2009 New Jersey Governor's Race

[Verily]

Corzine picks Weinberg.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/corzine_picks_sen_loretta_wein.html

I'm now voting for Corzine. So at least he has that going for him. I'm pretty unabashed in my idolization of Loretta Weinberg.

I wouldn't be surprised if you were the only person in the state whose vote has changed because of this.

You should be supporting the best politician in the whole goddamned country for Lt. Gov. of New Jersey, too

Unfortunately, this means I actually care about this race now even though my candidate will probably lose.

[Verily]

Corzine picks Weinberg.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/corzine_picks_sen_loretta_wein.html

I'm now voting for Corzine. So at least he has that going for him. I'm pretty unabashed in my idolization of Loretta Weinberg.

I wouldn't be surprised if you were the only person in the state whose vote has changed because of this.

You should be supporting the best politician in the whole goddamned country for Lt. Gov. of New Jersey, too

What's so special about her?  I would really like to know.

She's been an incredible.. well, force of nature would be a good description... for anti-machine politics in Bergen County for the past couple of decades. She has absolutely no fear about standing up to the party bosses, about exposing corruption and behind-closed-doors dealings, about calling out people like Rep. Rothman when they try to look the other way. She's sponsored candidates running against the machine consistently, and many of those candidates have won. She's the sole reason that we have such a strong anti-establishment political grouping in central Bergen. (Well, not to belittle the other contributors, but Weinberg really muscles people like Valerie Huttle, Gordon Johnson, and local politicians into doing the right thing, and it's her advocacy for them that makes a lot of local anti-machine revolutions in Democratic primaries successful.)

She has been the singular voice for reform of New Jersey's party primaries in the Assembly and then in the Senate, and has pushed for extremely stringent anti-corruption, anti-influence peddling legislation at the state level all on her own for her entire career. There is not a single politician in NJ who has done more to fight everything that is wrong with New Jersey's political system than Loretta Weinberg.

She's also been a powerful voice for things like cleaning up and restoring the Meadowlands, fixing the property tax system by unifying municipalities, same-sex marriage, and pretty much every other piece of legislation I care about at the state level. That helps.

Disclaimer: She is my state Senator.

[Verily]

Corzine picks Weinberg.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/corzine_picks_sen_loretta_wein.html

I'm now voting for Corzine. So at least he has that going for him. I'm pretty unabashed in my idolization of Loretta Weinberg.

I wouldn't be surprised if you were the only person in the state whose vote has changed because of this.

You should be supporting the best politician in the whole goddamned country for Lt. Gov. of New Jersey, too

Unfortunately, this means I actually care about this race now even though my candidate will probably lose.

So you want a tough anti-establishment person to be the lapdog of Corzine, in order to beat Christie.. someone not so friendly with the establishment?

Edit: please, don't take this as me trying to call you out. I'm just trying to probe.

The thing is, Corzine is not particularly cozy with the establishment, either. For Republicans, of course, he's a Democrat, so it doesn't matter. But I would think people who don't automatically oppose him would be able to see that he clashes with the established forces far more often than he plays ball with them.

His willingness to piss off the Bergen machine by choosing Weinberg shows that as much as anything. I doubt Buono was on bad terms with the MidCDO.

[Verily]

Union County is uber-polarized; it wouldn't vote for Christie if he won by 15. Same goes for Passaic County.

[Verily]

What about the independent dude with a million on hand? Won't he soak up some votes?

Definitely at least 5%, possibly as much as 15-20% in the end. As the polls have suggested, he's a bit of a danger to Christie, not because he's drawing on the core Republican vote but because he's drawing the anti-establishment protest vote (the sort who won't be convinced by anyone to support Corzine, but aren't at all loyal to the Republicans) away from Christie. Daggett's campaign has at least the potential to really take off since the anger is there, but I don't think it will to the point of him being a serious contender to win.

[Verily]

What about the independent dude with a million on hand? Won't he soak up some votes?

Definitely at least 5%, possibly as much as 15-20% in the end. As the polls have suggested, he's a bit of a danger to Christie, not because he's drawing on the core Republican vote but because he's drawing the anti-establishment protest vote (the sort who won't be convinced by anyone to support Corzine, but aren't at all loyal to the Republicans) away from Christie. Daggett's campaign has at least the potential to really take off since the anger is there, but I don't think it will to the point of him being a serious contender to win.

Daggett's numbers depend on how well Corzine can smear Christie. Daggett will be the "none-of-the-above" choice, but he'll struggle to find votes without a solid angle. Daggett is a supposed moderate, so he won't be getting any ideological votes in the way that, say, Murray Sabrin did in 1997.

Without a solid attack on Christie (and no, calling Christie a pro-lifer isn't a solid attack), Daggett might not even get to 5%, his $1 million bankroll aside.

Personally, I think there's at least 5% of the vote out there for the taking for "None of the Above", provided people know it's available before they enter the voting booth. Daggett's money means that they will know it's available, unlike for most random independents.

[Verily]

Corzine is threatening a state takeover of the Borough of Ridgefield unless the mayor resigns after being indicted on corruption charges. He's the only one of the three mayors who has held out against the pressure to resign.

[Verily]

Corzine is threatening a state takeover of the Borough of Ridgefield unless the mayor resigns after being indicted on corruption charges. He's the only one of the three mayors who has held out against the pressure to resign.

But notably, Corzine has not applied the same kind of pressure to Jersey City, where city council president Mariano Vega, also arrested, similarly refuses to step down.

True--it's aimed actually at all cities with mayors indicted for corruption, so at least Carlstadt in Bergen would also be taken over. (The Republican mayor of Carlstadt was indicted for corruption back in May, although it got a lot less press than the current indictments because it was a relatively isolated case; Suarez in Ridgefield is a Democrat.) There was an article in the Record about it today, and the Record only cares about Bergen and Passaic, but I'm sure there are towns elsewhere that it would affect as well.

The problem with Jersey City is that it doesn't seem like the state government could legitimately usurp mayoral authority in Jersey City without the mayor himself being under indictment--even though of course a lot of the other leading figures in Jersey City are in trouble. Yes, you could call it a political ploy, but there are legal reasons why it can't be done as well.

[Verily]

Basically. Even with Christie so far ahead, it should have been clear to everyone that Christie was not going to win by 15 points, even if he polled that well. Corzine is unlikely to win at this point, and I don't think Republicans really need to worry about him coming from behind to victory, but it will be reasonably close, probably within five points.

Also, the splits on that poll basically confirm what  was saying about where Daggett draws votes. His support is (as you would expect), highest among independents, and he takes his independent vote mostly from Christie. Yet Daggett's support is marginally higher among Democrats than Republicans--he's taking the disaffected people who usually vote Democratic but are considering Christie and don't like Corzine much.

[Verily]

Hey guys.  Do as we say, not as we do.

http://www.politickernj.com/wallye/32304/spicuzzos-political-talk-m-rod-could-weaken-dems-argument-christie-rove-talk

The 19th is really safe, though. Corzine doesn't need to pay any attention to Rodriguez at all.

[Verily]

The Sierra Club endorsed independent candidate Daggett today.

Why not Corzine?

They hate Corzine. They might have actually endorsed Forrester in 2005, I forget, but they definitely had a huge feud with Corzine then, too, mostly over development policies. Daggett having environmental credentials was just an added bonus.

[Verily]

Quinipiac Poll didn't look good for Corzine, but the Rasmussen and Fairleigh weren't too bad.  This election is a complete toss up.  Corzine needs to apply a Route 4-17 strategy to win New Jersey.  If he can pay some college kids from Paterson, Ramapo, Fairleigh and Bergen to go to shopping stores on route 4 and 17, I think he will win.   He needs to run up the vote in Paterson, Teaneck, Fairlawn, Fort Lee and Hackensack and surrounding towns like Paramus and Wood Ridge.  Repubs are going to run up the votes in south east New Jersey and Northwest New Jersey.  No point in Corzine going there.   Just put limited resources in Route 95 cities as well.   Start going to minority neighborhoods and college campuses.   If he can do that than I don't see him losing to a Repub in Liberal state.   

Although I have to admit, the Republicans have placed themselves in a better position in New Jersey.  They will probably win alot of state and town seats.

Trust me, Corzine's turnout problem is not in the ultra-Dem towns in central Bergen. (I live in Englewood, the most Democratic of the Hackensack-Teaneck-Englewood-Fort Lee chain.)

There's a lot of enthusiasm for Weinberg as the Lt Governor candidate, at least among people who will actually vote (few, but that's true everywhere). Not huge enthusiasm, of course, but he should at least be more concerned about turnout in areas that do not have such an advantage (Hudson Co., inner Essex and Union Cos., Plainfield, Trenton, Camden, Middlesex Co., etc.)

But campaigning in the malls would hit the Republican towns of northern and southwestern Bergen as much or more than it would the Democratic towns of central Bergen, southeastern Bergen and the Northern Valley. After all, it's the rich white voters from Saddle River who go to the mall every weekend, not the poor black voters from Englewood's west side.

Also, Paramus voted for McCain and Bush (at least in 2004, probably for Gore in 2000). Not a good town for Corzine to look for high turnout in.

[Verily]

Obama won Paterson with over 90% of the vote. I don't think Corzine is any danger of doing worse than 85% or so.

[Verily]

It's an interesting poll.  Again, Corzine didn't really move up—he's still under 40.  It's just that Christie moved backward a bit.  Daggett moved up, but it may be more of a case of "None of the Above" moving up.

The reason for the undeniable tightening seems to be that retarded mammogram issue.  Women moved big to Corzine (Christie actually trails slightly among women) but men remain intensely committed to Christie.  Unfortunately, it seems that voters might actually prefer women going uninsured to those same women having insurance that is not required by law to contain mammogram screenings.  (Good job, voters.)

The inclusion of Daggett in these polls makes things confusing, since most people agree he's not actually going to get the 12% he's currently polling at.  PoliticsNJ mentioned a 1997 Q-poll that included all the independent candidates and not just Murray Sabrin wound up being the most accurate predictor of Sabrin's final total (~5%), so that may be a good future direction for the poll to take.

I've said it before, and I'll say it over and over again:
The people of New Jersey do not deserve good government because they routinely vote against it.

Wait, Christie would be good government? Excuse me while I laugh until I vomit.

[Verily]

Everyone has to stay up late. There will be no exit polls. The NJ Supreme Court just banned them again.

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=104&sid=1775646

[Verily]

Wait, Christie would be good government? Excuse me while I laugh until I vomit.

haha, I was thinking the same.

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.

"Checks and balances"? Split party control just means bickering and complete stoppage of government. The idea that parties actually police each other is a complete joke. Look at the New York legislature--was that good government? No, corruption was if anything worse during the years the Republicans held the State Senate. The only way anything could be passed was by bribing Republicans in the Senate (or Democrats in the Assembly) with pork or other things of "special interest" to themselves. Corruption would be even worse if Christie had to bribe the Democrats to pass his agenda (or Democrats had to bribe Christie to pass theirs).

[Verily]

I'm being totally honest here when I say that Daggett won the debate, which means that Corzine won the debate.  No B.S. or partisan hackery from me right now.  How can Corzine lose when the Independent candiate is complimenting you every time he talks and belittling Christie?   How can Christie win when he's asked the same question 3 times, but can't give an answer that isn't vague? 

Dunno if anyone can win a debate that no one watches.

In such a case, the winner is whoever the media says was the winner. Debates always affect public opinion, just not necessarily directly.

This doesn't tell me or you anything about who the media has anointed, of course, although the one article I have found corroborates Dem4Life: http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2009/10/mulshine_on_first_debate.html

NYTimes agrees that Daggett won by a mile:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/nyregion/02debate.html?_r=1&hp

[Verily]

Atlantic is more competitive but notably more Republican than the state on a whole.

LOL. Atlantic was within 0.5% of the statewide vote in 2008, 2005 and 2004.

[Verily]

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.)

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

I'd love you to tell us how Corzine has destroyed the economy of New Jersey, and how Christie will fix it. But you can't.

[Verily]

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.)

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

I'd love you to tell us how Corzine has destroyed the economy of New Jersey, and how Christie will fix it. But you can't.

I can, but Dem philosophy means you won't listen.

LOL. I'm about 70% sure I'll vote for Daggett at this point. I just see no evidence--at all--that Corzine is responsible for any of the mess the state is in.* You want to pretend you have something other than ideology backing your vote, be my guest. But I challenge that you can't come up with a single shred of evidence that Corzine, personally or through his policies, is responsible for any of the major issues facing New Jersey. Really, one piece of evidence (from a neutral source, not a Christie campaign website or something) shouldn't be hard to find.

*He may not have been very good at dealing with existing problems, I'll grant that. But here I challenge you to come up with a substantive policy difference of Christie's that would deal with the problems. No, his tiny cuts don't count (you could fire every state employee twice and not close the budget deficit), nor does municipal consolidation (which everyone advocates to some degree, Christie and Corzine equally tepidly).

[Verily]

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.)

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

I'd love you to tell us how Corzine has destroyed the economy of New Jersey, and how Christie will fix it. But you can't.

I can, but Dem philosophy means you won't listen.

LOL. I'm about 70% sure I'll vote for Daggett at this point. I just see no evidence--at all--that Corzine is responsible for any of the mess the state is in.* You want to pretend you have something other than ideology backing your vote, be my guest. But I challenge that you can't come up with a single shred of evidence that Corzine, personally or through his policies, is responsible for any of the major issues facing New Jersey. Really, one piece of evidence (from a neutral source, not a Christie campaign website or something) shouldn't be hard to find.

*He may not have been very good at dealing with existing problems, I'll grant that. But here I challenge you to come up with a substantive policy difference of Christie's that would deal with the problems. No, his tiny cuts don't count (you could fire every state employee twice and not close the budget deficit), nor does municipal consolidation (which everyone advocates to some degree, Christie and Corzine equally tepidly).

I'm not here to do homework assignments.

Then you have no right to complain.

[Verily]

Press of Atlantic City:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's downright cruel. It would be like Obama making fun of McCain for not being able to raise his arms above his head, Biden making fun of Palin for looking like a flight attendent, McCain making funs of Obama for having large ears, or Palin making fun of Biden's hairplugs. It's just annoying and low.

Well, in this case it was the press who asked the question. I actually thought Corzine's response was clever and even somewhat genial. "Yes, he's fat, it's really obvious, and I won't deny it just because you want me to, but hey, I'm bald, and people sometimes don't like that, too, maybe a lot of us have flaws."

I mean, really? Was Corzine supposed to say that someone who is morbidly obese isn't fat just to be nice? Right, because shifting standards don't have anything to do with the obesity epidemic...

[Verily]

I do have to give the Corzine campaign credit for making Christie's weight a legitimate issue in the campaign and not just something everyone recognizes but doesn't talk about.

I should note my praise is from a purely practical standpoint and has no relation to my moral standards whatsoever.

Well, yeah, other things about it have been less savory. The idea that this particular quotation was objectionable is what bothered me, not the whole strategy.

Although completely ignoring it might have been PC, it's also quite stupid, on the level of the individual voter rather than the campaign. Unless someone has a diagnosed disorder (thyroid, etc.), anyone and everyone can control their weight, and being obese reflects very poorly on your judgment, much in the same way smoking does (and if Obama hadn't been making a serious offer to stop smoking, it would have really bothered me).

[Verily]

Double digits among RV's? Wow, joke poll.

I don't see why. We know that there are a lot of voters simply not tuned in. The 2008-vote breakdowns for most of the LV polls have had Obama in the lead by less than 5%. Clearly, there are a lot of 2008 voters who either don't know an election is on or plan to stay home, and these voters are disproportionately Democrats. This should be no surprise; we are all well-aware that Republicans have an institutional advantage in off-year elections as a result of differential turnout.

The LV results of the poll are quite clearly not a joke. They are within the margin of error of the results of every other poll taken in the past week or two. If we saw RV polling by some of those companies, they may very well have shown substantial Corzine majorities among RVs.

Anyway, that shows why the race is far from over. Christie has the advantage among undecideds, and arguably among Daggett supporters, but Corzine has the advantage among those who have yet to make it through the LV screen but may still be convinced to vote (either because they don't know there's an election on or because they're being lazy). LV numbers will rise somewhat as election day approaches, boosting Corzine maybe 1-3 points, but Christie probably has the same cushion among undecideds and Daggett switchers. So, if nothing changes, the election is going down to the wire.

[Verily]

A great day for humankind, indeed.

Unless you're gay. Or a teacher. Or a woman.

I'm sorry. I just hate corruption, I sympathize with your concerns.

Corzine was many negative things, but he was not corrupt. At least, not any more than Christie. People seem to have difficulty understanding that the NJ Dems and GOP are equally extremely steeped in corruption, and one does not have credentials over the other. Corzine, as a political outsider, had some ability to fight corruption, although limited by the strength of the Democratic machine (and would have been equally limited by the Republicans had they controlled the legislature during his tenure). That he was not corrupt should be blatantly obvious from his choice of Loretta Weinberg as LG candidate, the foremost anti-corruption politician in NJ.