Local Voting Info - New Milford, CT

Reposted and in light of an email request from a reader for local New Milford, Connecticut, voting info:

Find out where to vote!
For your local polling place...

Find Your Polling Place | Voting Info For Your State | Know Your Voting Rights | Report Voting Problems

According to the information I found there are no local town issues to be voted on. Just the candidates and the two statewide questions. I phoned the town clerk's office to verify this information to be true:

Warning
November 4, 2008

State Election

The electors and taxpayers of the Town of New Milford are hereby warned to meet at the respective polling places in said town on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, for the following purposes:

I. To cast their votes for Presidential and Vice-Presidential electors, Representative in Congress, State Senator, and State Representative.

II To vote on the following questions for the approval or disapproval of a proposed Constitutional convention and proposed AMENDMENT to the Constitution of Connecticut, a vote of “YES” being a vote for approval, and a vote of “NO” being a vote for disapproval:

1. Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the State?

2. Shall the constitution of the state be amended to permit any person who will have attained the age of eighteen years on or before the day of regular election to vote in the primary for such regular election?

The full text of such proposed questions with explanatory text, printed in accordance with §2-30a of the General Statutes, is available at the Town Clerk’s Office for public distribution.

Notice is hereby given that the location of the polling places is as follows:

Voting District Location of Polling Place
District 1 Northville School, Hipp Road
District 2 Catherine E. Lillis Building, East Street
District 3 Pettibone School, Pickett District Road
District 4 Gaylordsville Fire House
District 5 Schaghticoke School, Hipp Road
District 6 Hill & Plain School, Old Town Park Road
District 7 Sarah Noble School, Sunny Valley Road

Voting machines will be used. The polls will be open at six o’clock in the morning (6:00 a.m. and will remain open until eight o’clock in the evening (8:00 p.m.)

Absentee Ballots for electors and Presidential Ballots will be centrally counted in the Loretta Brickley Room in the basement of the Town Hall at 10 Main Street.

The final tally of the election will be in the E. Paul Martin Room in the the Town Hall at 10 Main Street.

Dated at New Milford, Connecticut, this 17th day of October, 2008.
George C. Buckbee
Town Clerk
New Milford

Please note that if you typically voted at the Lanesville fire department in the past, they have switched that District 7 voting location to Sarah Noble School because of the fact that they dead ended that street.

EVEN IF YOU ARE NOT REGISTERED YET YOU CAN STILL VOTE FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE IN CONNECTICUT! It is the law. Bring your ID to Townhall where they should have special "presidential ballots" for your use. If you are registered to vote in New Milford, read on...

Also, in as far as the two statewide Constitution questions...

On question 1, most of the Democratic leaning Blogs seem to be in agreement that question 1 (having a Constitutional Convention) would be a bad thing and are pushing for a no vote:

The Connecticut Citizen Action Group (CCAG) urges a no vote on the question. As one of the organizations that has lead the fights to open up our political process (Direct Primaries, Campaign Finance and Ethics reforms) we believe a convention would be a waste of taxpayers' money and could be corrupted by the same special interests that our new campaign finance reform laws are designed to protect us from.

Proponents of a convention either do not understand the process or are deliberately trying to mislead the public by saying that the vote on November 4th is about initiative and referendum. If the vote passes it is then up to the legislature to determine the process for selecting delegates to the convention. This will likely be done through a costly special election and primaries. The convention is then convened, which will result in additional costs to the state. The delegates may or may not propose amendments to the constitution, which would be subject to a future popular vote. There is no guarantee that what the proponents of the convention are arguing this vote is about will be included these proposals.

It is plausible that many of the proponents of a convention would mask their real motivation due to the unpopularity of some of their ultimate goals. Connecticut does not want to ban a woman's right to choose or to allow discrimination against same sex couples. Advocates of these and other radical positions realize that they cannot win enough legislative races to accomplish their goals so they are trying to push a convention to create a new avenue for their fight. Their gambit will have significant costs for the state at a time we are facing a huge deficit. I am confident their stealth agenda will ultimately be rejected.

There is a high likelihood that the delegate selection process will be driven by lobbying and other big money interest. It is not surprising that special interests are looking for new ways to exert influence as Connecticut embarks on the first election cycle under our public financing system. The new system has been a smashing success with over 75% of candidates voluntarily participating. It has been praised across the country and will result in a state government more accountable to voters not special interests.

Costly to the taxpayers and could potentially run counter to the spirit and idea of the many recent campaign financing rule changes in Connecticut, and never mind the tendency of radical right wing groups, like the Family Institute of Connecticut (FIC), to push costly campaigns on to the ballot that will never pass in the real world. It is no coincidence that the fringe Heritage front group, FIC, is one of the groups pushing this agenda. They have little in state support or participation from Nutmeggers and the FIC is the quintessential example of an Astroturf group. Their sole purpose is to try and create a false perception of "grassroots support" for generally repulsive legislation that the majority does not support. They use money and vocal twits to agitate the process and create those perceptions.

To put it bluntly, FIC has more money... Yet, I have more readers (both in and out of state...) But the FIC uses out of state soft money and out of state sister group members to finance and create a fake movement and to get media access. And they want to amend the Connecticut Constitution?

I suggest using your middle finger on that "Hell NO!" vote for question 1.

When it comes to question 2, on allowing people that will be old enough to vote in the election to vote in the primaries if they are only 17, it seems like a reasonable way to help ensure our younger generation learns the civic responsibility of voting as soon as possible. If they will be able to vote in the elections, they should be able to help pick the candidate they want to vote for.

Those were my long answers... The short of it is to vote:

• NO on question 1
  
• YES on question 2

Just my suggestions and reasoning. :)

[update] I drove around New Milford to check out a couple of polling stations (District 2 Catherine E. Lillis Building, East Street and District 3 Pettibone School, Pickett District Road) this morning to look at the traffic AND there was a little traffic and no real lineups to get into vote this morning. When I stopped to get coffee at the grocery store I reminded everyone I talked with to vote today. One guy said he had already voted at a polling station that I hadn't driven by (District 7 Sarah Noble School, Sunny Valley Road) and he said that voting took less time than paying for his milk and bread at the grocery store. Another young lady that worked at the store said she was excited to be voting for the first time. Much like in the past elections, getting to the New Milford polling stations early will save you a lot of time. Usually, they start to get really busy in the mid-afternoon.

I'll try and update you with more local voting information through the day during the day. HatCityBlog is doing the same thing for the Danbury area.

And from the Working Families Party, a party that you might want to consider supporting because they are issues oriented in darned good way:

Working Families Party Works to Push Candidates Over the Top
Minor Party Pushes Message of Economic Security Across the State

As Election Day begins, Working Families Party volunteers and
canvassers spread out across the state in a final push to make the
difference for Working Families endorsed candidates. Over the last six
weeks, Working Families has knocked on 50,000 doors in an effort to
make the difference for candidates across the state that have pledged
their support for Working Families' priority issues, like affordable
healthcare, good jobs, and reducing taxes on middle class families.

"With everything happening in the economy it's understandable that
voters are angry and frustrated," said Brian Petronella, President of
UFCW Local 371 and a co-founder of the Working Families party in
Connecticut. "Change is the buzz-word this election. But if you want
to vote for change like you really mean it, vote on the Working
Families line."

Established in 2002, the Working Families Party has seen rapid growth
throughout the state by using the unusual strategy of
cross-endorsement. When a major party candidate is cross-endorsed by
Working Families, the candidate's name appears on the ballot twice:
once on the major party line and again on the Working Families line.
Proponents of the strategy say it allows voters to "send a message" to
support the Working Families positions on economic justice issues.

Working Families is supporting more than 85 candidates across the
state – mostly cross-endorsed candidates also being supported by a
major party.

With the nation experiencing one of the worst economic slumps since
the Great Depression, the idea of sending politicians a message to
stand up for working families has widespread appeal – across the
political spectrum.

"I think the Working Families Party offers voters something unique and
appealing in this election – a chance to vote for a party that
champions economic issues that matter to middle class voters while
still supporting a major party candidate – typically a Democrat – who
can really win the election," said Paul Filson, Director of the
Service Employees International Union in Connecticut.

Working Families top priority for Election Day is helping to Democrat
Jim Himes over the top in his hotly contested race against incumbent
Chris Shays. Working Families organizers are hoping to appeal to
voters who are frustrated and worried about the economy and
disappointed with both major parties.

Working Families is a minor political party formed by a coalition of
community organizations, labor unions and neighborhood activists who
united to fight for a fair economy. The Working Families Party was
formed to inject issues like healthcare, quality education, and
livable wages into the public debate, and to hold politicians
accountable on those issues.

[update] I've been going around from polling site to polling site in New Milford. At about 2:30 there was already over 1200 voters in District 2, District 6 had around 1340 by 5:00, District 7 was over 1600 by about 6:00 and all of the other Districts, though I don't have exact voting numbers for them all, are on pace for record voting numbers. At every site there are poll sitters for Murphy and NONE for Cappiello. I have been going from place to place poll sitting with all of them and the "Vote no on question 1" people that are out, as well.

Things are looking good if the large numbers translate into real change...

Acorn Droppings

Aldon Hynes over at Orient Lodge has been on top of sorting out the issues from the non-issues involved with the GOP's assault on Acorn in Connecticut.

This is problematic in many different aspects. Perhaps most troubling is that it shows a disregard for due process and the American belief that people, and organizations are innocent until proven guilty. Yes, two complaints have been filed. As noted above, there is good reason to question these complaints, and I believe that the SEEC will do an appropriate job in investigating the complaint and taking proper action.

The other concern is that instead of trying to make sure that “Everyone who is eligible has the right to register and vote”, Mr. Healy is calling for an end of a very successful and at least by every indication I’ve seen, properly run, voter registration effort.

Brad Blog has a whole bunch of it too:

So, Where's That ACORN 'Voter Fraud'?!

So far, nobody's been able to offer us a single instance of voter fraud as committed by ACORN, or even by any of the 1.3 million registered by them over the past two years. You sure wouldn't know it if you listened to the crazed rightwingers...

• McCain Was ACORN'S 2006 Keynote Speaker
  Video: Tells crowd they are "what makes America special"
  
  
• Brad at UK's Guardian: 'The Republican Voter Fraud Hoax'
  
  
• 1.3 Million Reasons for the GOP 'Dixie-Chicking' of ACORN
  
  
• See BRAD BLOG's "GOP ACORN 'Voter Fraud' Lie" page for more...

My suggestion when it comes to Acorn?

Grab a beer, read those sources... And then tell the GOP to go fuck themselves and their attempts at short cutting Republican voter caging efforts to its source based on the fact that Americans are registering to vote en masse because they are so pissed at Republicans and they can't wait to vote for candidates like Barack Obama and Jim Himes.

Heck... With the mob tied Cappiello running in CT-05, some Nutmeggers are probably even excited about voting for Chris Murphy.

Chris Healy is DWI if he thinks anyone is going to help him suppress the legitimate rights of people to vote just because he is tired of having to drink away the daily hangover of working for the GOP. Nobody in Connecticut is fat, drunk and stupid enough to take Chris Healy's low road on this issue.

Mickey Mouse tried to register to vote?

Whoopde-fuckingdoo! The GOP can grow up and get back to me when Mickey Mouse actually shows up on election day and tries to vote.

Does anyone discount the probability that Republicans filled out some of the fake cards to try and fabricate an Acorn scandal? And it really is a non-issue from the get go as long as the people paid to process the forwarded registration cards and the poll workers do their jobs.

Cappiello Steals Material from HatCityBLOG

ctblogger had some material stolen from him and misused and abused by Republican candidate David Cappiello:

Then it dawned upon me why the image caught my attention...because I shot the photograph.

Seeing that the budget for this ad was rather low, and most (if not all the images) in this so-called "ad" were a result of a google image search, it's no surprise that the top-notch Cappiello campaign used my photo seeing that it's the first image that comes up in google after a search for the words "Congressman Chris Murphy"

Now... I'll admit that I will yank material from others' Blogs freely. Some of ctblogger's material is found in here. He knows because I link to it. It is the only way we can keep track of our intellectual property and other contributed materials. The same thing he does when he yanks material from here.

Attributing material to the original thinkers on an idea, or research they have done or hard copy material is what makes the Blogging world go round. It is the unwritten law of the Blogging jungle in some cases, in others it is protected under copyrights or - like in ctblogger's material - it may be covered under a Creative Commons license.

I could go into the settled law about all of this, but the reality is that you really have to wonder a about Cappiello's character if this is the type of thing he would do. It's not that different than the kind of person that will pick up your money off of the table in your house and shove it in their pockets.

Here you have Cappiello getting a truckload of money from a recent fund raiser held by his BFF bush:

Ken Curran, Murphy's campaign manager, said the recent visits from Republican leadership shows that Cappiello "cares more about raising money from political allies than he does about the families of the 5th District."

"Cappiello's reliance on raising money from the Bush administration may help fill his bank account but it shows how out of step he is with the damage this administration has done to the people he claims to want to represent," Curran said. "Chris is making this campaign about listening to the people of the 5th District."

And Cappiello can't even afford a photographer of his own or, at least, to buy material legally from some established photogs archives? Show some frigin' common sense lad!

It also makes me wonder if Cappiello may be as computationally illiterate as his warmongering heir to bush wannabe McCain is. Most campaigns have figured out already that not only do they need to attribute the work done in the Blogosphere, but that it is the right thing to do politically.

Genghis, over at Connecticut Local Politics, had some things to say about Cappiello's serious mistakes.

As for Connecticut's GOP, I really have to ask: Is this the best and brightest you have to offer this year? Because we have already seen enough illegal actions from the Republicans that are currently and deservedly getting run out of office. We don't need more GOP idiots like them.

More Illegal Cappiello Donations

Yanked in its entirety from ctblogger at HatCityBLOG:

First it's the illegal bundled campaign donations from James Galante, now it's this.

The State Elections Enforcement Commission adopted a stipulated agreement today to settle a case which originated from a referral by the United States Attorney.

The settlement was reached with two attorneys from the Danbury area: Jack Garamella and Christopher Leonard. Both are partners in the law firm Collins, Hannafin, Garamella, Jaber & Tuozzolo, P.C. Each attorney paid the maximum $2,000 civil penalty under these facts for making a contribution in the name of another. Jack Garamella gave $500 to Chris Leonard and asked him to make a $500 contribution to the 2004 re-election campaign of State Senator David Cappiello, because he did not wish to be identified as giving a contribution to a Republican while he was seeking the Democratic office of Judge of Probate.

Leonard made a prohibited contribution by accepting the money, and then writing a check in his name to the Cappiello campaign. The Commission imposed the maximum civil penalty as it considers this a serious violation. Concealing the true source of a candidate contribution frustrates the purpose of disclosure laws.

UPDATE: Click here to read the stipulated agreement between Garamella, Leonard, and the State Elections Enforcement Commission.

UPDATE 2: Cappiello speaks...and his comment is predictable:

"I was stunned," Cappiello said.

Hmm, this reaction sound familiar...oh yeah, Cappiello's reaction to James Galante's contributions to his campaign. You remember, the trash hauler with ties to the mob who also gave illegal bundled campaign donations to former State Senator Lou DeLuca and Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton.

"He was a philanthropist - at least I thought he was," Cappiello said.

A philanthropist...yeah, got'cha!

Gallante buddy Jeremy Everett sentenced to 15 months

And a fine:

Federal prosecutors say a sales manager for a trash company has been sentenced to 15 months in prison for racketeering conspiracy, the latest sentencing in the investigation into former Danbury trash magnate James Galante's Allied Waste trash hauling company.

Jeremy Everett of Shelton was sentenced in federal court in New Haven and ordered to pay a $4,000 fine.

In February, the 32-year-old pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to violate the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Just a reminder of the ties that bind all of these republicans from a February AP report:

Their pleas before Judge Ellen Bree Burns in U.S. District Court, bring the number of defendants who've admitted guilt to either racketeering or related charges to 13. A total of 29 people, including Danbury trash magnate James Galante, were indicted by a grand jury last June. Galante, whose Automated Waste Disposal is at the center of the investigation, faces 72 criminal counts, including tax fraud, racketeering, threatening and extortion.

In December, alleged Genovese crime family boss Matthew "Matty the Horse" Ianniello, 86, acknowledged in court that he participated in a so-called property rights scheme in which trash haulers carved out routes for each other and agreed not to poach customers.

Companies owned by James Galante of Danbury allegedly paid a quarterly "mob tax" to Ianniello, prosecutors said. In exchange, Ianniello provided mob muscle to stifle competition. Trash haulers who tried to challenge the system allegedly faced physical and economic threats, prosecutors said.

Just remember these Republican names as you see these mob stories: Louie DeLuca, David Cappiello, Mark Boughton and Joe neoCON Lieberman.

Contributions from associates and friends of now-indicted garbage executive James Galante to the 2004 presidential campaign of U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman have sparked the interest of federal investigators.

Lieberman's bid for the White House took in at least $14,000 from Galante, his associates and their relatives in the fall of 2003, according to a Courant review of campaign records.

The contributions to Lieberman, a longtime Democrat who became an independent in 2006, are similar to allegedly bundled contributions to three Republican officeholders that earlier this month led to state charges against Galante, who is also facing a 2006 federal racketeering indictment.

What's more, people familiar with the campaign matters say, the names of Lieberman, the three Republicans and about a dozen other Connecticut and New York politicians have turned up on what the FBI loosely refers to as a "ledger" that agents seized from Galante's office while investigating mob influence in the trash industry.

The so-called ledger, a subject of interest to a legislative committee investigating state Sen. Louis DeLuca, R-Woodbury, summarizes information provided to Galante by his lobbyists on fundraising goals set by a number of candidates, the people familiar with the documents said.

A little on SOME of the donors:

A small number of 2003 donations to Lieberman, who at the time was running for president in the 2004 election, follow the same pattern.

Federal records show that $10,000 in donations for Lieberman's presidential campaign came in on Nov. 25 and 26, 2003, from donors - or their associates or relatives - who made at least one of the 38 PAC contributions mentioned in the affidavit that state investigators filed to justify Galante's Oct. 13 arrest.

Those 2003 donations to Lieberman included:

$2,000 on Nov. 26 from Mary Walkovich of Danbury.

She is the sister of Galante's local lobbyist, Joseph Walkovich.

Joseph Walkovich had written one of 15 checks for $1,000 that the investigative affidavit says were received Oct. 10, 2002, by Cappiello's PAC, the 24th District Republican Committee.

Joseph Walkovich also made donations of $500 and $1,500 to Lieberman on Sept. 30 and Nov. 14, 2003, records show.

$1,000 each on Nov. 25 from Ciro and Kim Viento of Mahopac, N.Y., each of whom gave $1,000 in 2002 to DeLuca's PAC, called 32 GOP.

Ciro Viento has worked for years as the operations manager for Galante's garbage companies, and was sentenced in August to 2½ years in federal prison after a March guilty plea to a racketeering conspiracy charge.

$2,000 each on Nov. 25 from longtime Galante employee Paul DiNardo of Danbury - who gave $1,000 each in 2002 to DeLuca's and Boughton's PACs - and from Mona Russo of Danbury, one of the 15 people who donated $1,000 to Cappiello's PAC on Oct. 10, 2002.

DiNardo was sentenced Sept. 12 to 21 months in federal prison after pleading guilty last December to a racketeering conspiracy charge.

$1,000 each from Nicholas and Linda Maraglino of Danbury on Nov. 25 and 26, respectively.

Nicholas Maraglino was one of the 15 who gave a $1,000 check to Cappiello's PAC on Oct. 10, 2002, as cited in the Galante arrest affidavit. Maraglino, owner of a tire company who has done business with Galante, acknowledged the contributions in an interview with the Courant, but said he gave the money himself and was not reimbursed by Galante or anyone else.

None of the other 2003 donors to Lieberman could be reached for
comment.

Simmons confirms the reason for Cappiello's limp into CT-05

I posted this last week on Cappiello limping into the 5th district:

Hobbled by his connection to the most corrupt group of politicians ever assembled under any political party's history, the GOP's David Cappiello will toss his name into the meat grinder that almost every GOP candidate will have to face in the state of Connecticut because of the meat grinder they have created for the soldiers in Iraq.

Unofficially it began Nov. 7 of last year. Officially the race for the state's 5th District Congressional seat started Wednesday when five-term state Sen. David Cappiello announced - more than 18 months before Election Day - that he's challenging freshman U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy.

"I've accepted that I'm the underdog and that I'm going to have to reach as many voters as I can," Cappiello said in telephone interview during a break from Wednesday's marathon session at the state Capitol. The Danbury senator, a 38-year-old mortgage broker, may be the first Republican to file paperwork for the 5th District contest with the Federal Election Commission, but it's likely he won't be the last.

The state's Republican party took a hit in 2006 when 12-term incumbent Nancy Johnson lost to Murphy and three-term incumbent Rob Simmons lost the 2nd District race to Democrat Joe Courtney.

The GOP... Just call them the hamburger party. No word yet if Joe neocon Lieberman will have any beefs with his fellow Republican David Cappiello, and if he will cross the aisle and support Murphy in the first truly bipartisan move of his recent career.

Yesterday, Connecticut Local Politics points to the fact that even Rob Simmons recognizes that his is the hamburger party and why:

From the LA Times:

Three-term Rep. Rob Simmons of Connecticut, who lost his seat last year by 83 votes, said he turned down an appeal from the GOP to run again in 2008, partly because of the dismal political climate. In a district dominated by Democrats, he said, it has become impossible for even a moderate Republican like himself to win — especially since he voted to authorize the war in Iraq.

The real humour here is that Simmons thinks he is a moderate... Sure he is, and so is his fellow Republicon and RADICAL AMERICAN CENTRIST Joe neocon Lieberman! I like to think of Simmons as a flame broiled member of the hamburger party.

In January I wrote about this mythical "Radical American Centrism" claimed by pure far right wingnuts:

Radical American Centrism: THE BIG LIEberman

The center is such a hard thing to nail down for Joe, at least, as long as it keeps moving EVEN FURTHER to the left of Joe than it was before.

According to C&L:

Military Times: (h/t Hugh)

Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?
Approve 35%
Disapprove 42%
No opinion 10%
Decline to answer 12%

A few more stats from Gabe at CLP:

TPM Election Central's Eric Kleefeld neatly rips this absurd argument to shreds (click through to read the whole thing and see the video of McCain making the claim):

First, let's take a look at Connecticut's exit polls. They show that sending more troops had the support of — get this — 15% of voters! Meanwhile, 63% of voters said some or even all troops should be withdrawn, in complete opposition to Lieberman's real position.

Second, given the total number of people who cast their vote for Lieberman, it's nothing short of absurd to say that it's in any way indicative of anything national. According to the final results, a total of 563,725 people voted for Lieberman — in other words, just over half a million in a nation of 300 million people.

Finally, Lieberman won because he was able to misrepresent his views on Iraq, not because voters agreed with his actual views on the subject. Back in July, Lieberman actually said he thought we'd be able to draw down "significant" numbers of troops by now. What's more, Lieberman worked hard to blur the line between himself and Ned Lamont on the Iraq issue. In one ad, for instance, he spoke of wanting to "bring our troops home from Iraq."

PING... Just using "echo location" to point out how much further to the left the people of Connecticut are compared to Joe "Right-Wingnut" Lieberman.

The same RADICAL label should, deservedly, be applied to any of Connecticut's Republican members of the hamburger party.

GOP's David Cappiello Limps Into 5th District Race

Hobbled by his connection to the most corrupt group of politicians ever assembled under any political party's history, the GOP's David Cappiello will toss his name into the meat grinder that almost every GOP candidate will have to face in the state of Connecticut because of the meat grinder they have created for the soldiers in Iraq.

Unofficially it began Nov. 7 of last year. Officially the race for the state's 5th District Congressional seat started Wednesday when five-term state Sen. David Cappiello announced - more than 18 months before Election Day - that he's challenging freshman U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy.

"I've accepted that I'm the underdog and that I'm going to have to reach as many voters as I can," Cappiello said in telephone interview during a break from Wednesday's marathon session at the state Capitol. The Danbury senator, a 38-year-old mortgage broker, may be the first Republican to file paperwork for the 5th District contest with the Federal Election Commission, but it's likely he won't be the last.

The state's Republican party took a hit in 2006 when 12-term incumbent Nancy Johnson lost to Murphy and three-term incumbent Rob Simmons lost the 2nd District race to Democrat Joe Courtney.

The GOP... Just call them the hamburger party. No word yet if Joe neocon Lieberman will have any beefs with his fellow Republican David Cappiello, and if he will cross the aisle and support Murphy in the first truly bipartisan move of his recent career.