Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube

Governor Ned Lamont spoke over the heads of moderate Democrat delegates to a different neo-progressive constituency in his acceptance speech as the Democrat Nominating Convention concluded. He was addressing the 25% of delegates who voted for Josh Elliott, a neo-progressive heartthrob some quasi-socialist Democrats in Connecticut regard as the Zohran Mamdani of Connecticut.

Elliot, who garnered a sufficient number of delegate votes to primary Lamont, has vowed to engage the governor, considered by some a moderate Democrat, in a primary.

The delegate count, Elliott has said, did not adequately portray his delegate support. He believes he would have won the endorsement had the delegate vote been anonymous.

“People were afraid to cast their votes against the governor,” he said. “I’ve been hearing threat after threat from people if they voted against the governor today. I’ve been telling people to channel that frustration into energy over the next three months. We have a 169-town strategy. We will have field organizers at every corner of the state. Our team will talk with every single Democrat, and we will be at every town committee in the state. We are going to win in August, and we are going to win in November.”

In his own post-nomination convention comments, Lamont vigorously struck the usual Democrat piñata.

“We’re challenging one of the most dangerous, extreme, and corrupt presidents in my lifetime,” said the usual mild-mannered moderate. “And I’ve been around for a while. This is why it’s important Democrats stand tall, stay united, and show what we’re made of. We will beat him back and win back Congress this fall and take control of our destiny. It’s just ironic that this guy is in the White House at the same time when we are celebrating our 250th anniversary. A country created by the best sentence ever written ‘all men are created equal.’ But when Donald Trump reads that, he thinks it means all white men are created equal, and it doesn’t mean women. And by the way it doesn’t mean you, you and you. That’s what this election is all about. Regardless of race, color, creed, what you believe or who you love, you belong here in Connecticut.”

Anyone who has been around in politics for a while knows that political targets are mobile. Trump moves through political events like a speeding bullet, and the state’s congressional and gubernatorial elections will not be decided until the political clock reaches V-Day, November 2026. Midterm congressional elections take place halfway between presidential elections. Trump will not be on the ballot in November and, despite Democrat caterwauling to the contrary, it is absolutely certain he will not be on the ballot when the presidential election rolls around two years later.

Americans are used to gaudy campaign rhetoric, but time marches on. The Democrat’s target – a president who will establish a fascist-like, Stalinist-like, end-of-democracy era of autocratic rule – is a disappearing target, a campaign scarecrow. Trump, for instance, has not proposed eliminating the Electoral College, a political devise adopted during the founding to prevent large population centers from determining elections. He had not proposed packing the Supreme Court, a political measure solidly rejected during the presidential administration of Franklin Roosevelt, a strongman president who served four terms in office before he and succeeding presidents were rebuked by the Twenty‑Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified on February 27, 1951, limiting the presidential office to two terms.

Democrats in Connecticut have so far made numerous political and programmatic errors, some short term, others long term.

The most serious long term error lies in the buried assumption that neo-progressivism in the United States, swiftly on its route to full scale socialism -- as in Zohran Mamdani’s benighted New York City -- is the preferred ideology of Connecticut voters. Socialism preeminently is a doctrine that relies heavily on envy – the bad kind -- and a revolutionary expropriation of wealth on behalf of the poor and lower middle class. Even Connecticut’s poor, languishing in long term politically produced poverty, know that all this is a false promise made by a seemingly omnipotent state that has, for more than thirty years in the state’s large cities, created the problems it long has purported to cure.

The second long term error lies in a misreading of the state’s disenfranchised Independents, more properly called unaffiliateds. Some unaffiliateds are born that way, other have defected from one of the two preeminent political parties. Henry David Thoreau considered himself a party of one.” When he resigned from the Friars’ Club, Groucho Marx wrote in his resignation letter, “I don’t want to belong to any club that would accept me as one of its members.”

The mistake is to regard such people as easily persuaded by political rhetoric. Those who decline to participate in the life of established political parties cannot for various reasons be moved as a bloc towards political parties. But it is likely that the unaffiliated breakdown patterns the breakdown of political parties across the state: There are in Connecticut 22% registered Republicans, 36% registered Democrats and 44% Independents/Others. We do not know how many Independents are disgruntled dropouts from the state’s two major political parties, but we can hazard a reasonable guess that within the dropout independent/Other group there are more independents disgruntled with Connecticut’s hegemonic Democrat Party.

The Republican Party in Connecticut must forge a new vocabulary to give it an edge over majority Democrats. And that vocabulary will of necessity at first seem unsettling to status quo ears.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'