[JayCT]

Originally Posted by East of the River

To me there used to be R's that were about not just cutting taxes but fiscal responsibility. Eliminating debt making government efficient (smaller) and here in the NE they largely ignored social political issues or could go either way. Those seem to be gone. Now it seems to be cutting taxes and allowing debt to increase while increasingly being pulled right on social issues. I can see the conflict if your from the old school. Personally while I have never registered R (independent but have reg D before for Primaries) I aligned more with the NE R's then the D's until some time around when W came into power.

Exactly. Why has the Republican Party become this body that promotes nothing but cutting taxes for big corporations and the rich? Where is the balance between what is needed in this day and age against fiscal responsibility?

The Connecticut Republican Party has almost universally rejected tolling as a transportation funding source. Why, when it would tap out of state drivers that currently use our highways and help relieve the burden of transportation funding on our residents? They are proposing a transportation funding plan of $70 billion over the next 30 years. That is basically the same as we have today but they propose to borrow the money. How is putting our state further in debt a fiscally responsible solution?

I am not ready to give up on the party just yet. I will continue to question their policies and practices as a moderate Republican in hopes that they will come to their senses. It will be interesting to see what happens in the upcoming election. If Stefanowski does not win, and by a decent margin, they really need to seriously question their future. Jay

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

CT is like a zoo - bunch of DINOs and RINOs.

Yea no kidding, only a matter of time before they start flinging poo at us.

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Exactly. Why has the Republican Party become this body that promotes nothing but cutting taxes for big corporations and the rich? Where is the balance between what is needed in this day and age against fiscal responsibility?

The Connecticut Republican Party has almost universally rejected tolling as a transportation funding source. Why, when it would tap out of state drivers that currently use our highways and help relieve the burden of transportation funding on our residents? They are proposing a transportation funding plan of $70 billion over the next 30 years. That is basically the same as we have today but they propose to borrow the money. How is putting our state further in debt a fiscally responsible solution?

I am not ready to give up on the party just yet. I will continue to question their policies and practices as a moderate Republican in hopes that they will come to their senses. It will be interesting to see what happens in the upcoming election. If Stefanowski does not win, and by a decent margin, they really need to seriously question their future. Jay

I think Stefanowski is one of the weaker candidates they could have nominated. The primary system itself seems to be the problem, because only the most extreme people vote in it. The whole primary was an argument about who most strongly supported President Donald Trump, in a state where he's unpopular. It was idiotic.

I think there's a deeper issue. I don't think people are going to trust government with more revenues until the pension crisis is somehow addressed and put on a real path to solution. Without something positive in this area, people are going to assume that any additional revenue they give the government will just go to the pensions, and they'll get nothing back for it. I think that fear is what undergirds the reflexive opposition to tolls.

[auggie22]

Originally Posted by dazzleman

I think Stefanowski is one of the weaker candidates they could have nominated. The primary system itself seems to be the problem, because only the most extreme people vote in it. The whole primary was an argument about who most strongly supported President Donald Trump, in a state where he's unpopular. It was idiotic.

I think there's a deeper issue. I don't think people are going to trust government with more revenues until the pension crisis is somehow addressed and put on a real path to solution. Without something positive in this area, people are going to assume that any additional revenue they give the government will just go to the pensions, and they'll get nothing back for it. I think that fear is what undergirds the reflexive opposition to tolls.

This, exactly. CT is a new revenue junky. Allowing this government to tap additional revenue sources only delays meaningful reform for just a little bit longer. Prove you can make the hard changes before asking the tax payers to do more.

[Kreliroth]

Originally Posted by dazzleman

I think Stefanowski is one of the weaker candidates they could have nominated. The primary system itself seems to be the problem, because only the most extreme people vote in it. The whole primary was an argument about who most strongly supported President Donald Trump, in a state where he's unpopular. It was idiotic.

I think there's a deeper issue. I don't think people are going to trust government with more revenues until the pension crisis is somehow addressed and put on a real path to solution. Without something positive in this area, people are going to assume that any additional revenue they give the government will just go to the pensions, and they'll get nothing back for it. I think that fear is what undergirds the reflexive opposition to tolls.

It seems like the Republican base in Connecticut is too conservative for it's state, more so than it used to be (though I might be biased from listening to too many talk radio callers here). Could a Charlie Baker or Larry Hogan type have ever made it through a GOP primary here?

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by JayCT

. Why has the Republican Party become this body that promotes nothing but cutting taxes for big corporations and the rich? Where is the balance between what is needed in this day and age against fiscal responsibility?

GOP knows we overspend. Why is it, under Democrats, government spending rises many times the rate of inflation? Why is gov't headcount not down proportionate to the Enormous gains productivity has allowed for which the private sector used? We should see gov't running with half its 1990 ratio of employees per thousand residents simply by using technology. To not do so = union feather-bedding

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

GOP knows we overspend. Why is it, under Democrats, government spending rises many times the rate of inflation? Why is gov't headcount not down proportionate to the Enormous gains productivity has allowed for which the private sector used? We should see gov't running with half its 1990 ratio of employees per thousand residents simply by using technology. To not do so = union feather-bedding

The use of technology does not halve the number of employees needed. It helps reduce the number but remember you need employees to service and maintain that technology. Jay

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Kreliroth

It seems like the Republican base in Connecticut is too conservative for it's state, more so than it used to be (though I might be biased from listening to too many talk radio callers here). Could a Charlie Baker or Larry Hogan type have ever made it through a GOP primary here?

I agree. That is why I am so critical of the party of which I am a member. I continually contact party leaders expressing my dissatisfaction with their positions. You would think the party leadership would have learned from the last two Governor races where their candidate could not even beat a Governor that had one of the lowest approval ratings in the country. Now they go and nominate an extreme right winger like Stefanowski in hopes that the state is ready for a major change. I am not so sure. We are a highly educated state and I think they will not blindly believe that we could eliminate the income tax without some unacceptable consequences.

I also disagree with the contention that our state is full of Democrats. The largest block of voters here are independents. The number of Democrats is not a lot more than the Republicans so whoever wants to win needs to be attractive to both their own party but also seek to attract the vote of those independents. Without those votes, they just can’t win. Jay

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by JayCT

The use of technology does not halve the number of employees needed. It helps reduce the number but remember you need employees to service and maintain that technology. Jay

We need fewer state employees. Malloy said he could do w/o 6,000 when he laid them off, a layoff he stupidly rescinded.

[Chazbme99]

This state is being destroyed by one main problem. That is horrible leadership at the Capital. Democrats have run this state into the ground. Retirees flee here as soon they can afford to. College grads leave for other states. Republican party is a mess in Connecticut. The recent runs by Tom Foley and Linda McMahon are proof of that. We need to start someplace. Only logical thing is win the Governor's race and then keep trying to change over the Legislature. If Lamont wins, we are really in big trouble. He is a Liberal bent on tax and spending. No cuts to programs or failing cities. No mention of sanctuary cities.
Republicans need to start running campaigns the way Democrats do. Say what you need to get elected, then just push whatever you want through. Trump wants to do more change but Washington Republican's hate him and won't give him any victories. Republican President with House and Senate should be getting even more done. Obama and the Progressive Democrats shoved everything they wanted right through without any problems.