Tag Archive: CD3

A Response to the Inquirer Endorsement of TMac

As Rosi reported on Friday, I penned a short response to what has got to be the poorest-written editorial endorsement in decades. My friend, who uses the nom de blog bssjersey (but is not, AFAIK, the person behind the Twitter feed of the same name), wrote a much more detailed and well-thought out response. I'm reprinting it here with his permission – edited only for minor formatting changes.

Guest Post. Written by bssjersey:

 On what evidence does the Inquirer Editorial Board conclude that Tom MacArthur “is more conversant on policy and politics” than Aimee Belgard? Experience in politics? Both of them served 3 years as municipal council members. Tom MacArthur was mayor for one year (elected by his colleagues, not directly by the people). Aimee Belgard has served as a Burlington County Freeholder for almost two years. So she’s had almost five years of “seasoning” to his three, and two of hers are at a higher level (county).

It must be the business career that impressed you. It’s an undeniable achievement that Tom MacArthur was able to take a small insurance services company, grow it into a big one, and sell it for a lot of money. But success in business is no guarantee of success in politics. A 2012 article in The Hill newspaper entitled “History shows businessmen make bad presidents” noted that historians rank presidents whose earlier careers featured success in business as among our worst: the list includes Andrew Johnson, Warren Harding, Herbert Hoover, Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush.

And if The Inquirer had bothered to look closely at the claims MacArthur makes for why his business career suggests he’d be good at setting federal policy, you might have seen the holes in his arguments.

Oh, so THAT’s why Nancy Pelosi’s House Majority PAC dissed Aimee Belgard to plump up Don Norcross

crying-donkeyNow I get it: Why House Majority PAC pulled a quarter-mil or so out from under Aimee Belgard’s competitive race, and forked it over to Don Norcross’ sure thing.

I’m watching 3 races closely; Bonnie Watson Coleman, whose gutsy detailed position statements signal progressive intent, and Roy Cho and Aimee Belgard, who work mighty hard for every vote. At the other end of the merit scale is Norcross, whose candidacy is less about his own work than the good fortune of being somebody’s brother. His campaign has been arranged, and the way smoothed. Nothing against him. I wish him well in Congress. But, come on.

Then, I opened the mass email sent this morning by Nancy Pelosi:

THREE separate polls show Aimee Belgard TIED with her Republican opponent it screams at me in boldface. Aimee’s race is a TOP priority for Democrats.

Let’s review: Pelosi essentially controls HMP, on which her chance of ever being Speaker again rides.  She just pulled about $250k from hardscrabbling Aimee Belgard, whose opponent is a non-local who writes campaign checks to himself in the millions. Then, she writes all of us, begging for money to lift Belgard.

Tear your hair out all you want, but The National Journal has the poop on the quid pro quo. Six donations came in last month from unions and businesses tied to the House of Norcross. They total $270k; IBEW $100k, the law firm repping George Norcross $50k, Carpenters $50k, 3 IBEW locals together $70k.

Carpenters did not even endorse Aimee Belgard in CD3. They endorsed self-financed GOP insurance exec from North Jersey Tom MacArthur.

So. Norcross gets his minions to write big checks to HMP. And they swung about a quarter mil – nearly dollar-for-dollar – away from a competitive race that actually would add to their “Majority.”. And the fact Pelosi’s PAC paid for the ad signals to the Dem universe inside the Beltway that Don Norcross is a Democratic priority, so act accordingly – or else.

Welcome to our world, District of Columbia.