Josh Elliott labored Wednesday to exploit his only televised debate with Gov. Ned Lamont, twice tagging the two-term governor as “dangerously naive,” incapable of meeting a pivotal moment in American politics. Lamont casually dismissed Elliott as a state lawmaker of sound bites and no accomplishments.

Over 45 minutes in a fast-paced and relatively polite debate on WTNH News 8 in New Haven, the governor and his challenger for the Democratic nomination hewed to familiar messages honed over the past year and reinforced in digital and television ads in the weeks before their midsummer primary.

They broke no new ground, made no gaffes and created no moments likely to go viral, all factors that favor an incumbent who generally has enjoyed solid approval ratings, other than one public poll indicating a lack of enthusiasm about a third term. 

Early voting begins Aug. 3 in the first primary challenge to a Connecticut governor in nearly 50 years, a choice between a 72-year-old incumbent who has presided over an unprecedented string of budget surpluses and a 41-year-old challenger who insists it is a product of luck and a strong stock market.

Lamont’s political brand is centered around political and fiscal stability that is a contrast to the Trump years in Washington, D.C., and to Connecticut’s history of relying on fiscal gimmicks, most notably not paying into a pension fund that became a national embarrassment.

“We’re getting our fiscal house in order, and we had some surpluses to allow us to pay down some of the pension debt,” Lamont said. “Now we have the resources we need to make some of the big investments to really make a difference in people’s lives.”

Elliott, a five-term state representative from Hamden, is running hard at Lamont from the left, calling for higher taxes on the wealthy and proposing that Connecticut take steps allowing municipalities to take over the distribution of electricity from Eversource and United Illuminating.

The candidates were questioned by anchorman Dennis House and Mike Cerulli, the station’s political reporter. 

The format — questions to be answered with one-minute answers and 30-second rebuttals — did not allow Elliott to easily make a sustained attack on a governor he has ridiculed in ads as a man of great inherited wealth, a resident of Greenwich and the great-grandson of a J.P. Morgan partner.

“Meet the Lamonts. Here’s Ned’s great grandfather, head of J.P. Morgan, right after the crash that wiped out everyone else,” says a narrator in a new Elliott ad. “Funny how some families always wind up on top. Three generations later, here’s Ned with nearly a billion dollars, running the most unequal state in America. And, shocker, he doesn’t think anything needs to change.”

Elliott broadly sketched the key theme of his campaign: raising taxes on the wealthy. He previously has pointed to Massachusetts and its 4% surtax on incomes above a certain threshold that is adjusted annually for inflation. It currently applies to incomes above $1.1 million.

Connecticut should follow suit, tapping into revenue that could provide property tax relief, among other things, he has said.

“We’re the second-most reliant state on the property tax, which is deeply regressive,” Elliott said Wednesday. “The only way we can fix this is through a fair tax structure, asking the wealthy to pay a commensurate amount, a fair amount.”

Lamont did not need a full minute when Cerulli asked, “At what point would you ever consider raising taxes on the very wealthy?”

“Only when you need it,” Lamont replied.

Lamont said the fiscal stability he has promoted has led to economic growth that can meet Connecticut’s needs better than tax increases.

“Our income tax is one of the highest in the country, not the highest. It would be almost the highest if Josh has his way,” Lamont said. “Our sales tax is about average. Our property tax is heavy. That’s why I’ve increased municipal aid. I’ve increased the education cost sharing formula every year that I have been here, trying to do everything we can.”

Each man described the other as unserious.

Elliott said the governor’s accomplishments are largely a function of him acceding to legislative initiatives. He suggested that Lamont’s campaign has leaned left in response to his challenge, albeit in a weaker fashion.

“When I see that I’m up against somebody who takes my message and does the Temu version of it, I find it deeply frustrating,” Elliott said. “The fact is, I’m glad we’re rowing the same direction, but not quite the same, and not quite the same velocity. We could do so much more here in Connecticut, and the fact is, we have to fight for fairness up and down the board.”

In Elliott’s view, Lamont was forced into creating the $500 million fund that has been used to offset cuts by the Trump administration. He faulted the governor for initially responding to the suspension of SNAP with a $3 million grant for food pantries.

“We had to basically go over his head,” Elliott said. “So the Democrats and Republicans in the legislature came together to create this $500 million fund. And only at the very end did the governor come to the table.”

Lamont said Elliott’s criticism of him was suspect, given that he never saw the legislator involved in negotiations with the governor or his staff on the budget and any number of other issues.

“We took the lead on this. I sat down with the folks in the legislature to get this done. I’d say almost everybody in the legislature has been in my office making their case — except for Josh, somebody who’s never, I think, ever been in my office to make the case for something like this.”

Lamont said the $500 million fund was doable because of his fiscal stewardship, and it is unique.

Elliott’s reply for not being involved: “Oh, after you have enough conversations with the governor, and you know he’s just not going to ask the wealthy to pay their fair share, you just sort of give up.”

In remarks after the debate, both were sharper in their criticism as they expanded on their televised arguments.

“He doesn’t have much of a track record to talk about,” Lamont said. “I could talk about minimum wage. I could talk about economic growth. I could talk about the money we got for education and what we’re doing for health care. So it gave me a lot of material to work with.”

Lamont said he is comfortable defending his record, but Elliott is getting away with glossing over the details of his proposals as challenger — especially the potential takeover of electric utilities and his call for more electric lines to be placed underground.

“I take questions from you every day, and we go back and forth. I’d like to see Josh take questions from you,” Lamont said. “You’re going to bury all the utility wires? How much does that cost? Who’s going to pay for it? You want 169 towns to buy your utilities. How much is that going to cost? Who’s going to pay for it? Get him to answer the questions like I do with you every day.”

Elliott said Lamont, who was elected in 2018 at the midpoint of Trump’s first term, was too timid to confront a president who has upended Democratic norms. Lamont may have been the right candidate once, but not now, he said.

“When I talk about Ned Lamont in 2018, here’s what the state needed — they wanted somebody, they needed somebody who was nice and stable,” Elliott said. “And all along, I will say that Gov. Ned  Lamont, he is nice and he is stable, but he is not serious and he’s not a fighter. And that’s what the moment calls for.”