can Lamont "Back out" of something he hasn't even agreed to?

When the Frontrunner,Ned Lamont,decides how many,where and under what conditions any debates are to be held I'm sure he'll let the also ran,that's Dan Malloy, know.

Sufi, you are not doing Malloy any favors with your silly blustering  here.

---

by: ctkeith @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 19:41:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

a matter of public interest (1.00 / 1)

I wasn't blustering and do not believe I deserve to be called silly. As I mentioned to spazeboy in a recent comment, Lamont has already missed two debates. I don't know what his reasons where--maybe they were legitimate but it does not look good.

Debates serve a vital public interest and, in my view, progressives should support them regardless of how their candidate is faring in the polls and regardless of the motivations of the opposing candidate. I don't think Lamont's supporters are doing him any favors by claiming that he doesn't 'need' to debate his opponent merely because he is currently leading in the polls or by claiming that voters won't watch them because they will be on vacation this summer.

Every candidate should be ready and able to present and defend his or her views in a public debate. If I were a Lamont supporter and had faith in his skills and knowledge, I would say "BRING ON THE DEBATES".

Maybe, spazeboy is right and that 17 debates are excessive but only one debate is to few and I hope the campaigns can find a happy medium.

Primary voters in non-presidential election years are not mostly unengaged "low information voters"--they are exactly the kind of voters that pay attention to debates--at least more so than people who only vote in the general election.
 

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

---

by: sufi @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 03:57:39 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

getting harder to take this seriously (4.00 / 2)

I don't know what his reasons where--maybe they were legitimate but it does not look good.

Lamont was out drinking the blood of young virgins because that is how he maintains his youthful appearance.

or maybe

Lamont was afraid to be exposed as a unicorn.

Really now. This is reaching silly season. There was something nefarious? "maybe they were legitimate"?  Sufi, earlier someone said that you weren't doing Malloy any favors. This is the type of thing that they were talking about. Casting aspersions reduces the value of everything that comes after it. It's so Faux News.
 

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

---

by: Met00 @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 04:22:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

. (4.00 / 2)

We need more unicorns in politics.

http://games.adultswim.com/rob...

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

---

by: mattw @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 04:36:15 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I have faith in Lamont and in the fact he's winning (4.00 / 1)

on the ground.That being the case Lamont gets to call the shots on how many,where and what form any debates he decides to be part of.

Malloy needs debates because he's running second in a 2 man race.That being the case he's will have to take whatever  Lamont offers or there will be no further debates.

---

by: ctkeith @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:48:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

it doesn't matter (1.00 / 1)

it doesn't matter which candidate is winning. Debates are good and voters deserve them and if Lamont participates in the debates and does a good job, he will be all the more prepared for the general election.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 18:50:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If you're LOSING debates are GOOD (4.00 / 1)

because the one or two soundbites that they are reduced to by the MSM may help your losing campaign.

If I were advising Lamont I would offer Malloy one debate,have it before the end of June and then  ignore Malloy and start running against Foley.

---

by: ctkeith @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 19:47:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I would also require that the debate has (4.00 / 2)

a "fact check team" operational during the debate. This is a team of 5-7 people that fact check everything being said in real time. They are permitted to interrupt the debate at any time with information that one of the debaters claimed a fact that is a fiction.

I am so tired of debates where the candidates get to make shit up as they go along.

Debates without a fact check team checking and advising in real time is just a chance for the debaters to create false reality for soundbites.

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

---

by: Met00 @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 20:12:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Could an MLN Fact Check Team live blog the debate? (0.00 / 0)

Fact check teams are an interesting idea.  I also think they could be spun, or nits could be picked to create appearance of one candidate's quality vs. the other.  

However the concept of DINGs to the candidates who are deemed have given inaccurate or misleading answers is an interesting one.  I prefer it to the typical debate posturing that takes place with over-the-top attempts to send messages via body language, tone of voice, interrupting the candidate, "may I call you Joe?", etc..

Could MLN provide a pilot example of a live-blogging fact check team for the first broadcast debate of the season, whichever race it is?  This clearly is NOT the same as integrating into the structure (you can see how confident I am NOT that any aspect of the debate will aactually be strengthened and improved), but it does get out the message about inaccuracies faster than the news stories that will be written about the debate and probably using the inaccuracies as sound bites.

The logistics have challenges, as does the task itself.  i.e., Some answers are stats that are clearly true or false; some are interpretations of a combo of stats and are less easily to rebut or affirm in real time, and some may be assertions that represent conclusions based on a series of stats or facts.

I'd look for a dream team of special background people who understands not just the stats, but the territory in which the status pop up.

To reiterate a previous point I made in another thread, it's not just "have a debate" -- it's making sure that it IS a debate, and not a kangaroo courtish exercise.

---

by: greenpeas @ Thu Jun 03, 2010 at 08:16:57 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sufi, there are certainly going to be debates (3.80 / 5)

Ned Lamont has never said he was opposed to debating Dan Malloy.  But he's certainly not obligated to an excessive schedule of 17 debates per Malloy's grandstanding press release (before he even asked Lamont personally).  

It is what it is...a simple attempt at some free headlines for a candidate who's trailing by double digits even after getting the party endorsement at the convention.

This is a non-issue.  Let's talk about how awful Foley is, please.

Connecticut Bob

---

by: Bob Adams @ Wed Jun 02, 2010 at 20:45:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]