Delegate Primaries, Anyone? A Walk Down Memory Lane with Toby Moffett

For people of a certain age in CT (we’re looking at you, Boomers) Toby Moffett needs no introduction. Toby first came to prominence in the early 1970s as one of the leaders of “Nader’s Raiders,” a moniker given to those who worked alongside well-known Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader. First elected to Congress in 1974 (in what used to be CT’s 6th Congressional District) as a so-called “Watergate Baby,” Toby was a thorn in the side of the Democratic Party’s establishment from the get-go.

Toby was easily reelected 3 times, while becoming a national figure, before deciding to leave Congress in 1982 to challenge then US Senator Lowell P. Weicker Jr. in 1982, a race Toby lost by 6 points.

Undeterred, and still determined, Toby decided to challenge incumbent Democratic Governor Bill O’Neill in 1986. In what those old enough to remember was a Titanic battle, Toby launched a series of delegate primaries in the Spring of 1986, the most well-known of which was in Waterbury, where the police had to be called in to secure the voting machines after the polls closed, and where absentee ballots found very late on Election Night resulted in an O’Neill victory. Undeterred, Toby took his fight to the State Convention, where he failed to gain the necessary 20% of the delegates he needed to qualify for a primary. Toby challenged the outcome in State Court (more on that in the interview transcript below), but to this day Toby believes he won that delegate fight in Waterbury, and also believes he would’ve beaten O’Neill in a September primary.

Last week, we had the great privilege and honor to meet with Toby Moffett. Read below for all this and more.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

The coalition that made Toby Moffett

ImpactCT: You came into politics at a very particular moment. What was the coalition that brought you into office?

Toby Moffett: It was anti-Vietnam War. It was pro-environment. The Clean Air Act had passed four years earlier. It was the Equal Rights Amendment, civil rights, and the labor movement. It was all of those things.

ImpactCT: And that shaped how you thought about governing once you got to Congress?

Toby Moffett: Absolutely. I remember the Chrysler bailout. I was undecided, which was unusual for me. Then I walked into the chamber and saw the gallery packed with UAW members in yellow jackets. I recognized people who had helped carry me into office. I thought: what is wrong with you? These are the people who brought you here. So I voted yes.

Learning Congress, and learning power

ImpactCT: What did you learn early on in Congress?

Toby Moffett: One of the old-timers told me: go to other members’ offices unannounced. Just walk in, say hello, meet the staff. I started doing it, and it was transformative. In office after office, I saw pictures of JFK, RFK, and MLK on the wall. That told me a lot about how I got there and who I got there with.

ImpactCT: You had also promised not to stay forever.

Toby Moffett: I had said during my first race that if anyone found me there after five terms, they should tap me on the shoulder and remind me what I said.

The Senate race and the limits of visibility

ImpactCT: How did you get from Congress to the 1982 Senate race?

Toby Moffett: Chris Dodd and I were on a collision course for the Senate seat in 1980. We each had different wings of the party behind us. But I was a single father, I did not want to run statewide then, and I had just won a subcommittee chairmanship after challenging the establishment in the House. I did not want to walk away from that. So I endorsed Dodd, and we made a deal that he would support me in 1982 against Weicker.

ImpactCT: What did you learn from the Weicker race?

Toby Moffett: I grossly overestimated how well-known I was statewide. Even in a small state, I thought national attention meant everybody knew who I was. That was wrong. We ran a pretty good campaign, but it was not good enough.

ImpactCT: Do you regret that race?

Toby Moffett: I have some regrets about running for Senate instead of governor. But who knows.

Challenging the establishment

ImpactCT: One thing that comes through in your career is that the establishment kept trying to take you out.

Toby Moffett: That is true. They kept taking shots at me. They tried after I walked out on Gerald Ford’s speech asking for more money for Vietnam. They wanted me out for a long time. In 1982, that was another shot, and then 1986 was the big one.

ImpactCT: Was their opposition to you ideological, personal, or about power?

Toby Moffett: It was all of those things. By 1986, I had shown I could get things done and work across the aisle. I think they were afraid of me because they knew the reforms I had promised. They saw those reforms as a threat to their survival, their jobs, and their positions inside the party.

Why he challenged O’Neill in 1986

ImpactCT: Why challenge an incumbent Democratic governor?

Toby Moffett: Because it was a movement. It really was a movement. If you look at the progressive movement in Connecticut, I do not think there has been another gubernatorial campaign that brought together such a broad coalition. It was an ideological fight, but it was also about corruption and reform. And I have no doubt that we would have beaten O’Neill soundly in a September primary.

ImpactCT: So the campaign was bigger than one candidacy?

Toby Moffett: Much bigger. It was not just about me. It was a broad coalition, and it had real energy behind it.

Why wage delegate primaries?

ImpactCT: Why did you decide to fight town by town in delegate contests?

Toby Moffett: Because we knew we were not simply going to show up at the convention and get there. We had a strategy. We looked town by town at where the leadership was weak and where we could beat them. In a lot of places, we did beat O’Neill badly. But we did not have the messaging strategy we needed, and in some places we made real mistakes.

ImpactCT: Including Waterbury.

Toby Moffett: Including Waterbury. We won Waterbury. They basically stole it from us. We had been declared the winners. We were at the Red Bull Inn singing “See You in September” because we thought we had forced a September primary. Then late absentee ballots appeared, and everything changed. Several people were later arrested for voter fraud.

Waterbury, court, and convention

ImpactCT: Do you still think your side mishandled the legal response?

Toby Moffett: Yes. We screwed up. We filed in state court. In retrospect, we should have gone to federal court under a 14th Amendment equal protection argument. We had the legal brains, but not the right political strategy.

ImpactCT: And yet you still went to the convention.

Toby Moffett: We did, because we thought we could switch delegates. The Waterbury scandal had reverberated all over the state. Some people did switch. But it was not enough.

Then versus now

ImpactCT: What is the biggest difference between 1986 and today?

Toby Moffett: The establishment was much more powerful then. No question. It is much weaker now. The party was real. It had powerful people, and it could punish you. Today it is much more fragmented. Public financing changed a lot because candidates do not need the party the same way they once did.

ImpactCT: So does that mean challengers have it easier?

Toby Moffett: No. It just means the obstacle is different. If you are a challenger now, you still have to catch fire. You have to create buzz and show there is real energy behind you. You have to keep lighting matches until there is a flame. If there is anti-incumbent energy out there, and you have a solid message and a vision you can articulate, you should be able to build something. But you have to prove it.

ImpactCT: So the challenge now is less old-school control and more independent political demand?

Toby Moffett: That is right. The establishment is weaker than people think. But the candidate still has to show there is real support.

Moffett’s account is useful not simply as nostalgia, but as a reminder of how much Connecticut politics has changed. In 1986, the obstacle to a challenger was a party organization strong enough to control delegates, fundraising, patronage, and access. Today, that old machine is weaker. But the burden on challengers remains high. The modern test is less about surviving the bosses than about generating enough independent energy to qualify for public financing, force media attention, and prove real demand in the electorate. Toby Moffett’s phrase for that challenge is as simple as it is unforgiving: a challenger still has to “catch fire.”