From the advocacy group ImpactCT:
Last week, we asked whether Connecticut Republicans could keep the governor’s race respectable, hold onto open Senate seats and protect familiar incumbents from a deeply unfavorable national environment.
Turns out the answers are no, no, and no.
Tuesday’s midterm elections were, in case you somehow missed it, a landslide victory for Democrats and a gutting of the Republican party’s congressional power, not to mention its brand. And that’s just on the national level!
There is a lot to unpack everywhere and, of course, the explanations are already arriving, well before we have all the data needed to evaluate them. There’s a lot we don’t know yet, like if there are places where Democrats’ overperformance stands out and what we can learn from them. Or what type of coalition the party forms now. Or if, and how, the Republican party finds its way back.
But for now, we’re sharing our take on what the numbers are starting to tell us as we wait for individual voter data here in CT. There seems to have been a surge of new voters, as evidenced by the lines and buzz at same day voter registration centers. Our early read is that Democrats benefited from an advantage in mobilization and enthusiasm as well as a national environment that made even respected Republican candidates harder to sell. What remains to be seen is just how much of that advantage came from Democratic participation, Republican disengagement, or voters changing their minds.
First, the governor’s race. Ned Lamont won a third term handily, leading Ryan Fazio roughly 59% to 41% in the reported returns. Fazio fell short of the 45% we suggested would represent a respectable showing, with a loss closer to twenty points than ten. That complicates his case for another nomination in 2030 but he truly faced a difficult combination: an established incumbent, limited voter familiarity, and a national Republican brand that complicated his effort to keep the campaign focused on Connecticut. There was no spectacular campaign mistake for Fazio.
Lamont’s reelection was expected, but the surprising breadth of the Republican collapse farther down the ballot deserves closer attention. Despite leaving 34 House districts without candidates and therefore leaving CEP money on the table, Republicans had hoped that familiar legislators and established local relationships would give voters a reason to distinguish them from the national party. In several districts, those advantages proved woefully insufficient. Democrats flipped eight Senate seats, with one facing a recount, which could put them at 33 of the chamber’s 36 seats – a historic margin. Last week, we considered what it would mean for Republicans to fall into single digits and they now face the prospect of a caucus with just three members.
The four races we highlighted last week each help explain the breadth of that defeat. In the 36th District, Jill Oberlander defeated Joe Kelly, winning the seat Fazio vacated. In the 28th, Rob Blanchard won the open seat previously held by Tony Hwang. Republicans could not reproduce either incumbent’s winning coalition without him on the ballot.
In the 18th, Joe de la Cruz defeated Heather Somers, who had won approximately 59% of the vote just two years earlier. Her loss shows how far the Democratic gains extended beyond open Fairfield County seats. An established incumbent with her own local identity could still be overtaken in this political environment.
The 21st District was much closer. Newcomer Carolann Reid defeated Jason Perillo by 730 votes, carrying the Stratford portion of the district while Perillo led in Shelton, Monroe and Seymour. Stratford provided enough of a Democratic margin to overcome his advantages elsewhere.
For disclosure, ImpactCT was engaged in these four state senate races. Our work focused on encouraging less frequent voters to participate and support Democrats. Our tracking shows that voters we targeted cast just over half of all early ballots in the 18th and nearly half in the 36th. These are substantial shares of the early electorate, although they cannot tell us how every person voted.
Our working interpretation is that Democratic mobilization and Republican disengagement both contributed to these statewide results. The national environment also provides a plausible explanation for some local Republican weakness – the Iran war and higher gas prices complicated the party’s promises of stability and affordability.
For now, Tuesday’s blue wave suggests that Connecticut Republicans have a problem that extends well beyond recruiting a stronger statewide candidate – even some of their established local advantages could not withstand this election. Democrats, meanwhile, will return to Hartford with substantially more room to govern. How will Lamont and expanded legislative majorities use it? Will they agree on how aggressively to address housing, health care and other costs? Voters have given them considerable power, and their ability to hold this coalition together will depend on what they do with it.
For Democrats, the practical lesson is to keep investing in voters whose participation cannot be assumed, including in districts that look difficult to win on paper. Tuesday’s victories create an opportunity to build lasting relationships with those voters.
