2009 New Jersey Governor's Race

[Brittain33]

Smith isn't all that conservative other than foaming at the mouth whenever stem cell research is mentioned. You might be thinking of Garrett.

Well he is pro-life to the max, is what I meant.

Smith's also homophobic, and beyond simply voting for anti-gay legislation.

[Brittain33]

At this point, I'm rooting for Christie over Lonegan and Corzine. I'm curious if this will last through Election Day. I kind of hope Christie doesn't make vetoing gay marriage an issue, I want to be on the same side as my family for once.

[Brittain33]

The more you know about Lonegan, the less you like!

I've informed my mother that she is effectively disowned if she votes for the virulently anti-gay Lonegan.  (Though she was otherwise lured in by his reckless fiscal about face.)

My parents support Christie but aren't going to vote in the primary because "he's going to win" and they have better things to do. For one of them, it would mean driving to a home precinct 30 minutes away. Oh, then she remembered that she's registered as a independent and can't vote in the primary. (Is that even true?) My father's a solid Republican but not too well-informed on the finer points of politics, e.g. he told me he thinks Sotomayor won't get nominated because "lots of people" have trouble with her, blah blah "Latino business", and that she wants to make law, not interpret law. Which tells me he read the Wall Street Journal op-ed page and takes it as the voice of authority. He didn't respond when I told him, it may well be lots of people "have problems" with her, but she's going to get confirmed. Then when I asked him his opinion on the Lilly Ledbetter case and explained the Republican ruling on it to show the vagueness of "making law" vs. "interpreting law," he changed the subject to Obama's flagrant abuse of AF1.

[Brittain33]

Ugh. Ugh. Ugh.

This attitude may make this a very close race and maybe even a Lonegan win. If what I posted above is true, this is going to be a bad night.

I would not extrapolate anything from my father's comments. To the best of my knowledge, he has never voted in any Republican primary, state or Presidential, despite having his preferences. My stepmother is an independent in every sense of the word, too. She'll probably vote against Corzine this fall. I still don't know how she voted last year... in October she was torn because of doubts over both Obama's lack of experience and the flaws of the McCain-Palin ticket, and was sick to death of her daughter nagging her to support Obama and getting angry that she wouldn't.

[Brittain33]

Word is that turnout (so far) is the lowest it has ever been in an NJ Gubernatorial primary in 25 years.

I don't think it's an unequivocally bad sign for Christie. Primary turnout has been high in the past because multiple institutional candidates were running or you had Bret Schundler with his movement behind him. This is a race with only 1 top-tier candidate and one gadfly. I do question how strong Lonegan's support is in either a low or high turnout election.

[Brittain33]

Their attitude that Christie is going to win anyway so they don't need to show up is alarming.

It is, if other people hold that attitude. In retrospect, I misrepresented what they said, because I know they never "show up" anyway. I was probing on his views and interest, and while he said he knows Christie is going to win, that knowledge isn't dissuading him from voting because he doesn't participate in primaries.

Get down off the ledge. Lonegan could win, I don't know, but my father's views are not indicative of that.

[Brittain33]

Oh I just remembered this is NJ!   This has been a successful tactic in blue states like Jersey...Corzine is very desperate and it shows.  This is amusing and it would be laughable if NJ was filled with voters that actually considered real issues like hmmmm taxes and the NJTP debacle instead of minor arguments about values and worrying about whether the Republican candidate is a spawn of the southern religious right Republican organization.

I agree that this is the last debate NJ needs to have right now when the budget is in the toilet... but is this any different from Republicans running on bogus issues like gay marriage and family values in southern or mountain states? It happens all the time because it works.

[Brittain33]

Middlesex is a key part of the base for Democrats, but they had tremendous difficulty in the county during the Florio/Whitman years and would likely be a key player in any strong Republican performance in the state:

This is my home district. Jack Sinagra's wife had a license plate that said "SPEND IT" prior to his becoming mayor, when she had it changed. For "Career Day" at the community day camp, his young daughters put on feather boas to dress up as millionaires. They would be college graduates now, I think.  (googles) Yes, one of them attended a Sarah Silverman-sponsored benefit in the Hamptons.

Worth noting that there has been a lot of generational turnover in this district since 1990. Many of the parents with children or grown children then have sold and moved out, replaced by a much more diverse population. The foreign-born population of Middlesex County is very high. However, so are residential taxes...

[Brittain33]

Worth noting that there has been a lot of generational turnover in this district since 1990. Many of the parents with children or grown children then have sold and moved out, replaced by a much more diverse population. The foreign-born population of Middlesex County is very high. However, so are residential taxes...

Becoming more and more Asian, no?

Yes, particularly in Edison. Both South Asian and East Asian. My hometown built a mosque since I left; I don't know if the community is Pakistani or also Arab, but there has been a Coptic community there for decades, so it could be both. Also post-Soviet immigration, but I don't know how much.

[Brittain33]

There have been excuses for Corzine's performance since his first dismal showing months ago.  It's to the point that it's not just the effect of some random occurrence anymore.  These numbers have been the same for a long time and it's time to admit that it's legit.  Republicans get your hopes up and Democrats be worried.  This is the real deal this time, enough with the over-cautious dismissal.

Yeah. Ok, sure, Republicans have been disappointed in NJ several times before. But the state is not going to elect and reelect Democratic governors from now until the end of time. Virginia disappointed Democrats on the Presidential level many times, too, with polls showing competitive races that melted away before Election Day. Then Obama won it big.

Perhaps I'm scarred from having lived through a NJ tax revolt as a teenager, but the state has every ability to throw out entrenched Democrats if it wants to.

Democratic control of state government is much more recent than many people recognize, I think. The governorship dates back only to 2001, and uncontested control of both branches to 2003. That is enough time for the Democrats to own the current situation, but not nearly long enough for people to assume "they can't be beaten."

[Brittain33]

What's going to stop the Dems from pulling another fast one like they did in 2002 if Corzine is still trailing by double digits in September or October?

There is no Democrat waiting in the wings with the stature and likeability to win in such a situation. Perhaps the only one with the positives to run and win now would be Richard Codey, and one reason he was popular is because he was an accidental governor and betrayed no ambition to be governor in his own right. (See Rell, M. Jodi.)

Note that Corzine is unpopular, but he is not an unelectable, scandal-tarred ethical black hole like Torricelli was. Corzine stepping aside because "he might not win" is simply not going to float. Republicans seem to forget that the issue with Torricelli isn't just that the Democrats didn't want to run him, it's because he was indicted and facing a criminal trial which made his participation in the election a total farce. I know people like to believe that the 2002 court case was a total travesty and Democrats could swap in people for whatever reason they want, but that's not accurate.

[Brittain33]

I don't care why he's popular; all that matters is that he is popular.

My belief is that if he stepped in to replace Corzine at the last minute, he'd be sacrificing a lot of what makes him popular and he would lose. It would be out of character. And if the opening were to open up, Rob Andrews or someone else would jump in. But it's not going to happen, because Corzine is not an unusually flawed incumbent and he has enough money to keep his campaign running.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As I said, not only was Torricelli unpopular, he was under indictment and probably going to jail. The New Jersey Supreme Court took the latter into account when they ruled. You may disagree with their ruling, and that's fine, but it's still a different situation.

I don't see where "the people of the state" have any responsibility for the outcome, or any obligation to have voted Republican for their senator for the next six years. If Forrester had identified why people should vote for him instead of basing his campaign entirely on "help is on the way" and "pay no attention to what I'd actually do in office," he would have earned his seat.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am arguing that if he had only been down in the polls by 15 points, but had not had any material changes in his legal position, Torricelli would never have agreed to step down, the Democratic Party wouldn't have tried to make him, and even if they had, the Supreme Court probably wouldn't have gone along with it. Plenty of candidates go into Election Day or even October with huge deficits and no chance of winning and still go through with it. The indictment changed everything. It changed Torricelli's calculus and brought him on board. Of course the Democratic Party would have happily accepted his retirement letter any time before then.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do acknowledge that he should have been challenged in the primary and it's the shame of the NJ Democratic Party that they didn't. That said, it's political reality that it's hard to challenge incumbents who aren't under actual indictment. This is true in either party and in many states. It would be hackish of you not to acknowledge that his indictment after the primary but before the general election was a game-changer above and beyond simple unpopularity which, as you've been eager to say many times on this thread, often doesn't stop NJ Dems from getting reelected, especially to federal office!

[Brittain33]

P.S. Given that I'm all but cheering on Christie on this board, I think I've demonstrated I'm not a hack for the NJ Democratic Party.

[Brittain33]

You're failing to accept that there is no decency in their actions.

Phil, I am so not playing this game. If you want to find someone to beat over the head about the Torricelli swap and attack them for thinking it was the most wonderful, ethical thing in the world, it isn't going to be me. I am only in this thread to argue why it isn't going to happen to Corzine. I'm talking about Torricelli to draw a contrast with Corzine's situation, not to defend Torricelli. That's what you should take away from all of my posts. I am arguing why Corzine won't do a switch, not why it's an awesome thing to do and Torricelli is my hero.

Anyway, yes, I did some research and I was wrong about the indictment; Torricelli wasn't indicted. What happened in the fall was the release of more documents indicating how he should have been indicted and everything he'd done wrong, which was damning but not with legal implications. So, on that count, I withdraw that statement.

But I'm not here to help you work out your anger over Torricelli and the N.J. Democratic Party by standing in as your vision of an amoral N.J. Democratic Party hack. Take it somewhere else. That isn't me. If I want emotional manipulation and projection, I've got relatives who can do the job better than you.

[Brittain33]

If you're finished with something, stop responding.

Ok, I'm done. 

My parting gift for you: please understand the difference between "explain" and "excuse." It may help you understand why people say things you find morally objectionable, so you can see that it doesn't mean an endorsement.

[Brittain33]

Massive arrests in corruption cases today. The headliners seem to be largely Democrats but they have a Republican assemblyman.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"Several rabbis"? Oy gevult. There's nothing like a corrupt rabbi. 

[Brittain33]

"Body parts trafficking"

[Brittain33]

http://www.politickerny.com/4893/see-chris-christie-skate

Christie was on the list of "problem" USAs early in 2006, made lots of politically convenient leaks against Menendez right before the election, never built up or delivered a case, and was magically removed from the to-fire list.

It was obvious at the time Christie was helping the Republican campaign effort. The charges against Menendez were always a joke, and the whole point was to claim there was a cloud of suspicion around him. Christie was being a good team player instead of a good U.S. Attorney.

Will this be an issue? I doubt it. I feel the U.S. Attorney scandal was always too complex for ordinary people to understand because they don't expect the Justice Dept. to be independent of the President or know what it does. I don't think ethics alone were enough to let the Rs win, because people know the Rs are just as bad as the Ds in New Jersey; it was a combination of frustration with taxes, a bad economy, and "time for a change"/"this team's been too corrupt" that was going to deliver an exit for Corzine. However, this may mean that people in the know in the media will see through Christie's persona.

I still think Christie will win, but it's an opening.

[Brittain33]

The Sierra Club endorsed independent candidate Daggett today.

Why not Corzine?

[Brittain33]

What would a Republican-controlled government in NJ do, I wonder? What happens if there's a Gov. Christie and a Democratic legislature or a Gov. Christie and a split legislature?

I don't see many social issues coming up, aside from same-sex marriage, which is fairly minor. There are major budget problems. Yet people seem most unhappy about local taxes, or at least everyone I know is. What are a Republican government's priorities?

I hope no one seriously argues it's to "clean up government"; at best we'd see a drop in corruption as the new bosses take over, and then a gradual ramp-up to previous levels, as patronage shifts from the cities and the Dem machines to Republicans in swing districts. I'm curious about policy.

[Brittain33]

His negatives are way up, though.

His negatives have finally surpassed his positives. For a NJ politician, that's like having your bar mitzvah. "Today, I am a man."

[Brittain33]

To each their own, I suppose, but it's clear that the solution is not another four years of total Democratic control without any real checks and balances.

Are you writing off 2011 already?

[Brittain33]

How Corzine polls so astronomically well amongst those concerned about jobs and the economy when New Jersey has the worst economy in its region, I'll never know.

It's not rational to blame the governor for the state of the economy in any state, and people concerned about jobs and the economy in N.J. are presumably more in favor of an activist government looking out for the unemployed and hard-up than for tax cuts.

George W. Bush escaped blame for the economy in the 2002 elections, and he was about as responsible for that as Corzine is for N.J.'s economy (which isn't in that bad shape by national standards, anyway.)

[Brittain33]

If you don't know anything about Corzine, just stay out of it.

Wow. I'm sorry if this election isn't the self-esteem booster you were hoping for.

[Brittain33]

I am depressed that good D legislators went down in droves in Virginia while everyone in NJ kept their jobs except Corzine. Really a bad scenario for good government.