CT GOV: Malloy airs new TV ad

I Liked it Better Too (0.00 / 0)

Thought this one had more substance and highlighted his record in Stamford and a couple of the issues he wants to tackle. Honestly I don't think commercials on TV are the best forum to lay out lots of policy, that's better done on the website, in debates, etc. (hence why Ned had a commercial about his website) but are a good place for laying out some record and also some themes or larger ideas.

Proud to have been underpaid while interning for Dan Malloy's exploratory committee last summer. My comments and opinions are my own and not authorized or approved by any campaign.  

---

by: Matt Zagaja @ Sat Jun 26, 2010 at 10:01:28 AM CDT

Smooth ad. (0.00 / 0)

Makes positive points but not too many that it is a race to talk. Concentrates on what he is about and not about what others are or are not about.

A positive ad, overall.

I agree with Matt Z.. You can't really lay out policy in an ad. Unless there is a certain issue guaranteed on the horizon and you have already established who you are. Even then, policy never fits in a soundbite and is better directed to a web site.


Drinking Liberally in New Milford
ePluribus Media

---

by: Connecticut Man1 @ Sat Jun 26, 2010 at 18:02:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Malloy impressive (0.00 / 0)

I strongly supported Ned Lamont in his 2006 bid to excise the Joe Lieberman cancer from Connecticut's Congressional contingent. If the state Republican Party had given even token support to their official candidate, and if the misleading press coverage had not produced 25% of Lieberman's votes from persons (Democrats/unaffiliated?) who exit-polled as believing Lieber-what-ever was the peace candidate (WHAT?!!!), Ned would have been in DC the last 4 years.

My one regret from the 2006 election cycle is that I was influenced by the yoking of the Lamont and DeStefano Democratic primary campaigns to cast my gubernatorial primary vote for DeStefano, albeit half-heartedly. If Malloy had been the Democratic candidate in the general election, he undoubtedly would have given Fairy Godmother Rell a much stronger challenge than DeStefano, even with her incredible fawning treatment from the state's media, and would have certainly added a significant number of votes going into Lamont's column in the process.

I am impressed with how Dan Malloy presents himself, and his record of effectiveness for 14 years in using the mayoral office to meet the needs of the Stamford community. His forthright and quietly confident manner project extremely well on camera, and he expresses succinctly his strong commitment to effective governing and to small-d democratic values. I also was impressed with him in person when I attended a Clinton DTC-sponsored Malloy fund-raising appearance a few weeks ago. I am convinced that Malloy will be the strongest possible Democratic candidate for governor, that if he wins the primary he will win the Connecticut gubernatorial election handily in November against whomever the Repugs put up as their candidate, and that his presence at the top of the Democratic ticket will be a definite boost for all other Democratic candidates for office on the ballot.

---

by: bbaconjr @ Sun Jun 27, 2010 at 10:17:52 AM CDT

I guess... (4.00 / 1)

we all see things differently from our own perspective. As far as giving Rell a tougher run than DeStefano; I have no idea what you base this on, but giving you the benefit of the doubt, the most I would concede is that CBS perhaps would have called it for Rell at 8:02 instead of 8:01. Your "certainty" of Malloy adding a significant number of votes to Lamont's total seems similarly to be without foundation; except perhaps wishful thinking and spin.  

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

---

by: Jake Blount @ Sun Jun 27, 2010 at 17:46:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

God could not have defeated Rell in 2006 (0.00 / 0)

Her popularity ratings were in the high 60's, low 70's back then, and she had a fairly large war chest.  She milked her Grandma persona for everything it was worth, and the mood of the state was not the same as today.  It didn't matter which Dem gov nominee won the primary in 2006, the winner was going to lose to Rell.

Your opinion that Malloy could have defeated Rell in 2006 is shear conjecture and without substance.  He couldn't defeat DeStefano in the 2006 primary, so why do you think he could have defeated Rell in the general election?

---

by: Larkspur @ Sun Jun 27, 2010 at 19:56:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just because he didn't win the primary (0.00 / 0)

Doesn't mean he wouldn't  have won the election.

While I'm not going to argue that he WOULD HAVE won, saying that he wouldn't based only on the fact he didn't win the primary is stupid. Case in point, the last poll conducted showed Dan losing to Lamont, however beating republican candidates that Lamont did not.  

---

by: MBethel @ Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 15:10:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

agreed again (0.00 / 0)

I think DeStefano won the 2006 primary because he was riding on Lamont's coattails and the whole anti-Lieberman sentiment that brought Lamont to prominence. Many voters, including myself, had very strong feelings about the 2006 senatorial primary but were indifferent about the gubernatorial primary. In my conversations with independents, I did get the impression that they would have preferred Malloy over DeStefano.

I don't know if anyone can make the case that Malloy would have beaten Rell--but I definitely think he would have made a much better showing than DeStefano.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 16:25:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There is a case to be made (0.00 / 0)

I've heard a number of politicos -- including one name brand who's on the ballot this year -- say that they endorsed Malloy for his 2010 run "on primary night of 2006." Who knows how it would have been if a significant share of the party hadn't turned their backs on Destefano last time?

The argument that Malloy would have done better is premised on two things: the presumed higher degree of party loyalty among Destefano supporters relative to Malloy supporters, and the presumption that Malloy is more conservative than Destefano. Both are plausible, though I don't think it makes Malloy people look good to make those arguments.  

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

---

by: mattw @ Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 17:29:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agreed! (0.00 / 0)

In 2006, I voted for Destefano in the 2006 primary--mainly because back then, I was swayed by the argument made here on MLN that Dan Malloy was not progressive because of his affiliation with the DLC. I now find this argument to be hollow and meaningless and feel that it would be more productive to compare Malloy's actual positions with those of Lamont's. These two candidates agree on more than they disagree but I believe that Malloy is marginally more progressive and that sometimes small differences between candidates can have significant outcomes. On the issues of progressive taxation and paid sick leave, Malloy is clearly more progressive than Lamont. Even the union that endorsed Lamont said that they believed Lamont was wrong on paid sick leave and that they were mainly endorsing Lamont because they believed he had the money to win. Liberal groups like Love Makes a Family are also endorsing Malloy over Lamont. In my view, Malloy is the progressive choice in this gubernatorial primary.

I live in a New Haven suburb and in 2006, I went door to door canvassing for DeStefano in my town and came across independents and Republicans (and even a couple of registered Democrats) who told me that they would have voted for a Democrat for governor if the Democratic candidate were Malloy and not DeStefano. I'm not sure why they preferred Malloy to DeStefano but I'm guessing that is because they thought that Stamford was a better run city than New Haven. For whatever reason, they felt that Malloy was a more palatable candidate than DeStefano.

Also, in 2006, I think part of the reason Lieberman won is because a good part of the Democratic state party apparatus was secretly working for him up until the day of the general election. When it comes to the general election, I think Malloy will benefit more from the support of the state party apparatus than Lamont will.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 13:57:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Earth to Political Candidates.... (0.00 / 0)

This is 2010.  Nobody trusts TV commercials anymore.  "Candidate as packaged, spun, messaged, branded product?"  Yeaacchhh.

---

by: James D @ Sun Jun 27, 2010 at 20:06:21 PM CDT

Well, we know most people don't watch debates any more (0.00 / 0)

so TV ads is the primary vehicle to reach voters.  Sad but true.

But good ads can get non-political people's attention.  In 2006, Bill Hillsman helped Lamont sow the seed in viewers minds that they don't have to rubber stamp the status quo (Lieberman).  Lamont overcame a 50 pt deficit to win the 2006 Dem primary, so TV ads done right can be affective.

Hillsman was also the TV ad maker for the late Paul Wellstone when he ran for US Senate from Minnesota.  Hillsman did 1 TV ad for Wellstone and Paul only had enough cash to run it once, but the local media were fascinated by how unconventional it was and played it over an over for free.  That TV ad did help Wellstone defeat the Republican incumbant.

---

by: Larkspur @ Mon Jun 28, 2010 at 09:10:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]