Skip to main content

Connecticut Is Not Rhode Island Yet

In the end, the difference between the senatorial races in Connecticut and Rhode Island proved to be more important than their similarities.

The Rhode Island primary race pitted Republican U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chafee against conservative opponent Cranston Mayor Stephen P. Laffey; the Connecticut race pitted Democrat U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman against progressive candidate Ned Lamont.

The cheering sections for each insurgent were far different. Lamont’s campaign was pushed forward by progressives warming their hands around blog bonfires. Lieberman parted company with the progressive wing of his party – the Democrat Party no longer has a conservative wing – on the issue of the Iraq war when he publicly supported President Bush’s view of the conflict, a posture that aroused the antipathies of progressives at a time when the war was retrogressing.

National Republicans – not conservatives; they are not the same thing – formed an important part of Chaffe’s cheering section. Fearing a loss of support in the senate, Republican bigwigs supported both Chafee and Lieberman. The support cheered both incumbents, though Lieberman would be loathe to admit it, and Chaffee benefited from some nasty ads underwritten by nervous national Republicans.

Primary structures in Connecticut and Rhode Island are profoundly different. A Providence Journal reporter noted the difference the day before the primary votes were tallied: “Rhode Island has a hybrid primary, meaning independents -- technically called unaffiliated voters -- can vote in either the Republican or Democratic primary. Registered Republicans are limited to voting in the GOP primary, and enrolled Democrats can cast ballots only in their party's primary.”

When Tom D’Amore, senator and governor Lowell Weicker’s chief aide, was the chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party, he proposed a similar scheme. Unwilling to commit suicide, Republicans rebuffed him. After losing to Lieberman, Weicker ran for governor as a petitioning candidate and won. When Weicker, who yoked Connecticut with an income tax, declined to run again for governor (wonder why?), D’Amore drifted off to work on other state campaigns, backing one notable winner (Jesse Ventura) and slew of losers. D’Amore is now working for Ned Lamont -- who would not be the nominee of the Democrat Party had D’Amore’s plan to invite unaffiliateds to vote in primaries been adopted by both parties.

Ain’t life full of sweet ironies?

The opening of primary doors to unaffiliateds means that Republicans and Democrats in Rhode Island have lost control their own selection process. That is not the case in Connecticut. The progressives who lashed Lieberman won’t permit their influence to be diluted by the admission of moderates to the primary decision making process, and extra-party forces such as DailyKos and MoveOn.org that provided campaign support to Lamont may prove to be equally troublesome toward other moderates who have strayed from the strictures of The Huey Long contingent of the Democrat Party.

The struggle in Connecticut is not between Democrats and Republicans. Apart from the governorship, Republicans own little political real estate. Connecticut governors with Republican pedigrees – including Weicker and Rowland – have simply given up the ideological struggle to Democrats, which is why the state budget has more than doubled within the space of two governors. The battle is being waged between progressives, supported by extra-party instruments such as DailyKos -- financed by billionaire sugar daddies like George Soros -- and moderate Democrat incumbents and Republicans whose support systems have been eroded by anti-party reforms urged by those who do not believe that political parties should be partisan.

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