Jason Paul
One of the things I can’t stand about pundits is that they are so often make predictions that turn out to be just plain wrong but they never have to admit those mistakes. Instead they return to make a new round of predictions without ever owning what they said previously. In the interest of full disclosure, here is how I did against my predictions published in the Independent the day before last week’s Democratic gubernatorial primary contest between Dan Malloy and Ned Lamont.
My article was predicated on the concept of a close race. That did not happen. As has been the case in a number of primaries this year across the country — - most notably in the Alabama gubernatorial primary on the Democratic side — - the race broke late and strongly in one direction, for former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy. This skewed what happened and made many of the numbers less important. Although trend lines suggested Malloy was doing better, it was hard to predict his margin. I wish I had seen it but I didn’t.
1. Turnout.
The total votes cast with one precinct to go was around 183,000. The actual turnout fits with my theory that a vote total of fewer than 200,00 would benefit Malloy — - which it did. Still his victory was bigger than I would have predicted even with that turnout.
2. Stamford
The blowout made Stamford less important than I thought. I said that Malloy needed a 4,000 vote margin in Stamford to win. But turnout was down so much that Malloy won Stamford by only 3,200 votes and still obviously won the state by a comfortable margin. Malloy retained nearly the same percentage in this primary as he did in 2006 at 71 percent.
3. The Big Three Cities
Malloy got exactly what he wanted out of what were supposed to be Lamont’s big cities. Malloy won New Haven by 180 votes, lost Hartford by 160 votes and is down 25 votes in Bridgeport with one precinct to count. In short Malloy tied in his opponent ‘s major bases, so it is not surprising that he won in a landslide.
4. Lieberman Country
Lieberman Country did not prove to be as crucial for Malloy as I thought it could have. Although Malloy took all but one of the towns Lieberman won in the ‘06 primary (Thompson, home to Senate Majority Leader and Lamont supporter Don Williams), he did not strikingly overperform there. In the 37 towns Lieberman took outside of Stamford and Bridgeport, Malloy ran better than his statewide average in 15 towns, ran worse in 18 towns and ran the same in 4 towns. Interestingly West Haven proved to be Malloy’s best town giving him 75 percent of its vote. So Lieberman Country helped Malloy, but he easily won statewide without it.
5. Fairfield County
Malloy’s rout here predicted his rout everywhere. Out of the Fourth Congressional district’s 17 towns, Malloy was victorious in 14 with one outstanding; two were in the Lamont camp. Lamont won his native Greenwich as well as Ridgefield due to the endorsement of former gubernatorial candidate and Ridgefield First Selectman Rudy Marconi. In New Canaan, Malloy won with 62 percent, indicating just how terrible the night was for Lamont.
6. West Hartford and Other Shared Territory
West Hartford proved to be to more Malloy country than shared territory.
But West Hartford was not typical in that Malloy won by six points more there than in the state as a whole. Malloy won almost all of the shared territory, Unlike Lieberman country that did not reveal much of a pattern, shared territory did. Lamont ran better than his statewide average in 37 out of 63 towns in shared territory, worse in 24 and the same in two. Of Lamont’s 12 wins (with one pending ), seven came in shared territory.
7. The 3 Ms
Al three “M” towns spoke to Malloy’s statewide margin. Middletown was exactly at the statewide margin. Manchester was slightly better for Malloy at 60 to 40, and Meriden was a little worse at 55 to 45. In general the 3 Ms were a decent barometer.
8. The Wyman Factor
Malloy won Nancy Wyman’s hometown of Tolland with 68 percent and captured, Mansfield and Windham, places Lamont needed to be successful. She also won her own primary easily, indicating she was a very solid pick for lieutenant governor
9. The Glassman Factor
Although this is probably of very little consolation to Lamont lieutenant governor candidate Mary Glassman, she had the most effect on the gubernatorial race of any of the underticket candidates. While Malloy ran 10 points better in Tolland than he did statewide, Lamont ran an astounding 27 points better in Simsbury than he did statewide. Malloy did around as well in 2006 when Glassman was his running mate, so there is really no other reasonable explanation for Lamont’s performance in Simsbury than Glassman’s presence on his ticket . Additionally, the nearby towns were among Lamont’s best. He won neighboring Avon, East Granby, and Suffield. He also ran much closer in Farmington, Canton, Granby, Hartland, and Barkhamsted than his statewide margin. Glassman had a sizable impact in her region.
10. A Surprising Base Area
In keeping with his blowout, Malloy was able to break 60 percent in 56 towns on the way to winning 156 of the state’s 169 towns.
In short, like a lot of pundits I was right about some things and wrong about others.