New Britain Election Results
CT, New Britain November 7th, 2007The Hartford Courant has a full rundown of New Britain election results at this link.
Probably the best news of the night is that Phil Sherwood defeated an incumbent Republican in Ward 4, bumping up the Democratic majority on the Common Council. He earned it, for sure.
Disappointingly but not surprisingly, Jim Wyskiewicz didn’t unseat incumbent Republican Mayor Tim Stewart. There are certainly many factors contributing, but primarily I think it’s due to the fact that it’s notoriously difficult to unseat incumbents in the first place.
The New Britain Herald covers Phil Sherwood’s victory here, and Mayor Stewart’s re-election here.
November 7th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
For the past three municiple elections in the city of New Britain the Democratic party has been as dysfunctional as the Bundy family on Married with Children. With a four to one majority the Dems could have easily defeated Stewart if they were all pulling the wagon in the same direction, incumbancy or not. If the Dems had quit stabbing each other in the back in this last election Mr. Stewart would be starting his flagman job for Tilcon today. I scincerely hope a true democratic leader emerges to lead these children out of their sandbox.
November 8th, 2007 at 8:28 am
You’ve summerized it well, Boru. poor Jim-good guy-#1, N.B. needs a new Town Chair.
How could a 4 to 1 dem town lose the mayoral election 3 times in a row?
November 8th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
I believe it’s misleading to say that New Britain has a 4-to-1 Democratic registration advantage. It may be true that registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by 4-to-1, but I get the feeling (though I’m in no position to check) that the majority of New Britain voters are registered as unaffiliated. The unaffiliated voters in New Britain may lean Democratic, but they may also be the same folks who voted for Stewart because they were inexplicably unoffended by his prior 4 years as Mayor.
Another factor contributing to Stewart’s victory are the Democrats who supported Stewart openly. I know of no such Democrats on the Town Committee, but I did see some “Democrats for Stewart” signs on lawns around town. If the New Britain Dems were united about anything, it was in opposition to Mayor Stewart.
I haven’t got any firsthand knowledge of the campaigns this year, as I was very much an outside observer save for 2 hours of phone-banking on election day. Was there a rift? Probably, but it isn’t a new one.
November 8th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
NB has always had a big number of unaffiliated voters. I stand by my first missive the mayoral election was theirs to lose and lose they did for the third time in a row.
November 9th, 2007 at 5:05 am
It is important to remember that Democrats just won a 13-2 majority on the City Council, that they hold all five state legislative seats, that they were one of only a handful of places were Democrats won for Governor and U.S. Senate last year and that they overwhelmingly (2-1) voted Democratic for U.S. Representative (unseating a Nancy Johnson who even lives in New Britain). With all of that success, it is unreasonable to judge the Democratic Party or its leadership on the outcome of the election for just one office.
This is especially true because candidates, themselves, not the town chair, are mainly responsible for organization that gets them elected. And the candidates are responsible for showing the leadership to unite a winning coalition of supporters. To be frank, on both these counts, this year’s mayoral candidate was sorely lacking. So, to the degree that blame falls, it falls squarely on him.
In the meantime, look at what the Democrats achieved this year. In spite of a tough time at the top of the ticket, the party managed to pull things together so well that Democrats gained a seat on the Council, won all possible seats on the Board of Education, knocked out a Republican incumbent, defeated new people Republicans were trying to bring up and elected new, young Democratic leaders to the Council.
Not bad, Mr. party chair… John McNamara, you earned a new term.
November 9th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Plebicola makes a good point. To conclude that the party is ineffective, one would have to overlook significant evidence to the contrary.