Skip to main content

Visconti, Spoiler?


The charge that by remaining in the gubernatorial race as an independent Joe Visconti may be a spoiler was always a bit fudgy; after all, anyone in a gubernatorial race seeks to spoil the race for his competitors. Republican gubernatorial contender Tom Foley would be quite happy to spoil Governor Dannel Malloy’s gubernatorial bid, and likewise Mr. Malloy is doing his best to spoil Mr. Foley’s reelection chance.

The most recent Quinnipiac poll continues to show Mr. Visconti drawing votes equally from both Mr. Foley and Mr. Malloy. However, Mr. Visconti has now seized 16 percent of the independent vote which ought to worry the usually unflappable Mr. Foley.

Director of the Quinnipiac University poll Douglas Schwartz notes that the independent vote is now up for grabs, and it cannot delight Mr. Foley that his portion of the independent vote has diminished since the earlier Q poll.

Democrats in Connecticut are usually strong closers because they enjoy as the party in power advantages unavailable to Republicans. Their advantages include strong organizational backing from unions, a media that is too often prey to the political hype that gushes from the party in power, expectations that a campaign similar to the successful campaign waged by Democrats in 2010 is bound to succeed in 2014, and a general feeling of malaise, an always exhausting and anxious anticipation that the forces of light are never bright or strong enough to overcome the forces of darkness.

It is a given in Connecticut politics that Republicans must enjoy a sizable edge in voter polling prior to the general election in order to win, since Democratic advantages give the party in power a sizable lead in state-wide races. The Republican lead of a few months ago has now evaporated – two weeks before the general election.

Cheered on by Mr. Malloy, who was able without breaking a sweat to throw off his own incubus, Independent Democratic Challenger Jon Pelto, Mr. Visconti has said he is in the gubernatorial race to the bitter end. The Independent challenger of a few months ago has now become, in the eyes of many, a spoiler. Mr. Visconti cannot win the race, those urging him to quit the race say, and any point made by his fruitless campaign is not worth a new four year stretch by an invigorated progressive Malloy. Optimists within the Republican Party – there are some – hope against hope that Mr. Visconti will graciously withdraw and bring to the Foley campaign the independent votes Republicans need to snatch the laurels from Mr. Malloy’s imperious brow. By doing so, Mr. Visconti will have made himself a very hot commodity in Republican circles.



Comments

Chris Lemos said…
Don, you missed a few parts of the poll. The poll also said that even with only days until the election, more than 50% of Visconti's supporters say they may still change their mind. You also missed the part of the poll that said if Visconti was not in the race, Foley would get twice as many of his votes as Malloy would.
While Visconti's number are so low to begin with that only amounts to a 1% shift in Foley's favor, remember last election Malloy only won by 0.5% so even 1% now could mean all the difference in the world.
Don Pesci said…
CL That sounds about right. Good to have your comment here.
mccommas said…
Yes Visconti is a spoiler. He is on an ego trip. Hi head is too swelled to see that he betrays his own agenda. If he does steal enough votes from Foley, the re-elected governor will be able to pass more gun-snatching laws.

Visconti lost fair and square. He should have supported the winner and ran another day.

I swear he must be getting a bribe to stay in the race. He is the David Bingham of 2014.
peter brush said…
Yes Visconti is a spoiler.
----------
Massachusetts got a second term of Coupe Deval acting as Governor even though he garnered only 48% of the vote. If we get Malloy again, and it turns out that Visconti's candidacy could be understood as the difference in the election, we will have every right to hold Mr. Visconti in low regard, call him vulgar names in the privacy of our own homes, and hope his dog gets fleas. He should have gotten out.

But, aside from his campaign in 2010 (or Jodi Rell's or John Rowland's) has there ever been a less inspiring presentation than Foley's 2014 run? Malloy is very unattractive, but beyond the fact that the operator of the State machinery is dishonest and reckless, can't a Republican explain what is fundamentally problematic with Connecticut's activist government?
mccommas said…
If Mr. Foley's presentation is lacking than that is an element of style over substance.

I think it is far better to have a real person maybe elected than to have a 100 percent phony elected like John G. Rowland.

Popular posts from this blog

Obamagod!

My guess is that Barack Obama is a bit too modest to consider himself a Christ figure , but artist will be artists. And over at “ To Wit ,” a blog run by professional blogger, journalist, radio commentator and ex-Hartford Courant religious writer Colin McEnroe, chocolateers will be chocolateers. Nice to have all this attention paid to Christ so near to Easter.

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."

Did Chris Murphy Engage in Private Diplomacy?

Murphy after Zarif blowup -- Getty Images Connecticut U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, up for reelection this year, had “a secret meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif during the Munich Security Conference” in February 2020, according to a posting written by Mollie Hemingway , the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. Was Murphy commissioned by proper authorities to participate in the meeting, or was he freelancing? If the former, there is no problem. If the latter, Murphy was courting political disaster. “Such a meeting,” Hemingway wrote at the time, “would mean Murphy had done the type of secret coordination with foreign leaders to potentially undermine the U.S. government that he accused Trump officials of doing as they prepared for Trump’s administration. In February 2017, Murphy demanded investigations of National Security Advisor Mike Flynn because he had a phone call with his counterpart-to-be in Russia. “’Any effort to undermine our nation’s foreign policy – e