CT News Junkie

A Connecticut news site that understands the usual media offerings just…aren’t…enough.

Cafero on Foley Loss: ‘He Was The Wrong Republican’

by | Nov 5, 2014 4:32pm () Comments | Commenting has expired | Share
Posted to: Election 2014

Hugh McQuaid Photo Republican Tom Foley’s loss to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy on Tuesday and his commentary on the race are not sitting well with outgoing House Minority Leader Larry Cafero.

Malloy held on Tuesday through a close rematch with Foley, his 2010 Republican rival. Although the race was expected to be close, Malloy’s victory came as a surprise to many Republicans who saw vulnerability in the Democrat’s consistently low approval rating. Malloy has never reached 50 percent approval in public opinion poll.

In a phone interview Wednesday, Cafero called the loss disappointing for state Republicans, but he said he took offense to a statement by Foley alleging he had done as well as anyone in the party could have done in Connecticut.

“Wrong. He was the wrong Republican,” Cafero said, pointing to gains his caucus made Tuesday in House races. “We represent 119 towns. Does that sound like a blue state to you? On your way out the door, don’t say ‘Republicans can’t win.’ Talk about arrogance.”

Minutes after Malloy held a 20-minute press conference at the state Capitol to thank supporters and talk about his second term, Cafero said the state “would be having a very different conversation” if Senate Minority Leader John McKinney had won his primary race against Foley in August.

Hugh McQuaid Photo “I can think of two people who would have won last night [Danbury Mayor] Mark Boughton and John McKinney. They relate to people, they’ve had experience, they’ve been humbled by the trials of campaigning, they have knocked on doors. Foley’s never had that,” he said.

Before conceding in an email Wednesday, Foley made the rounds on some morning radio shows. He was also quoted in the Courant saying, “We did as well as a Republican can do in Connecticut.”

Cafero disagreed and said it was time for Connecticut Republicans to re-think their habit of nominating successful business people with no political experience. He pointed to Foley’s two unsuccessful campaigns for governor as well as candidates like Linda McMahon and Mark Greenberg, who have both run at least twice for U.S. Senate and House seats.

“The answer is clear that this whole notion that someone successful in business with zero political experience can just grab the brass ring in a race for governor or senate, it doesn’t work that way. We’ve experimented with it as a party five or more times. It does not work,” he said.

During a call to WNPR’s ‘Where We Live’ Wednesday morning, Foley called Malloy’s apparent victory, despite his low approval ratings, an “extraordinary outcome.” The Republican blamed Malloy’s incumbency and his willingness to engage in negative campaigning.

“Incumbency has a lot of power. We’re a blue state. Last time a Republican won in Connecticut, statewide, was Jodi Rell in 2006. At that time, registered Republicans were about 25 percent of registered voters and it’s now down to 20 percent. It’s just very difficult, particularly if you have an opponent that’s willing to go negative and scare off unaffiliated voters and just turn it into a battle of the bases,” he said.

Other Republicans said they believe their party needs a better outreach strategy in the state’s cities, which have twice put Malloy over the top with wide margins of support. Sen. Len Fasano, R-North Haven, said Republican candidates have had a difficult time overcoming the Democratic advantage in the state’s cities.

“It’s very tough to beat the city vote. It’s the city vote that tends to put this governor . . . over the hump. So what does that say? I think it says that we as Republicans, I think you’re going to see . . . a new strategy, an urban strategy,” Fasano said. “I think we’ve got a good message, it’s just that we don’t get it to the cities.”

Second Amendment

Supporters of the Second Amendment, who tried to make the race a referendum on the lawmakers who supported the strict gun control bill after the Sandy Hook shooting, also lost Tuesday.

Members of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League, a gun-rights group that boasts nearly 16,000 members, gathered on the steps of the state Capitol prior to the election and called on supporters to turn out to the polls.

Malloy’s defeat has been a priority for the group since the passage of sweeping gun control restrictions following the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.

Scott Wilson, CCDL’s president, said even though Foley may have lost he thinks Malloy’s loss in Newtown was significant.

“Folks out there were the center of the gun debate and they chose freedom over malarkey,” Wilson said.

Foley won Newtown by 318 votes, according to Associated Press results.

“In spite of the results, we are proud that our members and other gun owners put forth a tremendous effort to protect their constitutional rights. In particular, we are happy about some of the house races and victories for other Second Amendment candidates,” Wilson said in a statement.

Ron Pinciaro, president of Connecticut Voters for Gun Safety, said Malloy lost Newtown in 2010 by 2,000 votes, so he doesn’t believe it’s as significant as the gun rights activists believe.

Pinciaro said his group lost one Senate seat they had been focused on picking up. Republican Art Linares of Westbrook was able to win a second term. Emily Bjornberg, a Democrat from Lyme, who Pinciario’s group was supporting, lost.

Wilson said his group was very involved with Linares’ campaign.

Tags: , , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |


(55) Archived Comments

posted by: GBear423 | November 5, 2014  4:48pm


Nothing but class Larry.

posted by: GuilfordResident | November 5, 2014  5:08pm

A majority of people in CT don’t care about erosion of their civil liberties. A majority of people embraced Malloy. End of story. I look toward more of my civil liberties being eroded along w/ my savings and manufacturing leaving the state.

posted by: Mo boss | November 5, 2014  7:07pm

I don;t believe voters “embraced” Malloy. I agree with Cafero on Foley being the wrong candidate. Foley was vague on what he wanted to do as Governor and gave zero on how he would get any of his ideas to work.

posted by: DrHunterSThompson | November 5, 2014  7:40pm

This is not rocket science. Foley was as awful a candidate as the republicans could put out there, and he still only lost by a whisker both times.  What it really speaks too is how much the public dislikes the Governor.


posted by: NoNonsense2014 | November 5, 2014  7:49pm

As long as Republicans keep endorsing the wrong candidates, they are going to lose. What was that definition of insanity again? Oh, yeah: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

posted by: StateEmployee | November 5, 2014  7:52pm

Well, duh!!!

posted by: shinningstars122 | November 5, 2014  10:13pm


Wow! This is the the brain trust of the Connecticut GOP?

Give that man a stuffed animal.

I guess he does not realize how many millionaires are in Congress these days?

Larry you are clueless and you share in this as much as Foley and the rest of GOP machine and playing the ” what if?” game is the sure sign that your message, or your party’s inaction, did not resonate with voters.

No matter if those voters lived in Hartford or Fairfield, which Foley lost by a very wide margin.

CT may very well become the bell weather state for the middle and working class fighting back the corporate backed status quo, and I hate to say it but the majority of elected Republicans in our state are card carrying members of that exclusive club.

Many are members of ALEC too.

So you are fooling no one sir.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 5, 2014  11:49pm

We can add Ned Lamont to Cafero’s list of rich, failed candidates from the business world who lacked previous on-the-ground political experience, so it’s not just a Republican problem.

Virtually every Democratic elected official,  town committee member, or campaign staffer I know agrees with Cafero on this one—McKinney would have been odds-on favorite in this race.  Thankfully that wasn’t the case.

posted by: art vandelay | November 6, 2014  12:00am

art vandelay

I totally agree w/Cafaro’s assessment.

posted by: Bethy | November 6, 2014  2:29am


Let’s discuss “embracing”...First of all, a Governor who is “not” embraced doesn’t win point blank.  It sounds like we have a group of folks living in denial. Wake up and smell the coffee folks. Not only was Malloy embraced, it’s a victory. Malloy was very much embraced. So “pinch” yourselves, put things aside and let’s move forward together as a state. The head of the Executive Branch remains in his seat. It’s over. The focus should be moving forward on making bi-part decisions. So let’s embrace that!

posted by: GBear423 | November 6, 2014  7:48am


@nononsense- sorta like voting for democrats over and over again and expecting fiscal sanity and respecting the Rights some of us fought to protect?
Art is right about republicans in Connecticut, they are actually “democrat-lite”. The candidates we are seeing presented are all shy of being actual GOP. McKinney, Boughton, and many other established “ctgop” are the types that think government is the solution. That programs will fix things, that gun control is a great idea (BOTH the Senator and the Mayor were linked to gun control) and once their campaigns were over they checked out of the mission of replacing Malloy.  Danbury, mayor Mark, how did they vote??  Ya we see his loyalty is to the guy in the mirror. Couldn’t get his own back yard to replace Malloy, and he would have convinced Connecticut according to Cafero…

The entire GOP has to be on board in these State wide elections, we are so few it requires everyone, especially those who have name recognition to go out to our fairs, parks, festivals, parades, etc and campaign for the Party at least if not the main ticket.
So spare us the criticism mr Cafero, you have been absent from the campaign and only after it falls apart you pontificate to the mic and camera… please. Leave and enjoy your tax payer funded retirement pal.

posted by: Nutmeg87 | November 6, 2014  12:00pm

Malloy won because he played all his cards heavy on the big cities, Bridgeport, Hartford & New Haven…  The polar opposite results in Greenwich, New Canaan & Darien simply can not play the foil. See the AP results…  Most CT outside of those cities are fairly split, indep & moderate and 2nd amendment not too important issue to them…

Guns didnt matter in the end…  NY, CA, & CT are so BLUE because of the overwhelming weight of inner cites & demographics that it really cant be considered a proxy of USA today, hence not caught up in the GOP wave…

Charlie Baker in Mass was a slim victory…  Maybe as CT goes deeper over the edge, it’ll change in 4 years… The unions can rejoice today…  But our Detroit is around the corner… Question is: How long can taxpayers outside the inner cities pay for the incompetence, ineffective and poorly performing state of govt., public education and job prospects with Malloy & Co.

Depressing that rest of country begins to move out of Obama malaise except CT… Hey, maybe the Clintons & Obama will retire in CT? Add to the tax base… Misery loves company…

posted by: GuilfordResident | November 6, 2014  12:20pm

Foley was a fine-enough candidate. People just want their civil liberties eroded in favor of handouts. The income earners want to be oppressed by taxation. There just are not enough people who value civil liberties.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 6, 2014  3:20pm

Nutmeg—Malloy won because he uses government to help those who need it:
—paid sick leave
—best rollout of Obamacare in the country
—increasing the minimum wage
Those are not issues that appeal to the three most wealthy towns in the state (Greenwich, New Canaan, Darien)

BTW, guns did matter.  Malloy improved nine percentage points over 2010 in Newtown

And as for your demographic excuse, look at towns like Westport (54-45), Branford (55-44), Salisbury (65-34),and Norwich (58-41).  None of those towns have large minority populations. 

And as for “our Detroit is just around the corner”, that’s complete nonsense.  Not one of our cities faces an economic crisis, much less is headed into receivership.

You seem to be rooting for Connecticut to fall apart, and when it doesn’t you claim it’s only a matter of time.  At what point will you admit that you’re wrong?

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 6, 2014  3:30pm

Guilford—Foley was a pathetic candidate.  Virtually every time he opened his mouth he stepped in it, and his ads were rated the worst in the country by the premier Republican messaging guru Frank Luntz.  “His ads were sophomoric at a time when Connecticut is one of the most sophisticated and best-educated electorates in America,”

I admit that Malloy was lucky, but luck is defined as preparation meeting opportunity.  Malloy was certainly prepared, and Foley gave him every opportunity.

posted by: GBear423 | November 6, 2014  4:11pm


Yes LJ47, that Obamacare thing, THIS is unfortunately published 2 days after the election.
Wonder how many of the 30,000 CT residents insured just got a year of free healthcare? That so many may likely lose coverage is bad, very bad; but it has been said by many critics that obamacare’s system is wide open to fraud, and the linked story explains how. In the past year nearly 6000 subscribers also lost coverage during this mess, it has not been something to crow about.

posted by: Nutmeg87 | November 6, 2014  4:20pm

All the reasons you state are why businesses are leaving CT…  Especially the important upper-middle class corporate jobs…  Malloy keeps spending $Millions in corp welfare to keep these jobs when they are leaving anyways…  Read up on GE, UBS fiasco and soon to be NBC…  Hell, Malloy offered Bushmaster (the assault rifle company) $Millions to move its executives to CT just before Newtown! (then rescinded, of course…)

Best roll-out of Obamacare… Ha!  Lets see how long that experiment lasts…  Hartford can not employ everyone, bribe companies to come & stay and force businesses to pay-up wages & benefits - ALL WHILE FORCING EMPLOYERS AMONG THE HIGHEST ALL-IN TAXES IN COUNTRY, FORCING RESIDENTS WITH HIGHEST DEBT PER CAPITA IN COUNTRY, AMONG LOWEST JOB GROWTH / HIGHEST UNEMPLOYMENT IN COUNTRY AND PADDING THE STATE DEBT WITH THE MILLIONS SPENT ON ALL THE ENTITLEMENTS…

More I think of it…  Dont think Clintons & Obamas will retire here…

BTW..  demographic excuse lays with the large cities…  the towns you mentioned dont swing enough either way to counter the large city bias in CT…  Look at AP results - total votes coming from the ousized cities dwarfs the towns in this small state…  Some of southern states have same issue, but state large enough to overcome the quanity of votes from large cities (ie., entire state red except a blue spot where cities located).

As the saying goes…  Hope for the best… Plan for the worst…  Its not about right or wrong - its about when you run out of money. BTW, States Can Not print money, and residents can move to avoid the debt… Whos left to pay? Farifield County used to be the home to the most Fortune 500 Companies…  Now Malloy’s Stamford looks like a ghost town of employers (see the photos of all the empty space at UBS grand headquarters!)...

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 6, 2014  5:04pm

GBear—250,000 people signed up for Obamacare in CT, either through Medicaid expansion or the Exchange with private insurance carriers.

Now we learn that 30,000 “could” face a problem because they haven’t verified either their income or citizenship.  That’s 12%, a number higher than I would like but not unreasonable given how complicated the back office system integration has been.

Put another way, 88% met all the requirements and are now benefitting from previously unaffordable health care.

I suspect that when the follow up story is written in December we’ll find that the number of people actually affected is much lower.  It’s a new program, and Medicare and Social Security faced similar problems when they were first rolled out.  Now both of them are solidly managed, and soon Obamacare will be as well.

Overall, I call that a success.  You probably call it socialized medicine.  Either way, it’s not going away so get used to it.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 6, 2014  5:30pm

Nutmeg—did anyone ever tell you that USING ALL CAPS IS LIKE YELLING AT PEOPLE?  Please, tone it down.

Now, take a deep breath and look at this map.  Yes, the bluest bits are Hartford and New Haven, and both produced large majorities for Malloy (about 30,600 total).

But also look at the shoreline towns, most of which went for Malloy to some degree.  And the northwest corner, also Malloy country.  And around UConn, and the suburbs of Hartford.  The only deep red is in the 5th district, and to a lesser extent in the small towns in the 2nd.

Malloy was re-elected because he had broad support across the state, not just the big cities.  And because policies like paid sick days and health insurance benefit working women with kids, wherever they are (the gender gap in this election was huge).

Finally, before you scream about business taxes in CT I suggest you look at the data in the annual Ernst and Young state tax study. 

Table 5 is very instructive.  The average business tax load for all states is 4.7% of private sector gross state product.  New Jersey’s is 5.1%.  Florida is 5.5%.  CT is 3.4%, well below national average. 

From a business tax perspective, we’re a cheap state and more than competitive in New England.  That should make you very happy.

posted by: Nutmeg87 | November 6, 2014  6:46pm

Sorry for caps.  I usually read on my iPhone and double hitting the arrow keeps it locked.

Anyways….  Filing partnership, PC or sole business Owner forces you to Indiv tax rates. CT unlike Ny & NJ does not allow for itemized deductions. It’s much like a flat tax at progressively higher rates. Not an issue for investors or w2 employees but small-mid size business owners that employ pays 5% indiv taxes on grossly higher numbers than in states that mirror Fed tax regime ...  Large Corporations can direct where they pay state taxes because they do business everywhere.  GE I believe barely pays taxes. Those rates you refer to are fir a small minority of business in CT.  Only way Malloy getting employees are by bribing companies with borrowed tax payer debt. Because it’s too expensive to hire and conduct business in CT because of all the things you mentioned that they are required to pay for despite competitive marketplace.

Winning by 6,000 votes or this years 1% margin in the nastiest race in nation is not winning on a broad measure…  Malloy won the big cities so overwhelming (>70%) that Foley must have won everywhere else on average to lose election by 1%.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 6, 2014  7:28pm

Nutmeg—Foley lost by 2%, about 20,000 votes.  Both are more than last time.  As the Q poll guy said, the more people got to know him, the less they liked him.

As to the tax code, I’m not an expert on its intricacies.  You may be right on those specifics, but I’ll trust Ernst & Young on the overall numbers. 

CT looks business-friendly to me on taxes, much better than NJ and NY who are our major competitors when someone moves out of the City.

posted by: Not that Michael Brown | November 7, 2014  7:45am

I remember the days when the right Republican was John Rowland.

posted by: Lincoln | November 7, 2014  9:39am

I don’t care for Cafero, but I agree with him on this one.  Foley was the Wendy Davis of the CT governor’s race.  A bad candidate that made a lot of mistakes along the way.  They may have been in a dead heat up until that debate when Malloy unloaded on Foley and Foley started begging for a truce.  He folded at that point and there was no recovering.  That probably swung a lot of undecided voters to Malloy.  So to some extent, Malloy did get lucky that the republicans fielded such a bad candidate.

posted by: BIA | November 7, 2014  10:48am

In all the comments not one mentioned the real ISSUE !
“The Republicans had four winnable seats, the democrats unknowingly threw then some bones. “Wake up call,  can they hear the ring”
The REPUBLICANS have lost contact with the VOTERS !  Do they know to correct problem? I for one would like to hear there solution.
History has shown us most Republicans ( not all ), when they get to Hartford or Washington, they forget about the voters who elected them.!
The solution is SIMPLE, “Politics 101” they have FAILED and will continue to fail under the present leader.

posted by: Breeze | November 7, 2014  11:34am

Does anyone know what BIA is talking about? She says she knows the REAL issue, but failed to mention it. Something vague about politicians neglecting the voters. If you ask me, republican voters are to blame. They chose Foley over McKinney. Sure, you can be forgiven for thinking that Foley could overcome a 6,000 vote difference, but did you hear him on the campaign trail?

posted by: art vandelay | November 7, 2014  12:18pm

art vandelay

We can “Monday Morning Quarterback” till the cows come home.  Bottom line is Republicans nominated a PATHETIC candidate, ran a PATHETIC campaign and LOST!.

Democrats on the other hand packaged a terrible governor, ran a textbook campaign and WON!.

Republicans have allot of lessons to learn. Problem is they won’t.

posted by: BIA | November 7, 2014  12:39pm

Typical response !
Breeze must be part of the problem,
“Playing the blame game, blaming the (VOTERS), thats not the solution to there problem. (Is it?) The republicans can’t win an election even when the democrats give them the opportunity. (Four Seats)
Take some responsibility for what has happened to the Republican Party in Connecticut.

posted by: BIA | November 7, 2014  12:45pm

Did the Republicans win any of the four seats?
Did they know what seats were winnable??

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 7, 2014  12:51pm

I think in all fairness to the GOP electorate we need to mention that it took McKinney a really long time to qualify for public financing and so he didn’t have the means to get his message out. 

Those who qualify easily actually demonstrate that they’re viable, while those that struggle to raise all those $100 max contributions show their vulnerability.

In this regard Foley was the more effective candidate.

posted by: BIA | November 7, 2014  3:13pm

With all do respect to Mr McKinney, he didn’t win in the Republican primary. How could you expect him to win over Democrats in a general election?
That sounds like a woulda coulda shoulda but not a solution.
Bottom line, if the Republicans are going to win elections, they’re going to need new leadership, and change there image. It’s a fact the present leadership doesn’t know how do do that! Or they would of won those four seats. Do you disagree?
Do any republicans following this column have the answers??

posted by: GBear423 | November 7, 2014  4:36pm


LJ47 opined: “Overall, I call that a success.  You probably call it socialized medicine.  Either way, it’s not going away so get used to it.”

Its not American, its premised on a twisted interpretation by a Supreme Court that was more concerned with image than performing its job. The law originally was a House Bill scrapped by the Senate and re-written into the mess we are forced to deal with. Its called a Tax, even though everyone knows it was not meant as a tax. It was voted on Party lines and signed by the epic failure in the oval office.
So calling that a success works for you, I call it a travesty. A poorly written bill that should have been killed in the Congress. aside from that I have no strong opinion on the matter. I only hope that the now republican Congress may hold and or gain in 2016 and a Republican President is elected so we may dismantle this garbage law.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 7, 2014  5:57pm

BIA—I’m not a Republican, but maybe I can answer your question.

First, John McKinney actually knows something about state government, which Foley most assuredly does not, and could have easily given well-articulated alternative policies to those of Governor Malloy.  He and Larry Cafero have been doing this for years, so the people of CT would have had a clear choice.

Add to this the fact that McKinney has no real negatives that Malloy could have exploited:  he’s pro-choice, helped pass the gun control bill, and is genuinely a nice guy.  Had Malloy gone negative on McKinney it would have backfired big time.

But there’s also a more practical reason why McKinney would have won—he has done so repeatedly in the past and knows what it means to campaign.

McKinney has a political base in the 28th state senate district, and we can look at three of the towns there to get an idea of how much better he would have done than Foley.

First, let’s look at Fairfield, McKinney’s home town.  He drew 14,647 votes there in 2010 while running for state senate, while Foley only got 10,905 this year.  Easton (2324 vs. 1810) and Newtown (7260 vs 5249) had similar differences.  Just those three towns alone constitute a swing of 6267 in McKinney’s favor.

That says nothing about Westport, where McKinney’s family has been deeply involved for over 100 years, or the rest of the 4th Congressional District, where John’s father served as U.S. Representative for many years before Chris Shays.

I know there are a lot of die-hard conservatives on this site, but it truth you’re not in step with the majority of voters in this state.  John McKinney is, but he couldn’t get past the Republican primary. 

In my opinion, Foley learned nothing the first time around, and his reluctance to engage the voters with anything resembling a real policy was an affront to the intelligence of the state. For this alone he deserved to lose. 

McKinney would have won, but you guys blew it.  Better luck next time.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 7, 2014  6:00pm

GBear—250,000 people in CT have health insurance today under Obamacare, cutting the uninsured rate in the state in half.

that’s a success, and if you needed health insurance and couldn’t afford it before, you wouldn’t be calling the law “garbage”.

I know it’s not perfect, but it’s much better than what we had before.  ‘nuff said.

posted by: Politijoe | November 7, 2014  7:48pm


Longjohn47….great commentary in this alternate reality of conservative perspectives. There are two central points in this thread that some have at least acknowledged. Foley was a lousy candidate and at some point, Republicans will have to gain the self-awareness necessary to recognize the role their own pre-concieved mythological notions they have of themselves play in this reoccurring drama.

From Ned Lamont, McMahon, and Foley, who are championed as political leaders merely because they have made millions in business. What conservatives don’t understand is that managing a successful business and beholden to shareholders is not the same as governing a state and being beholden to citizens. Having millions of dollars is not a calling card to the governors mansion. McKinney would have won this election, if the republicans could’ve only recognized that experience and moderation trump money and empty rhetoric.

Finally the chatter regarding Malloy’s roll-out of the ACA can only be described as a model of success that cant be denied. Predicting failure of the Ct exchange and healthcare reform is simply uninformed and incomplete. Simply look at the existing global models and the Commonwealth plan put in place by a Republican governor. It’s simply good fiscal sense.

posted by: art vandelay | November 7, 2014  8:07pm

art vandelay

I’ve had a strong belief for decades that the top echelons of the Republican Party in Connecticut are dyed in the wool DEMOCRATS.  I believe the Democrat Party in this state has so much power that they have been able to infiltrate the key positions of the Republican Party at the Central Committee level.  How else can one explain the total debacle of the party for the last 6 years.

posted by: SocialButterfly | November 7, 2014  9:11pm

@Breeze:  As a die-hard Democrat do you really care that McKinney didn’t get nominated as Republican?.

posted by: SocialButterfly | November 7, 2014  9:21pm

@art vandelay:  When will you stop criticizing the Republicns for losing the election? You predicted that the GOP would lose through the election and personally disliked Tom Foley as a candidate.  What else is new from you? It’s time for you to close this book.

posted by: shinningstars122 | November 7, 2014  10:35pm


Hey all is not lost friends, so do not despair.

Joni Enst will make all of your conservative dreams…I mean nightmares  come true.

Break out the banjos ya’ll!

posted by: Breeze | November 7, 2014  11:23pm

Butterfly - It’s harder for me to justify voting for a moderate Republican in a national House or Senate race because of he/she is going to get swallowed up by the idealogues. But for governor? If there’s a common sense Republican to vote for, why wouldn’t I be in favor of that? So, yes, I care, because as a voter I don’t want fewer options, I want more. You’re putting the cart before the horse. I vote Democratic because the candidates from that party align more closely with my political preferences. I’m in favor of balanced budgets, Medicaid expansion, and universal background checks. If there’s a Republican that can champion that, I’m all ears. I admire conservatism, but not the variety that shuns science and claims Social Security is unconstitutional.

BIA - I still have no idea what in the world you’re talking about. Can you come up with something concrete?

posted by: BIA | November 7, 2014  11:39pm

I want to make it very clear, I didn’t blow it the Republicans blew it!
John McKinney has done a good job for his district, however he couldn’t convince his own party to support him.?? How could he win the rest of the state over?
Who’s going to step up to the plate and say the buck stops here?  The leadership, central committee the delegates. I don’t think so, there just going to be finger pointing same owe, same owe.
Their were three other seats winnable who’‘s to blame for the losses? Don’t tell me, I know, the voters.

posted by: art vandelay | November 8, 2014  12:28am

art vandelay

As a conservative you’re analysis of the Republican debacle last Tuesday was spot on.

posted by: art vandelay | November 8, 2014  12:31am

art vandelay

You’re correct. I’ve said my piece. It’s time to move on.  What’s done is done.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 8, 2014  7:49am

Thanks, Art.  I feel your pain even though we couldn’t disagree more on the issues.

posted by: BIA | November 8, 2014  8:58am

@breeze something concrete you ask.?
The Ct. Republicans lost four winnable seats. Your response states very clearly as to why the voters are aliened with the democrats.
The democrats know who the voters are and have the stones to represent them.
As I said in an earlier post the republicans have lost contact with the majority of the voters and that’s why they lose elections!

posted by: shinningstars122 | November 8, 2014  10:39am


@LJS does present a very sensible argument but leaves out one MAJOR component…which was McKinney’s support and vote for the gun bill.

That was the simple fact why he was stopped in the primary.

Granted Foley was as vanilla as you could get on the issue, but it was still a better position than having supported that measure.

The state GOP made a massive political miscalculation by hedging their bets and believing that every CCDL member and Oath Keeper in the state were going to be the decisive factor in a GOP victory.


I assume McKinney still has his state Senate seat?

If so he can make big strides by working with his Democratic colleagues and his Governor in doing the best for our state.

Just saying ” No” will not promote his political future.

He needs to head toward the middle and show he is a leader for all of CT.

Plus Malloy has one of the rarest opportunities in the nation right now…a possible Democratic success story.

He is too smart to mess that up folks.So is the Legislature and Senate.

If McKinney and moderate Republicans want to be part of that success, you would be a fool not to, they need to accept and participate in it.

Contrary to every other nah sayer on this site CT will balance it budget without a tax increase.

We will see continued job growth, and hopefully rising wages, and falling oil prices will help economic growth in our state.

This should drive up housing sales especially among our growing populations of Latinos and other minorities.

So for all you folks who want to abandon ship,  families who have emigrated from India or South America will gladly buy your house and at a good price too.

These folks are the future and I am sure they will all work hard to make our state better.

posted by: SocialButterfly | November 8, 2014  1:22pm

@shinningstars122: As a die-hard Democrat you never would have voted for McKinney so why give your long-winded rhetoric?  You may have nothing else to do but please give the readers a break from you constant chatter. You voted for more spending and more and higher taxes taxes and Malloy and his General Assembly won’t disappoint you.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 8, 2014  1:56pm

SS122—McKinney will not be in the Senate next term.  He gave up his seat to run for Governor. 

I’ve heard him mentioned as a potential replacement for the GOP state chairman, and he could also run for Congress against Himes in 2016 (which he almost did in 2010, when he could have easily won).  My sense, however, is that he’ll try again for Governor in 2018

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 8, 2014  3:45pm

From a Hartford Courant data analysis:

The heart of the race was the fight for the middle class: Foley saying Connecticut’s recovery stinks, vs. Malloy saying we’re getting better and this super-rich guy is not for you. Foley had to make large inroads in the towns at the middle of the middle. But the Greenwich millionaire couldn’t pull it off. In the 82 towns with a median family income in 2010 of $65,000 to $95,000, Malloy increased his edge over Foley from 50.8 percent of the votes cast for the two men, to 51.6 percent – and boosted his margin of victory in that group by 7,000 votes. Not a resounding rebuke of Foley, but enough for Malloy to win the class battle, and re-election.

posted by: Breeze | November 8, 2014  9:28pm

BIA - you sound a like a broken record, i.e, they’ve lost contact, they’ve lost contact, they’ve lost contact. What on earth are you talking about? Is there a specific issue you’re referencing? Or issues? “There were four winnable seats.” Uh, can you explain how they could have been won?  Does the word “concrete” elude you or do you always speak in generalities. You seem to have firm convictions. Too bad they don’t seem to be founded on anything except an expectation that the good guys are supposed to win. How could General Custer have lost?

LongJohn, Politijoe, Shingingstars - I read CT News Junkie as much for their stories as I do for your posts. Great stuff.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 9, 2014  12:54pm

Thanks, Breeze!  Glad to hear someone likes my posts!

posted by: Politijoe | November 9, 2014  1:28pm


Breeze, Longjohn and SS, really great to have moderate, reasonable perspectives like yours on news junkie. Its a refreshing balance to the incomplete and sophomoric rhetoric that passes for informed opinion in overwhelming numbers typically found here.

I would probably add to the thread the mid-term election was less a win for Republicans and more a testament to the failure of Democrats. Instead of standing behind their successes and wearing their moderation and progressive beliefs as a badge of honor, Democrats distanced themselves from their accomplishments. In the face of unprecedented obstruction, bordering on sabotage they allowed others to frame the narrative. In the end Democratic cowardice failed the party in 2010 and paid the price again in 2014.

In spite of the worst economic crisis in 80 years under a Republican watch, the trillions of dollars and millions of lives squandered on a deceptive war, an enormous taxpayer bailout of Wall Street and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. The nation just doesn’t seem to be paying attention. The manufactured hysteria that encourages frivolous presidential lawsuits, mock healthcare repeals and government shutdowns are designed to distract conservative constituents from the real issues of middle class stagnation, concentration of wealth and inequitable taxation. In contrast, under a democratic administration, the deficits are down, gas prices and unemployment are down. Stock market and corporate profits remain at historic highs, healthcare reform is a success and the economy is moving in the right direction. What should be a golden era of progressive politics is instead an era of discontent. This is the result of Republicans voting against their own interests and Democrats not voting for their interests.

The preconceived mythological notions Republicans have of themselves and the ambiguous self-awareness Democrats have towards their own values exposes a detrimental weakness in the fabric of our democracy.

posted by: SocialButterfly | November 9, 2014  1:32pm

@LongJohn47:  How can you quote a biased Hartford Courant data analysis when they endorsed Malloy to beat Foley?  You say Foley was a pathetic candidate.  You biased liberal press controlled by Barack Obama beat Foley. Be a gentleman and do not band Foley as pathetic in losing in an Obama controlled news media. Of all the
Democratic national mid-term reelection candidates, they all avoided Obama like a plague except for Malloy, who invited both Obama and his wife to Connecticut for their election support. Malloy’s devious campaign that will also will cost state taxpayers greatly to repay the vast amount of bonded money he used to win the election.  You would never mention the Malloy “used pathetic means” to win the election. but for Malloy the end justified the means and you liked it.

posted by: LongJohn47 | November 9, 2014  2:33pm

SocialBF—did you even read the analysis?  are you so alienated that whatever is said is simply labeled good or bad because of the source?

let’s deal with the facts.  the numbers show that Malloy increased his percentage over 2010 in a number of towns across the state. 

Danbury and Newtown alone accounted for 4300 additional votes.  It seem clear that Foley’s gun position (and Visconti’s endorsement) had a major impact here.

Interestingly, Foley did better in both Bridgeport and New Haven than last time, shaving Malloy’s margin by almost 2650 votes.

These are real numbers.  they have nothing to do with “liberal bias” (whatever that is).  if you don’t want to understand what happened, that’s okay with me.  my side wins more elections when your side is so lame.

posted by: Politijoe | November 9, 2014  2:46pm


Socialbutterfly: you stated ” Of all the Democratic national mid-term reelection candidates, they all avoided Obama like a plague except for Malloy, who invited both Obama and his wife to Connecticut for their election support” ....  I agree completely which is one of the strongest reasons those Democratic candidates lost.

Secondly your statement “Foley lost in an Obama controlled news media.”....is simply nonsense. There is a complicitness of the mainstream corporate media, which includes the left leaning mainstream, who spoon-feed apathetic Americans an endless diet of empty calories consisting of regurgitated infotainment. This intellectual malnourishment commoditizes the political process and contaminates our public discourse. And this is no more obvious than Faux News whose second largest shareholder is Saudi prince Al-Waieed Bin Talal who teaches uninformed Americans how to hate America. He has publicly stated more than once that “A strong America is not good for us” 

The point is ridiculous rhetoric like your statement the media is “controlled by Obama” is extremist contradiction that does nothing to further our discourse.

posted by: NoNonsense2014 | November 9, 2014  7:42pm

@SocialButterfly: You have GOT to be kidding. “You biased liberal press controlled by Barack Obama beat Foley. Be a gentleman and do not band Foley as pathetic in losing in an Obama controlled news media.” Foley IS a pathetic candidate, and the media (Obama-controlled or otherwise) has nothing to do with that. All anybody had to do was listen to Foley himself and to watch his disastrous press conference in Sprague. He was clueless and vague and had no command of facts.

Social Networks We Use

Connecticut Network


Our Partners

Sponsored Messages