feng2

After all, the buy-a-Senate-seaLinks of London C Charmt plan was hatched by someone who made a fortune creating and acting out wacky and improbable story lines for adoring audiences. Could politics be so different? I am a little surprised that Connecticut voters, at least as they are represented in the polls, seem so tone deaf to the larger issues at stake, so prone to falling into place in the story line. Is the Connecticut electorate really ready to send to Washington someone who is obviously soft on defending the existing minimum wage, never mind ever raising it? She admitted last week she doesn't even know what it is. Do Connecticut voters really want someone clearly more interested in lowering taxes for the wealthy than protecting the interests of the middle class? Could McMahon's pledge to spend $50 million even turn Links of London B Charm to be a smart personal investment, if she manages to get elected and preserve lower taxes on income, Links of London and estates? Aren't voters wary when McMahon promises to cut the budget but refuses to get specific, saying that specifics become "political footballs" in an election year? Of course they do. That's the point of elections. It will be interesting to see if Blumenthal, in the Links of London A Charm of his televised debates with McMahon, scheduled to go off Monday, will manage to hack through the hype of the McMahon candidacy. Can he successfully write himself back into the story line? It seems to me that, with election day fast approaching, Blumenthal must either expose McMahon as too far out of the mainstream of Connecticut political thinking, or give up.