If you wondering to yourself "how can a five term mayor of the seventh largest city in Connecticut have virtually zero name recognition", then let me explain.
In terms of the media market (newspaper, TV, radio), Danbury is located in the no man's corner of Connecticut.
Outside of the News-Times, this city rarely receives any attention in the state's major newspapers (i.e., Hartford Courant). Outside of immigration (which is not a statewide issue that Boughton can campaign on in 2010), the Greater Danbury area is for the most part overlooked/ignored. That being said, it will be very hard for a candidate from this area to get the type of free media exposure necessary to make a significant impact in the gubernatorial race (the Q Poll has Ridgefield Rudy Marconi running second to last among the Democratic gubernatorial candidates).
And of course, without name ID, it's VERY hard to raise money.
With two millionaires willing to self-finance themselves, (Tom Foley on the Republican side, Ned Lamont on the Democratic side), unless the state's public finance system is in tact this year, the chances of Boughton raising the amount of money necessary to be taken seriously is next to impossible.
But again, winning the nomination might not be in Boughton's playbook.
With Boughton in the possible position to grab a large number of delegates from Northern Fairfield County where he is well known (i.e., Greater Danbury Area up to possibly Watertown), while Greenwich resident Foley grabbing delegates in lower Fairfield County, the mayor's eventual entry into the governor's race could be less about winning the nomination but rather raising his state profile for future races and/or placing himself in position to make a deal at this year's GOP convention.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
