Markley: Out-of-Staters Misread Connecticut

Suggestion #1: If the Republican party were less than obstructionist, racist, a-holes, I might listen to what they have to say. Get rid of chairperson Romano. (Maybe Markley?)

Suggestion #2: Stop putting up billionaire business capitalist, nationalist, tea-partiers candidates with one campaign slogan, reduce taxes. Republicans should look at the large independent voter block, who, like me, can not stand the one party (Democrat) rule in CT, but who also are looking for a more practical approach to governing. Drop the social conservative moniker. Drop the "I am a business person, and so I can run a government," because governing is not about profit.

Suggestion #3: Set your sights on actually winning. The Trump Base is too base for Connecticut (and dare I say, the nation). CT Republicans need to draw are sharper distinction between the Republican party of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Trump, and the Republican party of CT. Who knows, maybe CT Republicans can set a new tone for the Republicans nationally?

Ideological whack-jobs are the problem with Connecticut's GOP. Markley should look in the mirror and realize that his extreme positions just don't sell well in the Land of Steady Habits.

In response to Chris LaCivita's comment in this article, I would say that listening is not his strength. The first time we met after the primary, he asked what I thought of the campaign so far; I said it was terrible. When he asked what I thought was wrong, the first thing I mentioned was lack of in-state input. I offered to recommend able people, or at the least to weigh in on potential hires, but my opinion was never solicited.

It seemed clear to me that LaCivita responds to pressure, not to reason. The last thing I wanted was to disrupt the campaign: if I'm not in charge I'm happy to offer my opinion, but I won't throw a tantrum.

Stefanowski's one note campaign wasn't understood in the cities and failed to resonate - they only heard program cuts. His weekends spent in the blue collar suburbs was wasted time - preaching to the choir. In the end a mediocre candidate running a bad campaign, and here we are.

"Do we lose because we're tot conservative? Or do we lose because we're not clear enough about where we stand?" Markley asked.

You lose because you have become the party of Trump, and there still are enough voters in Connecticut who know a con when they see one. A Yankee version of Kansas's Sam Brownback is not appealing, either. Find some uncorrupted candidates who are interested in rational, empirically-proven principles of governance and not demagoguery, and you might succeed.

He lost because nobody believed that he could cut the income tax and still balance a budget. Every single person knows that money has to come from somewhere, and you can't just reduce spending by 65% to cover the loss of revenue the income tax provides. Basically, he lost because the majority of people in CT are not idiots, and most of us still know how to balance a check book.

Both Stefanowski and Foley tried to placate the government workers and teachers saying his cuts would not effect them. The problem is that every government worker and teacher I know(and I know many) would never vote for a Republican regardless. Every govt/ed worker (including dump workers and lunch workers) vote Democratic but most low skilled private sector don't vote. In addition, suburban women can't disassociate Republicans from Trump due to simple minded media so will vote democratic to "send a message". A mess for the Conn private sector and has been since late 80's, by the same token i know a number of supposedly low paid teachers and govt high level clerks(paralegals, etc) who ending up making 90k plus and have great pensions at age 62. Why wouldn't the vote Democratic..many move out of state complaining taxes too high

Connecticut Republicans have completely ignored the potential power of the underticket for the last three gubernatorial elections. Instead of recruiting a diverse, energetic group of known candidates from cities and large towns, they've gone with anonymous white people from, mostly, small suburban towns. Not helpful at all. Democrats, meanwhile, went with a diverse group who added life to the ticket and no doubt helped them win over some wavering votes. Ticket building seems to be a lost art to the GOP, but their leadership is astonishingly unimaginative and resistant to winning strategies. A good lead candidate is always the best thing, of course, but don't sleep on that underticket!

I am an avid Stefanowski supporter. I agree with some of what Joe said. But first, , I do not appreciate Tim Scott ranting weekly on Todd Feinberg about the cockroach consultants. It was my understanding that it was Chris and Pat the campaign manager along with a close circle of friends from CT. Scott makes it sound like hordes of people. I also understand that it was Joe and Tim that ran the show through the primary and that as Tim stated, did not encourage Bob to go into the cities, which many of us disagreed with. I appreciated the campaign msg but it needed to be crafted so it connected to all voters. Bob lost because the RTCs, and it also appeared that Joe was not behind him. Then there was the anti-Trump factor. Lastly, Republicans do not know how to get out the vote. But I am angry at Joe and Tim for bashing Bob when they should have been forceful during the general election to have him change course. If you remained silent because you felt it wasn't your place then shame on both of you. That is when you needed to speak up and out. Not now. Too late. You two contributed to the loss and going to the VCs to convince his people to change course was done behind his back. I didn't see you out campaigning in full force either and those little pep meetings were worthless. Bob is a good man and yes, should have stuck to local people and gone into every city and town. He had a year but were not Joe and Tim advising him then? If not, who was? Lots of lessons learned but he was a good candidate. He would have reduced the income tax to the lowest amount possible. Those of you who did not believe it could be done are the foolish ones. There is so much wasteful spending and lack of priorities. Bob would have cleaned house. That is what everyone was afraid of. Shame on everyone who did not vote for him.

"He was a good candidate, he just did everything wrong." OK. He was a terrible candidate. He had a platform with a single, non-workable issue and went out of his way not to talk to people about it. It was a vanity campaign waged by a bored oligarch. That he managed to win the primary is probably the most telling thing about the current state of the CT Republican party to come out of 2018.

Sorry, we know exactly how much cutting the income tax would lose the state in revenue. But neither Stefanowski nor anyone else that I've seen has been able to account for proposed spending cuts beyond gesturing broadly at "wasteful spending."