Five lurking problems that could sink Lamont

We all know this election for governor is about taxes, jobs and the state budget.

We all know the Republican, Bob Stefanowski, promises to hammer state spending and somehow magically cut taxes despite huge shortfalls while the Democrat, Ned Lamont, says he’ll maintain most state commitments and manage the state back to fiscal health with collaboration.

That’s the billboard picture. But close elections — and this one is a toss-up — are won and lost on the ground, with lurking issues and simmering problems ruling the day. Some we can see, such as Gov. Dannel P. Malloy picking up support after his handling of the Newtown tragedy.

Others creep up and we

debate them years later, like Linda McMahon’s overly closed, tightly controlled campaign for U.S. Senate in 2012.

With that in mind, here are five lurking, simmering

concerns that could sink Lamont’s chances of winning the governor’s seat on Nov. 6. Look for the Stefanowski list later this week.

1. Urban voters stay home

Four years ago, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy won New Haven by 17,500 votes over Republican Tom Foley — and that was down by more than 1,000 from Malloy’s 2010 showing. The Rev. Steven Cousin of Bethel AME Church in the Dixwell-Newhallville section supports Lamont but he’s worried about turnout, anticipating a falloff from those Malloy elections. The reason: Lamont vs. Stefanowski just isn’t sending a charge through the city, despite the high stakes. “Not for lack of trying but they’re not simply connecting,” Cousin told me Wednesday. Lamont has made appearances in the cities, though not as many as the ubiquitous Malloy. More to the point, even though he fully supports the cities, he just doesn’t connect quite as well with voters of color, as Cousin said. His pick of Susan Bysiewicz as his running mate may help him in places like eastern Connecticut and the Naugatuck Valley, but it’s not a great salve for the urban enthusiasm gap. The bright side: As the race tightens, the message is sinking in for city voters: Show up on Nov. 6 or face massive cuts in support.

2. Voters perceive a weaker candidate

Lamont has a charming sort of aw shucks persona that played well in a more thoughtful era. But I’ve heard more than one undecided voter say he comes off as the weaker of the two major party candidates. Maybe it’s his smaller physical stature or penchant for sloped-shoulder suits, maybe it’s his deliberative style of answering questions, maybe it’s the fact that, until recently at least, he was slower to attack Stefanowski than vice versa. True power, of course, is not about physical presence and bluster, it’s about the ability to shape events — and Lamont has shown he can do that amply. Perception matters, though.

3. A nagging sense about taxes among independents

We all know taxes in Connecticut are too high. Lamont wants to lower them just as badly as Stefanowski; well, almost as badly. The issue is who can cut spending more through smart management without slashing critical services. And there’s no reason to believe Stefanowski can do that better than Lamont — just as Malloy was able to cut more state worker jobs than former Gov. John G. Rowland, despite Rowland’s rhetoric. Still, all but the most ardent Lamont supporters may enter the voting

stalls and say, “You know, my taxes are too high and this guy over here is talking about nothing else. Maybe I should take a shot.” That’s why some people think independents, some of whom favor petitioning candidate Oz Griebel, might break for Stefanowski instead of Lamont at the last minute. Lamont isn’t helping his cause, swearing off cost-cutting measures such as new labor negotiations — as he said on Tuesday about teachers’ benefits and as CTMirror.org’s Keith Phaneuf documented on Wednesday.

4. Anti-union backlash equating labor with elitism

No Connecticut Democrat can occupy the governor’s mansion (yeah, right, the Executive Residence) without big-time support from labor, and next week alone, look for three national union leaders to show up for Lamont, including Randi Weingarten of the AFT. That rallies the base but also charges up the opposition, as Trumpism — with Stefanowski as a major acolyte — is anti-unionism at its core. The ironic message we’re hearing is that unions are elitist, that their members enjoy a level of prosperity above the norm. That’s not true for the most part, and public surveys show support for unions in Connecticut despite Trumpism, but years of state budget shortfalls are feeding the backlash. And the elitist accusation could hurt Lamont more than other Democrats because, policies aside, he’s fabulously wealthy from inheritance as well as income he and his wife have earned.

5. Less urgency on the ground

Eight years ago, when Malloy ran in 2010, Democrats hadn’t celebrated an inauguration in 18 years. The sense of desperation, the edginess, was palpable. And the campaign organization on the ground matched that sense. Unions sent out an army of volunteers that year, and again in 2014. Does Lamont have a ground game with the same sophistication, the same sense of urgency? It’s an open question. We’ve now had a governor who eliminated thousands of state employee jobs and oversaw years of pay freezes. And Malloy, for all his economic woes, has advanced the state by reducing homeless ranks, modernizing housing policy, reforming criminal justice, instituting gun control, welcoming refugees and broadening health coverage. That could cut into Democrats’ fire in the belly. The AFL-CIO reports that union members are just as robust as ever at the phone banks and in the streets for Lamont. But there are quiet fears in the party that the intangible factor is weaker and that Lamont’s field organization, while strong, could be stronger.