With a newly elected 85 year old Senator the speculation about who will be Frank Lautenberg's replacement is inevitable. With a deep bench of Democratic politicians awaiting his retirement the race for his seat is sure to be hard fought and sought after. In my opinion there are two ways the race for Lautenberg's seat will play out:
1. Lautenberg retires and the Governor appoints his replacement;
2. Lautenberg serves his 6 year term in its entirety and there is a primary
for the Democratic nomination in 2014.
There is a long list of powerful New Jersey politicians who covet Lautenberg's seat. Congressmen Rothman, Pallone, and Andrews would surely throw their hats in the ring. Whoever the Lt. Gov is (assuming Corzine wins reelection) will most likely consider a run, and in my opinion the best positioned potential candidate, Mayor Cory Booker, is widely known to have ambitions to higher office.
Not surprisingly, New Jersey as such is rarely mentioned in these high level memos. As many warned, we got lumped into the big February 5 Super Tuesday. It's good to see that Mark Penn did value Corzine enough to view his endorsement as a significant April 2007 development, on par with Iowa Governor Vilsack.
After that, the main interest of the leaked memos is in the predictions of the outcome. On January 21, 2008, senior adviser Guy Cecil included New Jersey in his predictions. His memo considered New Jersey one of only four Clinton "Base States" and predicted the following primary results (Clinton-Obama):
Vote: 56%-44%
Statewide Delegates: 21-16
District Delegates: 39-31
Total Delegates: 60-47
This was pretty good: The actual results were 55% - 45%, statewide delegates 21-16, district delegates 38-32, and total 59-48.
The memo specifically lists Delegate Districts 10 as a 3-delegate district they should target and Districts 16 and 17 as additional targets to pick up delegates. At first, I thought this was an excellent decision as Clinton picked up +1, +1, and +2 net delegates in those districts. Clinton got 52% of the vote in NJ10 to pick up an extra district, so that targeting decision was definitely right on. On the other hand, vote breakdown, Clinton actually easily blew by the thresholds in NJ16 and NJ17, and I can't help but think some effort in District 2, or districts 12 and 18, would have been more valuable. If I read the 21 January internal targeting projections correctly, Clinton's campaign aimed for the minimum threshold in these districts, when in reality they fell just missed the higher threshold to pick up additional delegates on February 5.
Assessment: B+: The Clinton campaign predicted the vote within 1% and the delegate breakdown within one. The three districts Cecil wanted targeted provided a net +4 delegates, most of the Clinton district-level +6 victory margin. So far so good, but when I look at the district breakdowns I wonder what they were doing in districts 2, 12, and 18, where a few percent more would have picked up additional delegates. So I give them a B+, but only with the benefit of hindsight.
Back in 1910, New Jersey faced the question of who would replace John Kean as U.S. Senator. Woodrow Wilson had just been elected governor of New Jersey, having initially been the choice of the political bosses, but having run on a reform platform that earned him the support of progressives. In those days before the 17th Amendment, the Senator would be chosen by the Democratic-controlled State Legislature.
I know the people of New Jersey do not desire Mr. James Smith, Jr., to be sent again to the Senate. If he should be he will not go their representative. The only means I have of knowing whom they do desire to represent them is the vote at the recent primaries, where 48,000 Democratic voters, a majority of the whole number who voted at the primaries, declared their preference for Mr. Martine of Union County. For me that vote is conclusive. I think it should be for every member of the Legislature.
Wilson's support was decisive and the choice of the voters became Senator.
With approval ratings hovering in the 30's, Jon Corzine is preparing to seek a second term as Governor of New Jersey. The lopsided defeat of Rob Andrews might give the Chief of State supreme confidence that a primary challenge will not materialize or will fail miserably. Should a challenge not materialize, Mr. Corzine may feel secure knowing that New Jersey is a blue state that is getting more blue by the day. However, he might possibly be misreading the tea leaves.
This and two dollars will get you a coffee, but it's nice to see the primary votes in NJ2:
Frank LoBiondo (R): 15,712
David Kurkowski (D): 15,771
It's the first time the Democrat got more votes than LoBiondo. (Admittedly, Donna Ward (R) got 1,980, and this is actually more votes for LoBiondo than he's gotten since 2002.).
I wouldn't bet against LoBiondo, since he got 172,779 in the last Presidential election year, but it's another sign of the long-term trends in this district.
Voting in the primary election today got off to a slow start in some New Jersey polling places despite some races that were expected to be competitive.
At one district voting at Cherry Hill West High School, there were only two voters in nearly two hours, leaving poll workers to chat and work on crossword puzzles as they waited for more.
Meanwhile, in Monmouth County's Ocean Township, only 29 of the nearly 900 registered voters in one district had voted by midday.
Turnout in New Jersey's primaries held in early June has hovered around 10 percent for the last several years.
Panic is setting in at the BCDO. They have been robocalling, not just for Lautenberg, trying to ride into power again on his coattails, but they also have a woman robocalling - warning about OUTSIDERS who are threatening to overthrow the (wait for it......... "Democratic" process. Gasp!)
They are urging all frightened democrats to demand to see credentials when anyone comes to their door. They are basically hoping that will stop our canvassers from doing any more campaigning before the election.
They don't even have the decency to say WHO to be afraid of. They just say "OUTSIDERS". Oooooh, I am so scaaawed :o I wonder who they are talking about.........
Juan posted the call on the Front page. You have to hear this.
It's pretty low and beneath the dignity of the County Democratic Organization. But then that's what you expect from frightened vermin that are scared. They get nasty when cornered.
If they do mean us - and I am sure they do, How do they figure us for OUTSIDERS? Three of us are present or former Democratic Councilwomen FROM BERGEN COUNTY. We are VOTING members of the BCDO - at least till tomorrow.
I guess they mean we are not in the inner, INNER circle of Joe Ferriero's best buds. You know, the He-Man Woman Haters secret clubhouse at the BCDO. The Sopranos Annual Italy Tour Club. The Dennis Oury House of Ethics Government Grant Emporium. The "Lets Rezone Teaneck for the Badda Bing Club" Land Use Attorney Association. I could go on - but you get the idea.......
If that makes me an OUTSIDER, well then, so be it. I am STILL on the ballot in the DEMOCRATIC Primary in Column 3 - the column ahead of Joe Ferriero and his Inside Job INSIDERS.
While the first rule at Blue Jersey is to keep it Jersey-centric, this diary breaks that -- but only because this is one of the best places to engage in a constructive criticism/debate. I really had such a great time watching the Senate debate with you here on Friday night that I hope we can discuss this in a way that's respectful to supporters of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
The past two months or so, I've been keeping up with a lot of the pro-Hillary blogs to see what their perspective is: on what they feel slights her, what they perceive as the important developments and generally what they think about Barack. The reading has provided insight on when and how best to reunite this party once the contests are settled.
It's been enlightening, but I can't say it's been heartening. That's because the main thrust has not been about why Hillary should be the nominee, but why Barack shouldn't. There's a good reason for this: the circumstances and outlook of the group. He's held the advantage for some time now and Clinton supporters came to these blogs to find like-minded people -- they don't need to justify their support for Hillary everyday, nor should they be expected to.
I, too, have shared their disappointment. I was so very disappointed in how so many people savaged Clinton for her poor choice of an analogy in her editorial meeting with the Argus Leader. She should not have referenced the murder of Robert Kennedy, but in no way did it seem that she was suggesting the specter of assassination was keeping her in the race. It was shameful of Obama's communications office to rebuke her like that.
And other times I feel like Hillary's campaign should not be given an inch because it seems like she's trying to discredit Obama as someone who has not earned his position, feeding into the biased perspective some have of the most successful African American candidate in history.
Take the popular vote line -- that Hillary has gotten the most votes in history -- is qualified by Obama getting a big fat zero in Michigan. But because they've been saying it for so long, reporters have stopped mentioning it's the popular vote "by her count," I guess because they think it's implied. Maybe it is just me, but I feel like Hillary is arguing that Obama is being handed the nomination over someone who's more qualified and actually earned it. And that message creates yet another obstacle for Obama to bring in those Clinton supporters who resented his upstart candidacy in the first place.
Chuck Todd suggested this morning that these arguments Clinton is making will only matter if Obama loses the nomination. Then she'll come back and say that she should have been the nominee all along. I used to think that was absurd, but now some of the rumor-mongering that's coming out of the Clinton blogs -- namely a bogus claim that Michelle Obama ranted about "whitey" -- is being echoed in Republican circles. They're arguing that Obama is a McGovern/Kerry waiting to happen. They're declaring the election is John McCain's. They're rooting for a Democratic loss to say, 'I told you so.'
It's really, really sad.
That's about all I can muster in reaction.
I would say that because of circumstances, it's hard to imagine what would happen if the shoe was on the other foot. Obama faces big challenges in putting the Democratic Party back together again, but so would Hillary if she were to receive the nomination now. She would have to go after the youth, African American and so-called "elites" she has written off for the past few months. She would then have to face the onslaught of questions over the money she poured into her campaign. Reconciling the party would not be an open-shut matter.
Worst of all -- and bringing this post full circle -- is that what so many of her backers say is needed in order for Clinton's rise would create a huge obstacle to party unity. It means that Obama would have to have gone down hard -- meaning that something so major would have to happen to him that there'd be no way he could be the vice presidential nominee. That would mean there'd be no way whatsoever for the party to reunite around a coalition ticket. It's been months since anyone speculated that Clinton could lead anything but a Clinton-Obama ticket. So not only would Obama be out of the picture as the nominee -- he'd be out as the VP nominee, too.
I take it that most Clinton supporters feel an Obama-Clinton ticket is unlikely anyhow, matching their all-or-nothing mindset. But I entertain it as something that is possibly necessary for November.
Either way, it's June. I haven't been scared about the party coming together until recently, telling myself that it'll all come together, it will all be OK. But this primary season is unprecedented. Anything could happen. Hence the end of primary anxiety.
So, in closing, what are your thoughts about this, Blue Jersey? (And I'm most interested in hearing from Clinton supporters on this one).
There are several different reasons why I believe Senator Lautenberg will and should win.
The most important issue to understand is that Andrews was a co-author of the war resolution in 2002 that got us into Iraq. That's it. That is the end game. But if you want to go further I surely can.
Senator Lautenberg is a high ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, the Budget Committee, the Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee, and the Environment and Public Works Committee. With his position on these committees, particularly the Appropriations and Budget committees, Senator Lautenberg has brought and will continue to bring more money and resources to New Jersey. Whether or not one likes it, seniority makes a difference in the Senate and it would be very hard for any freshman Senator to gain a position on any important committee.
I could go on (date of filing, negative commercials, lack of funding, lack of campaign resources, etc.), but there is little reason to. Senator Lautenberg has been a good member of Congress and has brought a lot to New Jersey and to the United States (preventing oil drilling, bringing more money to NJ security, fighting for health care, etc).
On June 3, it seems Senator Lautenberg will win, and I believe he should win for the reasons described above. But that will only happen if people vote, so go vote!!!
I got my absentee ballot in the mail this week. LATE this week and I noticed something VERY wierd.
The absentee ballot has everybody on a DIFFERENT column than we will be on in the VOTING booth. In the sample ballot for actual Election Day voting, we should all be bracketed in COLUMN 3. HOWEVER, on the Absentee Ballot - they stuck us in the same column as Cresitello in COLUMN 2.
Not only that, but the County Committee folks aren't even on the same ballot as the rest of the Real Bergen Dems even though we should be bracketed together. We aren't even on the same piece of PAPER. It isn't even the same KIND of paper.
So, we can't even tell folks what column we will be in, because it is different depending on whether you vote absentee or not.
Not only that, but if you want to vote for me as freeholder - you fill in the little oval with a #2 pencil, but if you want to vote for me for County Committee, you've got to make an X or a + or checkmark.
Is this messed up, or what?
This happened in Edgewater as well as Tenafly and Bergenfield. Wonder if it happened in Ferriero-crat towns as well...........
This is a cool video. Funny how the traditional media will ignore interesting things like this being done by a campaign but spill ink on pointless shit. Promoted from the diaries -- Juan
If there's one thing I know about Blue Jersey people, it's that we're all avowed politics junkies.
So whoever your candidate of choice is come June 3, this video should hopefully have some appeal.
To have such unfiltered access to the inner works of a US Senate campaign -- as a blogger -- is a very satisfying beat to cover as you might imagine.
For those of you who do not know, I headhunted myself for a job on the Andrews for Senate campaign staff. They bit so I am on the team.
Others (including Juan and/or Thurman, if I remember right) have suggested that Andrews wins from this primary even if he loses, because it gives him the exposure to mount a successful campaign for the gubernatorial nomination should Corzine retire or be sufficiently unpopular.
The polls suggest that Lautenberg can probably win this, even if he ducks all debates. Contrary to the slander put out by Andrews partisans, Lautenberg would do fine in a debate. He'd probably win according to a majority those who listen on the radio and he'd probably lose to Andrews' prettier face according to a majority of those who watch on TV. But neither would score a knockout blow, or anything close to it.
So Lautenberg wins if he debates and he wins if he doesn't.
Color me confused. If it's okay for Rob Andrews to launch a primary challenge against Frank Lautenberg, then why is it not okay for Donald Cresitello to do the same thing?
One of the lawyers challenging whether Morristown Mayor Donald Cresitello should be on the ballot for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate today said she was working for Rep. Rob Andrews (D-1st Dist.), who has already announced his own candidacy.
I want to be fair to Rob Andrews - the story reports that there was confusion among the two lawyers as to who they represented (shouldn't that be the first thing a lawyer knows before going into court?). Just to be sure there is no confusion, I believe Mr. Andrews should publicly denounce the effort to remove Cresitello from the primary ballot. And just to be sure there is not a wink-and-nod type of agreement (because those never happen in Jersey), he should offer to counter-sue on behalf of Mr. Cresitello. Then he should, I don't know, punch the litigant, John Kwasnik, right in the face on the steps of the courthouse and then cry out, "I strike a blow for freedom! I pledge my life and my land against tyranny and oppression!"
I'm not a fan of Cresitello. I think he's a laughable Goober that should be thrown head over heals out of the Democratic Party for pandering to the Klan and neo-Nazis. But if we're going to have an open primary, let's make it wide-open. Let's let in all the crazies and nut-jobs and freaks that can scrape together enough signatures to make it.
I'm willing to bet that Cresitello would get less than two percent of all votes cast anyway. So why make him feel important by trying to keep him off the ballot? Well, that's business as usual in Jersey politics - common sense does not apply.
Update Via email, I have been informed that Bill Caruso says "They are not our attorneys and they do not represent us."
Update II As it turns out, John Kresnik - the lawyer who knew he wasn't representing Rob Andrews - serves as legal counsel for the Prodigal Foundation (which, incidentally, looks to be a worthy cause). Also serving that organization, as a Honorary Trustee, is State Senator Joe Vitale (as well as Middlesex Freeholders John Pulomena and H. James Polos). Vitale has endorsed Andrews, and the Middlesex Dems have thrown their weight to Andrews.
So how likely is it that Kresnik is actually doing this of his own volition? His bio from the Prodigal Foundation doesn't list any experience in elections law:
Mr. Kwasnik concentrates his practice in the areas of real estate, trust and estates, community association law, land use, civil litigation, commercial transactions and corporate law.
Yet Cresitello's lawyer finds it hard to believe that this case filed itself:
Cresitello's lawyer, Paul Bangiola of Morristown, said earlier the challenge raises "every conceivable, arcane minutiae of election law" to question the validity of more than 700 of the 1,384 signatures on the mayor's petition. Lautenberg filed 4,950 signatures while Andrews filed 5,970.
"I might be darkly cynical," Bangiola said, "but I have a feeling either Congressman Andrews or Senator Lautenberg or the state Democratic Party are at work here."
I believe Mr. Andrews when he says he has nothing to do with it. But I don't understand how Kwisnik, who has no experience in the area, suddenly files a lawsuit focusing on "every conceivable, arcane minutiae of election law". It looks like there might be a behind-the-scenes connection with the Middlesex Dems trying to work on behalf of Andrews - but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Last week, Camille Andrews, wife of Congressman and candidate for the United States Senate Rob Andrews, was selected to be on the June Primary ballot as the Democratic candidate for her husband's seat in Congress. Is Mrs. Andrews qualified to serve in Congress? Absolutely. Is her selection a wise political move? Absolutely not. In fact, the selection of Mrs. Andrews to run for Congress undermines her husband's insurgent campaign.
Regardless of the possible negative effect of challenged (or "divisive") primaries on the general election, what's the alternative? That all party nominees are chosen by county chairs (who may or may not be fair)? That "our" incumbents get automatic renewals?
"Divisive" is used to put challengers on the defensive and depict them as disloyal to the party and its ideals. But challengers just may be be seeking to advance those ideals, perhaps in the face of enormous odds. Or they may not be-- isn't that a judgment call that should be up to voters?
I support Lautenberg on his record and his merits. But I think accusations of divisiveness are counterproductive - not to mention boring and predictable. Same with the accusations about going negative that are sure to come. The more sanctimony, the more annoying. My eyes glaze over and my mouse clicks away from all posts complaining about negative campaigning by either side.
I don't care what team you're batting for this primary season, but I do care that you get yourself -- and others -- to the polls.
The following dates should help.
April 15: School board elections in many areas
May 13: Last day to register to vote for the June 3rd primary.
May 27: if you're gonna vote ABSENTEE, have your application in the mail by today!**
JUNE 3: PRIMARY ELECTION!
(**the deadline to submit absentee ballot applications IN PERSON to a county clerk is June 2 at 3pm. As noted, if you mail the application in, the deadline is May 27!)
Looks like there is still plenty of time for registering friends and neighbors to rock their vote too!
I just received this campaign update with the title: "It's Time for Real Democrats to Join Together". I have to say, it's probably the most offensive title they could have been given to it.
I know that many people who frequent this site are "Real Bergen Democrats" - and I understand that they picked that name specifically to separate themselves from Joe Ferriero. I'm on the record at the time for saying it was offensive - not for trying to separate from Ferriero, but because it specifically aims at dividing the Democratic Party. It says, "Yeah, I know you guys fund-raise and canvass and work your butts off, but you support the wrong guy, so you aren't really part of our Party."
That's just childish. It may be necessary in Bergen County where that merry band of rabble rousers really is fighting for control of the Party (I'm unconvinced, but support their fight anyway). But it is certainly not necessary in the Senatorial primary. Not when you're coasting on a 31-point lead in the polls.
First, this is not aimed at any race in particular - but it might just apply to every race in particular. Before anyone fires off a comment hatin' me for anything; remember: It isn't aimed at any race in particular. I'm just talking general practices here.
I am personally in favor of having every single election of any type being contested. There is nothing that is more an affront to the principle of democracy than to have an election just handed to someone (anyone) because no one signed up to oppose them. A challenged primary - in theory - can actually improve a candidate's standing (without demolishing the competition).
Make the jump. It's time to discuss this and get it on the record.
The latest Bergen County nuttiness. Here is an article from the Record for today. Teaneck councilman Adam Gussen is challenging a sitting County Committee member and is demanding quite petulantly that Loretta give him priority.
"We will not cower to her political will," Adam Gussen, a Teaneck councilman and county committee challenger, said in published statement about Weinberg. "We will never back down from our desire to participate."
Now THAT is funny. Do you have any idea how many people across NJ who have been encouraged to get involved in County Committee by Senator Weinberg herself? At LEAST Hundreds. Senator Weinberg encouraged me and at the time, I was just an ordinary resident of Bergen County. This attempt to paint Senator Weinberg as anti-semitic is ridiculous as well as fishy. The slate that just magically appeared to challenge what should be non-partisan councilmembers in Teaneck has been assembled- rumor has it - by Joe Ferriero's friends. Loretta does not "blackball" people. She does care about her constituents - all of them - and tries always to do right by them. She has supported us in 2006 when Joe Ferriero unfairly threw us off the line as INCUMBENTS simply for voting for her. We did not petulantly DEMAND her help. She was gracious enough to help us deal with a tiny tyrant named Joe Ferriero.
There's room in the pool for everyone, Adam. Loretta always says so. Just make sure Joe Ferriero isn't lurking just below the surface like an alligator. He does bite.
.gif)
