Showing posts with label New Jersey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Jersey. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Final Thoughts on Yesterday’s Elections

Summary: Dave at WAYLA reviews the November 2009 elections and their implications.


First I want to start by looking back on my predictions from Monday. In Virginia I said McDonnell would win handedly against Deeds, and he did. In fact, he won with 59% of the vote - 2% more than I expected.

In New Jersey, I wrongly suggested Corzine could squeak in a victory, and no matter who won it would be close (as in, by a point or so) - as it turned out, Christie defeated the incumbent governor by more than 4%.

In Maine, I suggested it would come down to whether the youth and progressive votes would turn out in proportionally higher numbers than the older voters and conservatives. Unfortunately, I don’t have the exit poll information to check that, but I’ll get back to this race later in the post.

In New York City I turned out to be dead-on in my prediction: incumbent Mayor Michael Bloomberg won, but with a much smaller margin than pundits were predicting. I was hearing he might win by as much as 10%-15% yesterday - he won by just 5% over City Comptroller Bill Thompson.

In New York’s 23rd Congressional District I was wrong yet again, assuming that Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman would defeat Democrat Bill Owens by a substantial margin. Owens won with a 3-point lead over Hoffman. In fairness, I was second-guessing that prediction yesterday hours before polls closed in New York, and I’ll explain why shortly.

Second of all, let me stress that I don’t believe this was a referendum on President Obama or the Democratic Party. In fact, Tom Schaller had a very interesting post the other day, suggesting it could be more of a referendum on the GOP.

However, most of this comes down to the local circumstances of each race. As we mentioned last week, the Deeds defeat - and the extent to which he lost - had more to do with poor campaigning on the part of him and his party than on anything to do with the “spending in Washington” we’ve heard so much about. Chuck Todd said it best when he pointed out “[the Virginia race is] a good reminder that campaigns matter.”

In New Jersey, Corzine was plagued by the difficulties of governing in a recession - something we’ve discussed time and time again. In order to balance the state budget he had to increase property taxes and reduce services - actions that would be unpopular no matter what. The property tax increase was particularly damaging to him - according to the exit polls, a whopping 26% of voters said it was their main issue in the race, and that meant a significant drop in support (by perhaps as many as 100,000 voters) in the suburbs of Philadelphia and New York City.


Now let me get back to the elections in Maine and NY-23.

Yesterday something crossed my mind while looking at the polls on Question 1 in Maine - what if we were looking at a Bradley Effect?

To explain, let’s look at the three most recent polls on the issue. Two found that the referendum would fail - a Daily Kos / Research 2000 poll said it would by 1% and a Pan Atlantic poll said it would by 11%. A third poll, conducted by Public Policy Polling, found the referendum would pass by 4% - which is roughly what happened.

It’s important to note that unlike the other two polls, the PPP survey was an automated response poll - allowing respondents to explain their position by punching in numbers on their keypads and not talking to a live person. This allowed them to be honest about their opposition to gay marriage without being embarrassed for what could be perceived as homophobia.

I was led on to that theory by a recent article in Politico on the gay marriage referendum. Just read some of the responses from those interviewed:

"[‘No on 1’] did a very good job of humanizing the issue," said state Sen. Peter Mills, a Republican who voted for the marriage equality law and opposes Question One. "They had gay couples inviting themselves into the Rotary Club and talking about what it's like to live in a world where it's possible to discriminate against somebody just because they're a same-sex couple."…

…"Even in the conservative areas, they don't like the government telling them what to do and making choices for them," said former Defense Secretary William Cohen, who served as a Republican senator from Maine and has not taken a position on Question 1. "Maine people in particular are very open to change, even though it's a moderate-to-conservative state overall."

Republican politicians not only kept mum about the issue, but some even went so far as to oppose Question 1, seemingly to save themselves from what they figured was a socially libertarian electorate. In fact, it seems quite possible that many anti-gay marriage Mainers were hiding their true opinions from their neighbors.

Moving a few hours south of the Pine Tree State we come to New York’s 23rd. Many - including myself - initially figured that Hoffman would solidify support from Scozzafava’s base despite her endorsement of Owens. After all, the polls said he would.

But yesterday two things occurred to me. First, Scozzafava would remain on the ballot, and a sizeable portion of her supporters would vote for her regardless of her decision to drop out - it turned out to be 6% of the electorate.

Second, many of Scozzafava’s supporters probably quickly decided that they would support Hoffman - Owens was a Democrat, after all - and then later changed their minds. The second part of that trend, however, wouldn’t have been reflected in the polls following Scozzafava’s decision - it took place just four days before the election. My guess is a number of these voters took a step back and said “well, I am a center-right conservative, but this Hoffman guy is really out there - he just called Glenn Beck his mentor.”

With a shake-up as dramatic as Scozzafava’s decision, it’s quite possible that her supporters were scrambling like that to make a decision before Tuesday.

Finally, everyone is going to want to point out broader implications about what these elections mean for 2010. Republicans are saying that voters - even blue state voters like those in New Jersey - are rejecting Obama/Democratic policies and that we’ll see this trend continue in 2010. Democrats are arguing that the shake-up in NY-23 indicates that conservative activists are moving the GOP so far to the right that they won’t be electable next year.

The implication I see, however, is along the lines of an idea we’ve discussed before. Next year might be a tough year for Democrats on the state level, but probably not too bad of a year on the federal level.

We saw such trends yesterday. Democrats won in special Congressional elections in New York and California, while losing statewide races in New Jersey and Virginia, not to mention State Legislative seats in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.

Whether those trends will carry on in 2010 will now depend on just how the parties and campaigns position themselves going into next year.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

Happy Election Day 2009

Summary: Happy Election Day - will political predictions come true?

It’s the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November - and although it’s not an even-numbered year this year, today is still Election Day.



With polls closing in Maine, New York, New Jersey, and Virginia in less than 12 hours we thought we’d bring you some Election Day analysis from pundits across the news media and blogosphere.

From NBC Political Director Chuck Todd:

“We know that whether Jon Corzine wins or loses, he won't get 50 percent, meaning more than half of the state voted to oust him in a very blue state.

We know that the Republican Party has to deal with two rifts, one that is ideological, the other a battle between the establishment and grassroots. The two rifts are not interchangeable.

We know that not being associated with either political party is a net plus with many voters — from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s expected victory, to Chris Daggett's influence in New Jersey, to Doug Hoffman's rise in New York's 23rd Congressional District.

And we know that the president's coattails have gotten shorter…

…Let's start with what should be the biggest lesson: The return of the angry independent.

The one thing Daggett and Hoffman have in common is that they both have anti-establishment, anti-political party credentials. And both used those attributes to gain credibility.

While lots of folks want to paint 2010 as either a midterm election like 1994 (Democratic over-reach backlash), or 1982 (economic angst), let me suggest that things are looking more like 1992, when a billionaire gadfly galvanized the radical middle…

…there are a few other things about [the Virginia] race that shouldn't be overlooked.

First, McDonnell avoided a divisive primary and didn't have to "run right" before running to the middle in the general. In fact, McDonnell got to run to the middle the entire year — his ads project a pragmatic problem solver who can work with both parties. It should be a model for Republican gubernatorial candidates in 2010, and perhaps for any Republican pondering a presidential run in 2012…

…Second, McDonnell was of course helped by the inept campaign run by Democrat Creigh Deeds. But the irony is this: Deeds is the most centrist/moderate Democrat the party has nominated this century. He is to the right of Mark Warner, Tim Kaine, and Jim Webb, but he was painted as someone more liberal than any of those three. These mistakes are on Deeds and his campaign. It's a good reminder that campaigns matter.”

From Newsweek’s Howard Fineman:

“President Barack Obama believes in the saving grace of the federal government.

But do the American people?

In a time of economic uncertainty and fear, that is the core question implicit — and sometimes explicit — on Election Day 2009…

…It's always dangerous to extrapolate national trends from scattered local elections such as these.

And of course, as I write, we don't know the results — only which way the polls were heading in the final days. But I think in this case the message is already clear: Voters, who launched the Obama Era with so much hope a year ago, are still hopeful but they're also skeptical.

And they are once again impatient with Washington, and with big shots of any stripe — on Wall Street or the nation's capital — who seem more interested in increasing their own power than truly solving problems.”



From MSNBC host and former Rep. Joe Scarborough:

“A big Republican win in Virginia will not be an earth mover, but instead confirm that the home of Thomas Jefferson and Robert E. Lee is a toss up state that still swings Republican. A Bob McDonnell victory will be seen by most in the media as reflecting a rising discomfort with the explosive growth of Washington, but also, perhaps more importantly, the weakness of the Democratic candidate…

…Every Democratic consultant I've talked to over the past few days has let loose involuntary groans every time they talked about [the New Jersey] race. Many Democrats began quietly predicting the collapse of the independent candidate at the end of last week and assumed that factor would help Christie.

Last minute polls suggest they may be right.

Still, I believe the Democrats' turnout operation should keep this race tight all night. If the race is instead a blowout, that can only be bad news for the Democrats.

And for those second guessing the president's active involvement in Corzine's race, the fact is that Barack Obama had no choice but to jump head first into the Jersey fight. All the president's men know that a Republican sweep in New Jersey and Virginia will strike fear in the hearts of those swing state Democrats who now hold the future of health care in their sweaty moderate hands…

…Hoffman's ascendancy in NY-23 is less about Barack Obama than it is about a decade of bloated and corrupt Republican leadership in Washington, D.C. This race gave the same conservatives who helped drive Ronald Reagan's victory and the 1994 Republican Revolution something to cheer about for the first time in a long time. It also gave them an opportunity to stick it to an incompetent GOP Establishment…

Here are my predictions a little more than 24 hours before the polls close:

Virginia-- Bob McDonnell by 10+
New Jersey-- Chris Christie by 1
New York 23-- Doug Hoffman by 7

…(Despite my prediction, I still have a hard time seeing Jon Corzine losing this race.)”

Also, be sure to check out Politico’s “5 Things to Watch for” in Virginia, New Jersey, and NY-23, as well as a good article on the gay-marriage referendum in Maine.

Monday, November 2, 2009

Predictions for Tomorrow’s Elections

Tomorrow is Election Day for residents in New Jersey, Virginia, Maine, New York City, and New York’s 23rd Congressional District. Last week we analyzed the gubernatorial race in Virginia and found Republican Bob McDonnell to be the likely winner.

Today we take a look at the big races in the other four elections.


New Jersey

Big Race: Governor

Candidates: Jon Corzine (D), Chris Christie (R), Chris Daggett (I)

Analysis: While Corzine has not been a popular incumbent throughout the race, he has been gaining in the polls over the past month or two. Nate Silver suggests the race is largely up in the air at this point, with Christie being a 4:3 favorite. The race has been very negative, and no matter who the undecided voters choose, they’re going to have to select a politician that they’ve heard a lot of bad things about. Largely, this race could come down to which campaign has the best organization for tomorrow - and in New Jersey, it’s typically the Democrat.

Predictions: I would put my money on Corzine, but it is certainly possible that Christie will pull an upset victory. Either way, expect Daggett to do fairly well - perhaps even better than the polls up to this point suggest he will do.


Maine

Big Race: Question 1

Options: A “Yes” vote is to overturn the legalization of gay marriage in Maine, a “No” vote supports gay marriage.

Analysis: This question was thrown on the voters at the last minute, and for a referendum concerning an issue as progressive as gay marriage, it should theoretically be a bad sign for “No on 1” supporters. That being said, “No on 1” has raised significantly more money - including from in-state contributors - and past analysis suggests the electorate will vote this question down. Silver predicts there is an 80% chance that the “No” vote will win. However, a recent Public Policy Polling survey found that Maine voters supported Question 1 at a 51% - 47% margin.

Predictions: If any state can vote this down, it’s a New England state - however, the polls don’t look good. I think it will come down to the youth vote. Young voters were far more opposed to the referendum than older voters, and older voters typically make it to the polls more often. Yet gay marriage is one issue that young voters are extremely passionate about, and they might rally a “No” vote better than conservatives can rally a “Yes” vote tomorrow. We’ll have to wait and see.


New York City

Big Race: Mayor

Candidates: Michael Bloomberg (R,I), Bill Thompson (D)

Analysis: Unfortunately, this race has been a lot less exciting than we hoped. While NYC is an incredibly Democratic city, voters tend to approve of Bloomberg’s pragmatic style of governance. Silver sees Thompson as a 35:1 underdog, with only the Bronx as a winnable borough for him. However, voters in NYC are still upset over Bloomberg’s moves last year to extend term limits and still others are frustrated with his lack of attention towards low income residents. Additionally, Bloomberg’s campaign has been using robo-calls so frequently it’s getting on everyone’s nerves. Nonetheless, voters will probably look past these issues, and Bloomberg’s wealth has made him a very difficult candidate to beat in logistical terms.

Predictions: While I suspect Bloomberg will win, I have some feeling it will be closer than most pundits are saying it will.


NY-23

Big Race: Representative to Congress

Candidates: Bill Owens (D), Doug Hoffman (C)

Analysis: Until this weekend, I would have expected the conservative vote to split about evenly between Republican Dierdre Scozzafava and Hoffman - running on the Conservative Party ticket - allowing Owens to squeak by with a slim victory. On Saturday, however, Scozzafava dropped out - leaving a mass of conservatives to support Hoffman. Of course, she did endorse Owens upon exiting the race, and the district as a whole is far more moderate than Hoffman. Nonetheless, the conservative base is fired up and likely to bring in way more support for Hoffman on Election Day than Scozzafava can do for Owens. In fact, DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen appears to be conceding on that point already.

Predictions: Hoffman will win, and probably by a substantial margin.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Do You Need to be Thin to be a Politician?

Summary: Tensions are high in the New Jersey gubernatorial race as Corzine hints that Christie is too fat!

The gubernatorial race in New Jersey has been about as dirty as we expected it to be, but it appears to be hitting a new low.

Governor Jon Corzine (D-NJ) recently released this seemingly harmless attack ad (as far as attack ads go) about his Republican opponent, former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie:



But then a post on RealClearPolitics.com reviewed the ad and said that by using the line “threw his weight around” Corzine was pulling the “weight card” on Christie, who is notably overweight.

Even if it was intentional, meant to invoke a subconscious response from the voters, it would be impossible to prove. But then Corzine was asked about the ad.

From an interview with the Press of Atlantic City:

"People who flash their credentials or use their offices to accomplish something, people say 'people threw their weight around,'" Corzine said.

Asked directly if he thought Christie was fat, Corzine touched his bare head, smiled and said, "Am I bald?"

There is a lot to say about this new development - particularly what it says about our culture and (more importantly for this blog) America’s voting habits. Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com - however - stole our thunder.

From his recent post:

This, insofar is it goes, is true: Chris Christie is a large man. And one thing that's certainly true of Americans is that they don't elect very many fat governors. Running through pictures of the 50 sitting governors, I come up with only about 10 (20%) who are distinctly overweight, and only 3 (6%) -- Haley Barbour, Bill Richardson, and Sonny Perdue -- who are clearly obese. This compares with percentages on the order of 65 percent and 30 percent for the U.S. adult population. The skinny on the numbers after the jump.

At this point, Silver lists each governor in the country and humorously comments on their physical stature.

He continues…

Now, some of the cases are debatable -- my classifications are probably a bit conservative given that overweight is the new normal in America. Perhaps someone like Brad Henry or Oklahoma or Tim Kaine of Virgina would meet the clinical definition of overweight, along with a few others. Still, it's clear that overweight governors are considerably underrepresented as a percentage of the U.S. population. As an electoral handicap, it probably doesn't rival being atheist or (avowedly!) gay, but I'd probably bet on the skinny woman before the fat man, all else being equal.

It would take a lot of work to figure this out, but I'd guess that this is a relatively recent phenomenon. We've elected quite a few fat Presidents ... William Howard Taft, Grover Cleveland, Teddy Roosevelt -- and Bill Clinton really, though he wore it well. And those men (with the partial exception of Clinton) were elected at a time where being obese was far less typical than it is today.

Certainly, you can see where the Corzine campaign is hoping to go with this one. Let your mind run wild with the not-so-subtle implications: Christie is a fat slob who is underprepared for the pressures of office, a fat cat who will sell out to the special interests, etc. Undoubtedly, their crack research staff uncovered some evidence that Christie's weight is a vulnerability, or at least could be associated with other negatives about him.

But it's one thing for your opponent's weight to be a vulnerability, and another thing to point that out to the voters without looking like an a-hole.

There have been many, many campaigns waged over the years that deftly (or not-so-deftly) implied that the opponent was a closet homosexual, Muslim, communist, or atheist. But being fat isn't like those other things: it's something that everyone can see for themselves. There is no plus-sized closet for fat people, so to speak. And our nation's relationship with obesity and obese people is complicated. Although fat people are perhaps by default objects of disdain, it doesn't take very much to turn them into everyman-ish Bubbas -- objects of sympathy.

Corzine remains in a much better position than he was a month ago. But if this is his campaign's idea of an endgame, he's liable to send Christie's big, fat ass to Trenton.

Well said.

The only thing Silver seemed to miss was along the lines of one point he made: our politicians are mostly skinnier than they used to be.

One likely correlation is this: as food has become easier to produce over the past 100 years, overeating (and eating the wrong things) has become more common for the average American than it has for the rich American. In fact, wealthier Americans are more likely to be thin today because they can afford healthier meals, to get exercise equipment, and go the gym.

Malnutrition is just as serious for working-class Americans as it has ever been - the only difference is that malnutrition is no longer synonymous with hunger for them.

What this suggests is not that it’s necessarily easier for a skinny person to be elected because of their low weight (although it may), it could simply be that the skinny person is more likely to be elected because they can afford to self-fund their campaigns (like Corzine) or at least significantly help their campaign with their own resources.

It would be interesting for political scientists to study exactly what the effect of weight is on a candidate’s chances.

Monday, July 20, 2009

A Wealthy Governor Short on Campaign Cash

Today WAYLA reports on local politics from New Jersey

Governor Jon Corzine (D-NJ) has not been short of woes in his tough re-election battle this year, but the one area where he always had the leg-up on GOP opponent Chris Christie in campaign money.

According to a New York Times article last week, however, Corzine is now struggling on that front as well.

[A]fter a costly divorce and a steep decline in his net worth [since the Wall Street collapse last year], Mr. Corzine, the onetime chief executive of Goldman Sachs, is in the unfamiliar position of seeking donations to help foot the bill for his campaign…

…Mr. Corzine is trying to raise upward of $15 million from donors, according to people involved, which he hopes to match with no more than $25 million of his own.

He is calling wealthy donors personally to ask for money, holding receptions and staging larger events, like a performance by Jon Bon Jovi last month.

On Thursday, President Obama joined him at a $5,000- to $10,000-a-plate luncheon expected to raise more than $1 million.

But Obama and Bon Jovi aren’t making the new fundraising experience much easier for Corzine. According to campaign aids, convincing Democrats to foot the bill for a governor that’s well known for his money has been difficult.

Several people trying to raise money for Mr. Corzine described resistance from prospective contributors who asked why the governor did not just reach into his wallet again.

“We always talk about it and joke about it, how it’s like selling sand to the Saudis…people say, ‘I’m having trouble paying my bills; what does he need my money for?’”

Of course, a campaign’s finance operation is not an island to itself - the results of a fundraiser, for instance, can often have a great impact on the political nature of a campaign’s efforts.

Take, for example, the Bon Jovi fundraising concert…

Mr. Corzine drew screaming rock ’n’ roll fans from as far as Hartford to a fundraiser in Newark headlined by Mr. Bon Jovi.

Some had come for the music, not the politics. Among them was Judy Grabler, a homemaker from Edison, N.J., who called Mr. Corzine “out of touch” and said she opposed much of what he had done as governor.

Sitting in a $300 seat, Ms. Grabler said she was appalled when the singer disappeared after only three numbers. “I kept thinking he would be back after the speeches,” she said of Mr. Bon Jovi. But he did not return.

Nor did hundreds of Corzine donors who had filed out just before the governor took the stage.

Frankly, that is not the sort of image a campaign wants to present to voters.

None of this is unfamiliar to campaign professionals who have seen wealthier candidates try to raise money rather than self-fund their campaigns. Nor is the current slump surprising to those who work in political fundraising. We mentioned back in February that the current recession doesn’t appear to be leaving campaign politics as a safe industry.

Luckily for Corzine, Christie isn’t doing much better on the fundraising side of things. The Republican depends on the state’s public finance system to provide matching funds, but that limits his campaign spending to $11 million this cycle. Corzine could easily spend all of the $40 million he hopes to raise from private donors and put in himself.

But that’s still short of the combined $100 million he’s put into his races in the past when he was more popular. Now, trailing in the polls by as much as 10 points, a four-to-one cash advantage might not be enough.

We’ll have to wait and see.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Will Republicans Start a Comeback in New Jersey?

Today WAYLA reports on local politics from New Jersey.

Last night, moderate GOP candidate, former U.S. attorney Chris Christie, defeated the conservative small town Mayor Steve Lonegan for the Republican nomination for governor of New Jersey.

Now Christie will take on entrenched Democratic Governor Jon Corzine for the November 2009 General Election.

Currently Christie has a good lead Corzine in the polls. According to a Quinnipiac poll released May 20, Christie’s leads Corzine 45% - 38%, with independents supporting Christie 52% - 25%, and Republicans much more supportive of their nominee than Democrats are of Corzine.

A Rasmussen poll confirms this trend, with Corzine trailing Christie 47% - 38%. A Research 2000/DailyKos poll also finds Corzine behind 46% - 39%.

Much of this is due to the budget shortfalls that New Jersey - like so many other states - is facing in light of the recession. Recently, the governor suggested the state’s popular property tax rebate be cancelled to make up this shortfall.

Yet Democrats outnumber Republicans considerably in the Garden State, where a Republican has not won a state-wide race in 12 years.

Can the GOP really pull it off?

Winning a campaign comes down to three factors - time, people, and money. The most important of the three is time.

With 152 days until the General Election, Corzine will have plenty of time to mount a decent campaign if he can put it together properly. But if those who think they know who they support don’t change their minds, Corzine will have to win over the undecided voters at - at least - a 2 to 1 basis. That is easier said than done.

It’s hard to gauge the second factor - people (volunteers) - because there is really no scientific way of observing who will have the most ground support. At least not at this point. But although New Jersey is a remarkably Democratic state, Corzine is not the most popular politician within the party. 23% of Democratic primary voters opposed him yesterday - a big number for an incumbent. It seems unlikely he will bring in the number of volunteers that his campaign would like to recruit.

Of course, this won’t be an easily won factor for Christie either, as he was certainly the moderate of the two Republican candidates. Typically volunteers are activists who are very ideologically aligned to the right or left - not the middle.

In terms of money, Corzine has the advantage. The governor has raised $3.2 million to Christie’s $2.2 million. Furthermore, Corzine is wealthy. As a former Goldman Sachs CEO he has been able to put $2.3 million of his own money into the race. His net worth may be as high as $40 million. In order to match that, Christie will need a miracle.

But despite a fundraising advantage, Corzine’s future does not look so bright. Nothing is certain, but it will take a lot of effort on the part of his campaign - and perhaps a few slip-ups from Christie’s - to retain his office.

And a victory in New Jersey would be a big win for the GOP as America heads into the 2010 midterm elections.