Trump refuses to condemn white supremacists - Join rallies TODAY
Charlottesville Va Mayor Michael Signer puts the blame on KKK/Nazi enabler Donald Trump
White Supremacist assholes
The Alt-Right brings violence and bigotry to Charlottesville
That’s white supremacist and murderer James Alex Fields carrying a big shield
RESIST sign
What Trump sees
Flying into Trump National Golf Course in Bedminster
Impeachment Explained
Are we there yet?
Probably not. But Robert Reich is ready to walk you through how it works
Hispanics in NJ: Their wondrous diverse culture, political strength and life stories
Bill Orr’s latest series

Latest Posts

Forrester retracts condemnation of campaign manager’s smearmongering

Yesterday we noted that while Forrester condemned his campaign manager for spreading lies about Corzine, he was unwilling to fire him from his campaign. That alone says a lot about his complete lack of ethics. Now, he’s flip-flopped and won’t even condemn the smearmongering of his most senior campaign officials:

Forrester, meanwhile, backtracked from his statement Friday condemning his campaign manager, Rick England, for fueling a rumor that Corzine had an affair with a young female political staffer. The Star-Ledger reported yesterday that England cited the rumor in an August conversation with a lobbyist for the New Jersey Education Association.

On Friday night, Sylvester said Forrester had spoken to England and “condemned” his actions. But Forrester said the issue came to his attention only yesterday morning through The Star-Ledger report. He said he would review the circumstances. Asked if there was any chance he would discipline England, he said, “Let me get the facts first.”

Either his spokesperson is a liar, or Forrester approves of these smear tactics. A man of real integrity however, wouldn’t let that happen in his campaign:

Corzine, however, said if such gossip were spread by senior people on his campaign, there’s no question what he would do: “I would ask him to step down.”

Forrester’s sleaze campaign having no effect on voters

A Monmouth University/Gannet NJ poll out on Saturday has Jon Corzine leading Doug Forrester by 9 points: 47-38. The poll director claims that Forrester’s attack ads and rumor-spreading haven’t worked:

The current poll was already being conducted when the Forrester campaign launched a television ad featuring a quote from Joanne Corzine, the Democrat’s ex-wife. Poll director Murray commented, “Our internal poll results for each evening suggest that this ad had no significant impact on the race. Voters indicate that both candidates have stepped over the line in the way they have run their campaigns, particularly with their attack ads. In fact, there is potential for this recent ad having a negative backlash for the Forrester campaign.”

An internal poll (take with extra grain of salt) funded by Congressman Rob Andrews shows Corzine leading Forrester by a whopping twelve points: 48-36. Again, the poll concludes that voters are rejecting the attack ads on Corzine:

Corzine leads Forrester 48 to 36 percent in a survey in which half of the interviews were conducted Thursday evening after the most recent ads aired. Interviews conducted that evening indicated no significant shift in the race.

Corzine hints at Codey as his pick for Senate

With the campaign wrapping up and no longer needing as much stumping help from all the potential Senate appointees, Corzine hints that he might pick Codey. From the Asbury Park Press:

In an interview on “The Brian Lehrer Show” on WNYC public radio, Corzine said he would have supported acting Gov. Codey for a full term “if circumstances were different” and indicated a willingness to elevate him to the U.S. Senate. If elected, Corzine would appoint his Senate replacement.

“We have a very good relationship. We will be very strong partners. He will be the (state) Senate president, unless other terms occur — for instance, if he wants to be considered for the Senate post, if I’m graced enough to be elected, we’ll consider that,” Corzine said.

Codey is the most popular Democrat in the state with an approval/disapproval rating of 60/15. But it’s not just New Jerseyans that like Codey. National Democrats want him to run, too…

Mainstream media, the last debate & the “NY Times front page”

Just watched the final ‘gloves off’ debate.

I am sick, sick, sick of NBC, the NY Times, and Star Ledger!

The moderator stunk.  Aired 4 negative ads for discussion purposes, which just ended up being a bruising repetition of what we’ve been reading here.  The NBC reporters who asked Forrester if he had an affair should be ashamed of themselves. And the 11pm news that ran it as a LEAD story.

For every time Forrester defended his running the Joanne Corzine ad with the fact that it was off the NY Times front page, I swear I’m going to go out and convince someone to cancel their subscription (which commits me to two so far, I don’t subscribe).  I just CAN’T BELIEVE they gave her the coverage, so that he could use it.  EVEN THE NY POST ran it in their gossip column!!! Cheerleaders for the Iraq war and proud to try to manipulate elections.

(crossposted at corzineconnection.com)

Campaign Slogans Wanted

We might be making some signs for election day.  What’s  the most effective slogan? Your suggestions are appreciated!

 Here’s mine:

FORRESTER:  SLEAZY CAMPAIGNER

CORZINE:  EXPERIENCED CEO, SENATOR, LEADER  
 

What a Difference a Poll Makes

One of the main ways used to keep an eye on political issues and campaigns is opinion polling. Everyone has seen them – Candidate A is ahead by 3% over Candidate B, etc.  For some reason, even though polling has proven over the years to be a remarkably crude tool, people fall in love with quoting the latest numbers from whatever poll has been published.

For example, Fairleigh Dickson University released a poll on November 4 which had support for Jon Corzine at 43% and support for Doug Forrester at 41%.  That’s pretty close.  But how these numbers are generated are important in determining what they mean.

Personally, I don’t put much faith in FDU’s polling.  Why?  Well, for one thing, the Margin of Error (MoE) is a whopping 5%.  But 5% isn’t much, right?

Forrester’s campaign manager leads smear campaign

It’s been revealed by the Star Ledger that the smear campaign against Jon Corzine has been led by Doug Forrester’s campaign manager, Rick England. Forrester initially denied that he even knew about it:

Forrester said he was unaware of the details of a rumor Republicans have been circulating about Corzine: that the U.S. senator had a sexual relationship with one of his young female aides.

Riiiiighht. Then, one of the people who had been fed the smear spoke up:

In August, England spoke with Jim Schroeder, a lobbyist for the New Jersey Education Association, about the decision by the state’s largest teachers union to endorse Corzine.

Schroeder, in an interview yesterday, said England “did tell me I was making a mistake” by endorsing Corzine. He said England relayed the rumor about Corzine and the staffer, saying reporters were investigating it and that resulting stories would embarrass the Democrat’s supporters.

Candidate responses to Joanne Corzine are revealing

    Without an acquaintance with the rules of propriety, it is impossible for the character to be established.

      Confucius

Let’s consider how the candidates have reacted to comments made by Joanne Corzine about her former spouse. I read the following three articles:

Here are some snippets:

OUR VOTES COUNT TOO

We submitted this op-ed to several of the State’s largest newspapers. I guess it is not negative enough to print.

In the intensity of last year’s presidential election, many pop stars and celebrities undertook a nationwide campaign to urge more young professionals to be counted by voting.  The benchmark for young voter turnout was reached nationally, but this generation of voters should not remain on the voting booth sidelines in non-presidential election years.  November 8th will provide young professional voters in New Jersey with an opportune chance to return to the polls with the same level of intensity as they did last year.  

So why don’t voters in their 20s and early 30s vote as often as older generations?  It is one of the classic political chicken-or-the-egg stories. Do young voters not vote because candidates do not address issues important to them? Or do candidates not address issues important to young voters because this voting block doesn’t routinely vote?

Voter turnout certainly should not be blamed on a lack of impact of the issues on our generation. Indeed, a very strong argument can be made that some of the most linchpin campaign issues this year affect our generation more directly than many others.