Should the Democrats just run "Dan Malloy" in every state from now on?

[homelycooking]

I think that the voters of Connecticut reelected Malloy because of the weakness of his challenger rather than any particular quality exhibited or effort made by Malloy or the Democrats. Malloy is not well-liked in Connecticut. He has a very defensive, calculating and impersonal quality to his leadership that endears him to very few voters. He is, however, well known - part of the Republicans' problem in Connecticut is one of name recognition. Few have ever heard of or know anything about most of this year's GOP nominees. Those that they do know or recognize are tainted by their association with the Republican Party and its apparent callous and reactionary disposition.

Malloy won almost 40,000 fewer votes than he did in 2010, but Foley's total dropped by almost 60,000. Republican towns swung more heavily to Malloy than did the cities - and it wasn't because he was winning crossover votes from suburban conservatives. Thousands of independent and Republican voters stayed home rather than vote for a Republican candidate in Tom Foley who said and did as much as possible to avoid distinguishing himself as having any principles, proposals or ideological predispositions at all. He attempted to make the race a referendum on Malloy's unpopularity and sought to benefit from the votes of people who voted for the non-Malloy, generic GOP candidate. He did not account for the fact that many voters saw no reason to vote for a candidate whose sole campaign theme and message was "change governors".

This election, the fourth consecutive sweep of all statewide and Congressional races by Democrats, is indicative of a serious and persistent problem for the CT GOP. Republican candidates for the statewide and Congressional seats are almost exclusively businessmen and investors without any experience in government. Most reside in Fairfield County (and especially Greenwich). Foley, a Greenwich investor, had served for two years as ambassador to Ireland, but had never held elected office. It was a simple matter to show the voters the pictures of his mansion, airplanes and yacht and leave it to them to draw the conclusion that he doesn't understand the concerns of working families. But this is just about the typical profile of a Connecticut Republican candidate - wealthy, ambitious and completely foreign to the Connecticut political establishment. The Democrats, on the other hand, have the advantage of decades of incumbency and constituent service and the experience of dozens of successful electoral campaigns behind them to bring to bear against their Republican opposition. Their statewide organization is powerful, efficient, professional, and fearsome. They even managed to re-elect a weak State Treasurer in Denise Nappier, who has performed very poorly as the state's financial manager, over a young, dynamic Republican, the first selectman of Trumbull Tim Herbst (for whom I voted).

While Republicans gained several state House seats and at least one in the State Senate, and can be proud of having taken almost three dozen legislative seats in the past three election cycles, they have little to look forward to in 2016. No candidates present themselves for the GOP as obviously strong challengers for any of the state's House seats or to Sen. Blumenthal - the last successful GOP leaders statewide (Rell, Simmons, Shays) are all retired from politics and the few large-town and -city mayors and state Senators would much rather win reelection to their offices than face long odds for higher office against a powerful Democratic incumbent. Tim Herbst's defeat, though very narrow, was a troubling sign for our state's political culture - what more could the GOP have done to knock off the state's most vulnerable Democrat? What can they hope for in 2016 as the Democrats look poised to sweep to victory once again?
 
That's my take on CT politics for now - I'd like to invite FreedomHawk or any other CT Republicans to comment and give their perspective.

[homelycooking]

Barely winning in Connecticut is not exactly an amazing result for an incumbent Democrat, y'know.

You're right, but let's be fair. Barely winning in Connecticut with a swing and a majority in a terrific year for Republicans, and holding all congressional seats, statewide offices and both houses of the General Assembly is a good result, though not an amazing (or an unexpected) one. Challengers to many Democratic incumbents in Connecticut (Dan Debicella and Tim Herbst especially) made them sweat, but the CT GOP's problem has to do with cobbling together a majority in Connecticut, not performing well in the 40s. Republicans can get 46% and 48% of the vote in every election against as many incumbents as they like, but that doesn't solve their problem.