Trump hatred swamps CT elections

/
Slippery slope

Slippery slope

(From the Daily Caller, which, for those unfamiliar with the publication, is as libertarian-far-right as I am)

The incendiary nature of national politics in the Trump era trickled down to the local level in Fairfield, Conn., where Democrats routed their opponents, garnering a 23 to 17 majority on the Representative Town Meeting (RTM), a hold over term from the days of early New England government that translates to town council.
Alex Plitsas, a Republican RTM candidate for Fairfield’s 7th district, told The Daily Caller News Foundation that Trump’s influence on local elections throughout Connecticut was unmistakable.
“How do you know that’s just not an excuse for poor performance? Well, one, it wasn’t a couple of candidates, it was Republicans across the board. We weren’t just beaten, we were annihilated at the polls,” he said. “Second, in many of these local races, including several in my town, there were Democrats on the ballot who literally didn’t campaign, I mean did nothing. No signs, no advertising, no door-to-door, no engagements with people, nothing, who won or came very close to winning.”
Pam Iacono, a Republican RTM candidate for Fairfield’s 8th district, described the phenomenon as force of nature that herself and her fellow Republicans found themselves powerless to stop.
“We got caught up in what I call the Trump Tsunami,” Iacono told TheDCNF. “We did a good job getting our base out but it wasn’t enough because the people who came out to vote were the angry voters, who were upset with the Trump administration. They wanted to send a message and they did, in droves.”
“I ran candidate recruitment,” she said. “I know in speaking with a lot of the other candidates, there were people that were approached and said I like you but I can’t vote for you because you’re a Republican and I don’t like Donald Trump.”
Plitsas, a combat veteran and former Pentagon official, explained that anti-Trump sentiment seemed to hold sway over the electorate, despite the fact that the highest office on any ballot in the state was that of mayor.
“Without an executive, these elections were truly about local issues. Nobody was running on an anti-Trump or pro-Trump platform,” Plitsas told TheDCNF. Traditionally close races were not even close. Democrats were out in droves. In some cases 25 to 30 percent more Democrats than Republican voters turned out.”
Plitsas illustrated the momentum enjoyed by Democratic candidates, pointing out that many won or came very close to winning, despite a noticeable lack of campaigning relative to their Republican opponents.
“In one case the board of finance chairman in our town, who is very well known, who’s been in office for a number of years, spent a lot of money, was out there going door-to-door speaking to everybody, he only won by 50 votes against a guy who didn’t campaign,” he said. “Quite frankly you could’ve had Mickey Mouse on the ballot; as long as it had a ‘D’ next to it, the guy won.”
The finance board race perfectly encapsulated the Trump phenomenon, Iacono said. Incumbent Republican incumbent Chris Dewitt ran against a virtually unknown Democratic challenger, Chris Skoczen, who almost won despite a total lack of campaigning.
“This is a man that’s a newcomer to politics in Fairfield and we don’t even know what he looks like because he never even showed up at a debate,” Iacono said.

Worrisome.

State budget passed, deficits resume

/
Hartford celebrates

Hartford celebrates

Billions and billions.

Less than three weeks after legislators approved a new state budget, eroding revenues have opened deficits topping $175 million this fiscal year and nearing $150 million in 2018-19.
Eroding income and sales tax receipts in particular also probably have worsened the multi-billion-dollar projected shortfall Connecticut must solve after the next election.
The new deficit estimate for the current fiscal year also falls dangerously close to the threshold that would force Malloy to craft a deficit-mitigation plan.
New state budget isn’t sustainable… 
Even before Monday’s report, one of the chief criticisms of the new budget was that it sets up the winners of the next state election to face a deficit much worse than the one lawmakers just tackled.
Analysts had said state finances, unless adjusted in the present budget, were on pace to run $1.6 billion in deficit this fiscal year and $1.9 billion in the red in 2018-19 — or a biennial shortfall of $3.5 billion.
Much of that gap stemmed from surging retirement benefit costs and sluggish overall revenue growth.
Legislators boasted that they averted the shortfall without increasing income or sales tax rates, relying on smaller tax hikes and significant spending cuts. But they also diverted hundreds of millions of dollars from off-budget, specialized and one-time sources — moves that shift burdens onto the next governor and legislature.
Further complicating matters, the new budget orders tax cuts for businesses, estates, retirees, students and others — about $130 million per year. But it delays most of the relief until after the next election, when analysts say state finances will be in worse shape than they are now.
Even as the new budget was adopted last month, nonpartisan analysts warned that plan wasn’t sustainable.
If continued into the 2019-20 and 2020-21 fiscal years, the plan would amass red ink totaling $1.9 billion and $2.7 billion respectively — gaps of 10 and 13 percent.
In other words, while legislators averted a potential, two-year deficit of $3.5 billion, they set up the winners of the next state election to close a $4.6 billion gap.
… And post-election finances look worse
The new report downgrades expectations for income and sales tax receipts not just in the current budget, but at the start of the next two-year cycle as well.
For example, projections for income tax receipts in the 2020 fiscal year now are about $70 million less than they were three weeks ago, when analysts warned of a major post-election deficit.
Similarly, sales tax projections for the first fiscal year after the election are down about $56 million from where they were three weeks ago.

This may be a good time to remind readers that I represent sellers, as well as buyers.

 

Loss on Lauder Lane

/
lauder.jpg

34 Lauder Lane, purchased off-market in 2011 for $3.8 million, has resold, again off-market, for $3.475. The sellers renovated it after their 2011 purchase, and put it up for sale on the MLS unsuccessfully, at $4.350 in 2016-2017. When that listing expired, two agents from different firms put this deal together.

I really liked the house, and its location, and even its price (approximately), but the market didn't value it the way I did, obviously.

Here's a link to the original listing, with pictures.

Overprice, kill your chances

/
17 winterset.jpg

17 Winterset Road (off Londonderry, off Stanwich), has dropped, again, and is now priced at $2.350 million. First broker had it at $3 million back in May, 2015. The craziness of this sort of thing is that there are plenty of houses in each price range, so there was absolutely no excuse for pricing this 1967 house at that original $3 million: there were, and still are, far better homes available at that price.

The new price is certainly more reasonable, but the owner has now sat tied to a property she doesn't want for 2 1/2 years, while the market declines and her own house appears less and less desirable as it is rejected by successive waves of buyers. 

Dumb.

Overprice your house, go to jail

/
Seller to prisoner in just five seconds

Seller to prisoner in just five seconds

Rene Boucher, the French-Canadian osteopath who assaulted Rand Paul, crushing six ribs, apparently went crazy when his over-priced house wouldn't sell, and he blamed Paul.

The 'socialist' doctor charged with cracking Senator Rand Paul's ribs in a crunching blindside tackle may have harbored a secret grudge against his GOP neighbor for spoiling his lakeside views and 'devaluing' his home, DailyMail.com can reveal. 
Rene Boucher, 59, told Paul in the wake of the mauling that he hadn't been able to sell his $740,000 house for ten years because the congressman's trees were 'in the way'.
It's believed Boucher was referring to woodland at the back of Paul's property that blocks the doctor's views of the picturesque private lake that forms the centerpiece of their upscale gated community.
Property records confirm that Democrat-voting Boucher has indeed put his house on the market five times over the past decade without success
Friends say the trees on Paul's property could explain why the retired anesthesiologist has failed to find a buyer for his five-bedroom, 1.36-acre home which is nonetheless described on property websites as 'overlooking' the desirable water feature
[But] One realtor pal told DailyMail.com the Boucher property probably didn't sell the home simply because it was overpriced
[Realtor Jim Bullington] said Boucher was a regular patron [article notes that Boucher hasn't worked since 2008] at Bowling Green's 440 Main restaurant where he would drink wine and espouse the virtues of ripping up the American healthcare system and replacing it with a publicly-funded service like those in Canada and Great Britain.
Bullington also remembered Boucher voicing frustration that his house had gone unsold.
'Everyone says it's priced too high. He tried to sell it himself because he didn't want to pay any commission to a realtor,' explained Bullington. [emphasis added]

Socialists couldn't be socialists if they accepted reality, so it's no wonder that Boucher didn't want to use the services of a realtor, but how sad to see that a friend of the masses was too selfish to share the wealth with one of us little people.

Don't let this happen to you.

And is this a surprise? 27 Alden Road now down a million-plus from initial ask

/

27 Alden Road dropped yesterday to $2.250 — it started in May at $3.3 million.

27 Alden Road — going down

27 Alden Road — going down

We had some fun with this listing back in August, after its agent had convinced Greenwich Time to publish a tribute to it, and nothing's changed since then (the new broker has, wisely, removed some of the most telling, and damaging photos from the preceding listing, but they're still in the August post's link and, of course, in the house itself). It's basically a land sale, and a lot on this site is probably not worth even its current price. Any honest agent would tell the owner that, but human nature being what it is, who wants to believe it?

Lower standards embarrass us all

/
sad

sad

Car thieves in Greenwich have expanded into Pemberwick, where old junks are now being boosted. Not long ago, decent cars, like Tommy Hilfiger's Land Rovers were the targets, and their theft brought us national attention that reinforced the town's image as a "tony" enclave (far more than Tesei's pitiful PR campaign, I might add) . Not so now:

GREENWICH — Auto thefts in the community have been ramping up, as police recorded eight stolen cars in the first half of November alone — and three overnight Monday.
Police responded to the northwest corner of town, the Pemberwick section, early Monday, to investigate the latest string of thefts. Two vehicles — a 2008 GMC Sierra and a 2012 Honda Pilot — were stolen from Hollow Wood Lane. Not far away on Monica Road, a 2017 Chevrolet Cruze was stolen.
Police Chief James Heavey referred to the latest spate of thefts as a “dramatic increase.”
He said the practice of leaving vehicles unlocked, with keys inside, was endangering the community. Car thieves were looking for opportunities, he said, and easy-to-steal cars provided them.

Please: if you insist on keeping a clunker, lock it up; stories like this make us look like Norwalk or, God forfend, Stamford.

 

I hate when this happens

/
221 Taconic Rd

221 Taconic Rd

221 Taconic Road has been dropped to $3.590 million.

This property's a charming, 1936 house on just about five acres of beautiful land, but it started off back in 2008 at $8.2 million (owner paid $4.150 for it in 2002, and did extensive remodeling), and even though it had dropped to "just" $4.950 million by 2010, when I had a customer interested in it, it was still priced too high for what it is: a small little gem on a great yard, badly in need, in my client's and my opinion, wth a balancing wing on its left. We both thought that $3.5 was the right price, but the heirs of the owner, having watched its imagined value of $8.2 melt away, wouldn't budge.

We came back in 2011, when the price dropped to $4.450 but again, no soap. My client moved on — I hope I managed to sell him something else, but I really don't remember — and now, finally, it's priced where it ought to be.

Or ought to have been six years ago, that is; it's been sitting on the market for a long time now, and that never helps a home's price.