Skip to main content

Murphy As Kingmaker, Not King



A recent story in the Hartford Courant, “Lamont Gaining Party Support," focuses on U.S. Senator Chris Murphy as a Democrat Party kingmaker.

Murphy is a kingmaker by default. Party bosses disappeared long ago. They were done in by two things: an anti-boss movement that had been picking up steam since very early press attacks on Tammany Hall, and reforms in election processes. The old party boss, usually a party chairman, fell victim to primaries and open elections. But necessary functions in politics do not disappear; they are transformed. In post-reform modern times, the party boss is the party’s most important elected official.


In Connecticut, the nominal head of the party would have been Governor Dannel Malloy, if Malloy had not thrown in the towel. In his absence, Murphy – oddly enough, not Dick Blumenthal, the senior Senator from Connecticut -- has become Connecticut’s nominal kingmaker, and what the kingmaker wants the kingmaker gets, usually. To a certain extent, party organizations still exert influence on potential candidates who may assume open positions. A Democrat candidate for governor, for instance, may run athwart the wishes of the new party boss by engaging in a primary, or by financing his own campaign. Very likely, some attempt will be made by party leaders to sweep the stage clean of secondary actors Susan Bysiewicz and Mayor of Bridgeport Joe Ganim before the Democrat nominating convention in a few weeks.

Bysiewicz is a tough candidate, and Ganim is showing signs he will not go gentle into that good night.

“They’re missing the boat,” Ganim said of the party leaders. “The Democratic Party has always been about people, not party bosses. [The governor’s office has] never been won by millionaires coming in with boatloads of money. We’ve rejected that.” If Ganim fails at the convention to get 15 percent of the delegate vote necessary to primary, he has vowed to petition his way onto the ballot.

Even so, things appear to be looking up for Democrat millionaire Ned Lamont, according to the story.  Murphy, up for re-election in 2018, “is quietly directing the party’s influencers towards Lamont,” rather than Susan Bysiewicz. There is, Courant reporter Neil Vigdor supposes, bad blood between Murphy and Bysiewicz, who “lost to Murphy in the 2012 U.S. Senate primary.”

Murphy spokesperson Laura Maloney puts it this way: “Sen. Murphy has been having conversations about the future of the Connecticut Democrat Party and is very involved in making sure there is a strong Democratic ticket in the fall. But, no, he is not currently making calls or doing outreach on behalf of any specific candidate.”  The general rule among non-transactional journalists, those who do not succumb to political influences, is that one should take with a shovel full of salt anything said in a campaign by political spokespersons whose business it is to plant directions in political narratives without leaving behind the footprints of their bosses. Translation: Murphy would prefer Lamont over Bysiewicz, but things have not yet progressed to a point at which it is necessary for Murphy to flex his kingmaker muscles.

Lamont, like other prominent Democrats – Senator Dick Blumenthal and Representative Rosa DeLauro come to mind – is a multi-millionaire, and money, perhaps especially after campaign reform, is still the mother’s milk of politics; just ask any kingmaker.

In the past, among both Democrats and Republicans, members of the state’s U.S. Delegation have crossed over from the U.S. Congress to run for governor. A list of recent Connecticut governors who also served in the U.S. Congress would include:  John Rowland, Lowell Weicker, Ella Grasso, Thomas Meskill, Abe Ribicoff and John Davis Lodge. A fair non-transactional journalist might want to know why Murphy himself is not running for governor.

The answer to that question very well may be: When the king has been dethroned by his own policies and you are required to mount the same throne, it is far safer to be a kingmaker than a king. Lamont, the prospective Democrat king, has promised to bring change to the governor’s office. There are two kinds of change: quantitative change, MUCH more of the same, and qualitative change, a different direction involving less ruinous and discredited policies. Lamont, thus far, has given no indication which change he hopes to effect. Perhaps after the convention, he will tear off his progressive mask and show his real face; for now, the millionaire businessman is a question mark whose candidacy is supported by a left of center kingmaker.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p