Do Running Mates Make a Difference?

It is May, and the conventions are just three short weeks away.

Still no running mates for our gubernatorial candidates. What gives?

Actually, I had managed to put running mate speculation out of my mind until reminded by the comments in this post. Audrey Blondin has apparently been mentioned as a possible LG choice for John DeStefano, although I'm sure there are others. As for Malloy, Enfield Mayor Patrick Tallarita has been mentioned, as have a bunch of others. Nobody seems to want to pick Kevin Sullivan, although I suspect the DeStefano campaign may have tried to lure him on board and he declined. I can't blame him. It's not a very rewarding job.

Ray Hackett is probably right that Rell will wait until the last minute to announce her choice. She likes to keep us in suspense.

So what should we expect?

There's always a lot of talk about a "balanced" ticket: in the old days, party bosses like John Bailey always tried to get a ticket with a good ethnic and regional balance. Later, gender balance became more important. Interestingly, the Governor and Lt. Gov. have been one man and one woman since 1990. Regional and ethnic balance seem to matter a lot less today than they did forty years ago (although it would be neat to see someone from Enfield on the ticket).

But does the Lieutenant Governor choice matter? It seems to have helped John Rowland contain Pauline Kezer a little bit in 1994, although it's doubtful Rell helped him much against the Rell-like Eunice Groark and Bill Curry. The choice of Joe Courtney (after a long and embarassingly fruitless search) didn't help Barbara Kennelly in 1998, nor did George Jepsen help Curry in 2002.

At this point, the choice of a running mate seems to be a good way to generate a ton of free publicity, but probably not actual votes. Voters don't make up their minds about the person at the top of the ticket based on the selection of a LG or VP.

Still... it's excellent fun to speculate. Alexander Kanevsky for Lieutenant Governor!