Lamont Campaign Calls on Malloy to Take Down Misleading TV Ad

I'd say pointing out the inacuracy (0.00 / 0)

is enough. The fact that the media and the Blogs are pointing out the real numbers already gets Lamont plenty of good mileage out of it as it is, IMHO.

And I doubt he really expects Malloy to pull the ads anyways. The longer they run the more mileage Lamont can get from it.

Just my two cents.


Drinking Liberally in New Milford
ePluribus Media

---

by: Connecticut Man1 @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 00:14:05 AM UTC

Factually correct but misleading (0.00 / 0)

Malloy never claimed there was a NET increase of jobs during his tenure--only that he created new 5,000 jobs. This is factually correct but misleading since many other jobs left the city during his tenure--both 9/11 and the stock market crash of Oct 2008 happened during his tenure and many companies laid off thousands of workers and there is nothing Malloy or any other mayor could have done to stop it.

I would also add that I think Lamont has also been misleading when it comes to the issue of "creating jobs". He keeps touting himself as an "entrepreneur" who has "created jobs" right here in CT--and the way he talks about it, I had gotten the impression that his company had hundreds or maybe a few thousand employees...but when I asked Lamont how many employees his company had he said "Forty-five".

Forty-five employees!!! That's all? I was so surprised. Yes, it's factually correct that Lamont "created jobs"--but 45 is such a small number. Then he added that his company used to have more employees but then he sold off some business units and now has only 45 employees. My guess is that the rough economy has negatively impacted his small business in the same way it negatively impacted the City of Stamford--in other words, the economy has had a negative global impact, which is why both Malloy and Lamont can claim to have "created jobs" even when their city and company has also lost jobs.

I think both candidates are guilty of puffery on this issue.  

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

---

by: sufi @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 02:36:58 AM UTC

Dear sufi... (0.00 / 0)

 As everyone knows it is not the size that counts... although I have to admit that this is usually said by those with small "businesses"...lol
 

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

---

by: Jake Blount @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 17:15:09 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Bill Clinton... (0.00 / 0)

 call your office. Malloy didn't necessarily lie in his ad. It all depends on your definition of the words "create" or "jobs" or "lie"......

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

---

by: Jake Blount @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 03:07:29 AM UTC

I'm going to start referring to him as the current Mayor of Stamford (0.00 / 0)

Because once a job is created in Stamford, it never disappears!

And why should we limit the fanciful style of measurement to economics? Maybe Dan Malloy will solve the energy crisis with a magical fuel that, once added to your gas tank, will never run out! Solve hunger by turning loaves of bread into, er, more loaves of bread!

Clearly the most serious problem the Connecticut economy faces is insufficient sunny optimism mixed with a willingness to TOTALLY LIE TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE STATE from our current Governor. If Jodi had adopted this accounting mechanism, the jobs picture would be looking pretty rosy right now!

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

---

by: mattw @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 03:13:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What do you think the Gov's press office would say (0.00 / 0)

If I asked for how many jobs were created on their watch without making them account for the jobs that were lost?

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

---

by: mattw @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 03:14:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

continuing the basic theme: entrepreneur vs. politician (4.00 / 1)

Larkspur said, "I'd rate this as a fair attack since it attacks an issue or policy position of Malloy's and is not a personal attack against him."

Could it be that the point the campaign really wants to make is:

"Unfortunately, it's something that career politicians do all too often," said Lamont campaign manager Joe Abbey.

 If so, then the ad is really about moving forward the campaign's main and basic premise.

Dan's campaign argues, "Because I'm experienced, and he's not."

Ned's campaign argues, "Because I'm an outsider/not a career politician, and he is an insider/career politician."  

On we go.

What's interesting is that Dan is trying to wash off eau de seasoned politician and at times seems to be working to convince people he's a lot like Ned was in 2006 (how is that going?), while Ned has decided to wash off eau de 2006 outsider and adopt some of the approaches of the seasoned politician, while claiming not to be one.  

At some point (and of course not in the campaign season), I hope somebody starts comparing HOW election choices are offered and the impact on the mess we are now in nationwide.

The public relations firm and the ability to make things look like what they are not if the target audience lives far enough away from them to adopt this alternate, synthesized reality is part of the problem -- and there is an ethical vacuum that lets people do this without any qualms.

Getting factual traction in these constantly overly mediated campaigns is like trying to jog in an IKEA ball room.  And in this moment in our planet's history, we need factual traction - badly.

---

by: greenpeas @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 10:05:58 AM UTC

"entrepeneur" vs. "politician" (2.00 / 2)

I think this whole "outsider entrepreneur" vs. "career politician" debate is just total crap and diverts attention from a discussion of real issues and how the candidates differ on them. There are plenty of "career politicians" that progressives love or loved--Russell Feingold, Dennis Kucinich, Ted Kennedy, etc. There is nothing intrinsically wrong about being a "career politician" and being an outsider entrepreneur isn't a special qualification for running a state. When Lamont speaks, he mainly talks about jobs, jobs, jobs--and yes, jobs are important but there are only one facet of governing. I think Malloy's knowledge and experience is much more expansive than Lamont's and he is also marginally more progressive. Frankly, I would like to see a future Governor Malloy appoint Lamont to be some kind of "Jobs Czar" so Lamont can focus on what he knows best.

Anyway, as I said before, these candidates are more alike than they are different so either one would be a good choice...but while I think the Lamont-Glassman ticket is a good ticket, I think the Malloy-Wyman ticket is a superior ticket.

Actually, I'm concerned that Lamont might be like another Jon Corzine--Corzine was a really good Senator (and I think Lamont would be a really good Senator) but he had more difficulty in the governor's office, and I think it is because his business background and less political experience did not make him as well suited for the governorship position.


"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 30, 2010 at 11:23:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Connecticut Gubernatorial Whine Index (4.00 / 2)

I must admit I've pretty much abandoned MyLeftNutmeg these days and I'm very disappointed with both Democratic Gubernatorial candidates, and even more so with their campaigns and their supporters.  It appears as if both Lamont and Malloy and their staff and supporters have decided it is more important to be whiny little brats and waste time and energy attacking each other rather than facing issues that really matter to our state.

In light of this, I have written my blog post, The Connecticut Gubernatorial Whine Index.  Read it and waste your time flaming me.  I have more important things to worry about.

---

by: Aldon Hynes @ Tue Jun 29, 2010 at 10:27:48 AM UTC