Friday, August 07, 2009
Spinning New Jersey and Virginia
It is only the beginning of August, and Jon Corzine is so nervous about Chris Christie that he is trying to hang George W. Bush on him. You get the feeling that we will be seeing ads of this sort in any blue state campaign where a Republican threatens to win for many years to come. Think about clicking through and voting against the video. You know, to send a message.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration and its allies are trying to argue that a Christie victory in New Jersey would be a purely local phenomenon. That may indeed be more true than in Virginia, where Republicans are trying to link the Democrat Creigh Deeds with President Obama (as opposed to New Jersey, where Corzine is hoping to bask in his glory), but there is no question that New Jerseyans, tolerant as we are of corruption in our government, are also very skeptical of its competence. That's a problem for a president who pushes statist solutions for every problem, real or perceived.
16 Comments:
By 
JPMcT, at
Fri Aug 07, 09:42:00 AM:
Obama's DISapproval rating in our fair state of Virginia is now topping 51%. Approval at only 37%. This first Deeds/McDonnell debate was an occasion for McDonnell to come down hard on Deeds for his support of Cap&Trade and Card Check.
Deeds also did NOT appear with Obama when The Big Zero invaded out state to give his health care snake oil pitch.
Deeds is currently down by double digits. I suspect the dirt-diggers and the Acorn bum-bussers will have to work overtime to Frankenize the election for Mr. Deeds.
By Bill C, at
Fri Aug 07, 09:58:00 AM:
Corzine has spent 10 of millions of his own money to win elected office. It would be epic kismet if his poor political skills and bad timing lead to a defeat in one of the bluest of blue states.
By 
, at
Fri Aug 07, 11:08:00 AM:
It's the downside of getting control of all levers of power, just as the Democrats did in 1993 when Florio lost to Whitman. When you control the White House and both houses of Congress and the state legislature as well, there's no scapegoats to tar any more and blame for your problems. So the "Attack Bush" card is really the only one Corzine has to play, but its one that gets weaker and weaker the more and more legislation the Democrats churn out in D.C. and the longer the economic stagnation continues.
By Brian, at
Fri Aug 07, 11:52:00 AM:
Obama's likely right about it being a local issue. For example, I despise the Republican Party on the national level but have occasionally voted for competent Republican state and local candidates when pitted against Democratic hacks. If I were a New Jersey resident, I'd seriously consider Christie given the level of NJ corruption and lack of progress over the issue.
By Escort81, at
Fri Aug 07, 12:18:00 PM:
Brian, your open-minded approach is appreciated here on TigerHawk.
I tend to vote more for the person -- to the extent I can get a good read -- than for a party.
Is it reasonable to assume that candidates will be running against Bush in 2010 and 2012? Should we start a pool right now predicting the last year a candidate runs with anti-Bush TV or Web ads? If the phenomenon goes on long enough, W. will overtake Nixon as the most hated man by the left (which I think had more to do with personalities than actual policies over the course of Nixon's career).
Which makes me wonder, are there still any old-time Republicans around who hate FDR? When my father was an undergrad at Princeton in the mid-1930s, and was one of the few Democrats on campus, there was a visceral dislike for the President among many undergrads. He was despised by people in the moneyed classes.
So, then, which modern (post-war)President engendered the least hatred on the part of the other party? Ike?
By , at
Fri Aug 07, 12:48:00 PM:
Escort81:
Re FDR syndrome. Some cousins of mine from the Midwest had a Republican schoolteacher grandmother, who was very vocal about her politics, as she was about anything. Back in the 1950s my cousin would deliberately get his grandmother riled up about FDR- about all he had to say was "That man," and his grandmother would be off to the races, into an anti-FDR tirade.
By , at
Fri Aug 07, 01:23:00 PM:
Escort, it's nice your civil and all, but what exactly in Brian's post shows an open mind?
"I Despise Republicans on the national level"
Why?
Are we to simply accept insipid statements and call them open minded?
By Georg Felis, at
Fri Aug 07, 02:32:00 PM:
It is openminded to have a certain "Despise" mindset towards the Republican party on the national level. Many Conservative Republicans feel just a bit put out by the actions of the national party in terms of taxation, and their general spendy tendencies during the Bush years. But we have an adjective much stronger than "Despise" for the feelings we have for the national Democratic party. (Which I will not use, as this is a family blog)
By , at
Fri Aug 07, 03:56:00 PM:
Anon: Escort was probably referring to my willingness to vote for competent Republicans at the state and local level. (Helps to read the whole context.) Escort's probably happy to get a vote for his side whenever he can.
I'd probably agree that I'm not very open-minded to Republicans on the national level, after long sad experience. Eventually they might imitate the British Tories like they used to, but I think it will take two more lost presidential elections before that happens.
I hope the Dems don't get too fat and corrupt (like in NJ) before the Republicans finally become a responsible opposition party.
By , at
Fri Aug 07, 05:13:00 PM:
I don't know guys, i have a Republican governor here in California and things are no better than when we had a democrat in office.
Corruption in NJ knows no party. We'll see if Christie is any less corrupt than Corzine. Doubt it. He'll probably be indicted or resign within a year for some sort of bad thing.
Vote the person, not the party. Duh! That's why I couldn't for for McCain or Palin. McCain's lousy excuse for not supporting Sotomayor's nomination just solidified the reasons I would have never voted for him.Like her or not, she was clearly qualified for the job, at least as much as Alito or Roberts. He is too beholden to the far, far right wing of the party and has NO backbone. Palin, even worse. Nuff said.
By Escort81, at
Fri Aug 07, 08:38:00 PM:
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Escort81, at
Fri Aug 07, 08:41:00 PM:
Brian is correct that I was applauding his willingness to vote for competent Republicans at the local level, notwithstanding his self-professed leftward tilt, IIRC.
I've been registered to vote since the late 1970s, and have never registered with a particular political party. In PA, that means I don't vote in the closed primaries (recall that Sen. Specter made noises about looking into changing that this year so that he could survive the Republican primary, then switched parties when he realized that wouldn't work; now he has Sestak to deal with). I just never felt completely comfortable with a specific party, or maybe it's a bit of that Groucho Marx concept of not wanting to be a member of any club that would have me. So, I'm neither a RINO nor a DINO, strictly speaking. I am not sure that party structures are as important as they were a generation ago, as national candidates now tend to generate their own followings (Obama being the leading and most recent example of that, to the point that it is both impressive and concerning). Last I read, Victor Davis Hanson stated that he was still a registered Democrat, but if that is still the case, he might be regarded as the turd in the punchbowl at local party meetings.
Sen. McCain is a man who has endured more than I can imagine. I disagree that he has no backbone, but would agree that he can be a difficult politician to peg. I think he could have been a decent but not great President (you know how to lead at a basic level if you've been a successful officer in the U.S. Navy), where President Obama will end up being written about by historians as either another Carter or a 21st Century FDR (hopefully without a world war). I think McCain is at the point in his career now that he kind of wakes up and votes depending on how he feels that day. I am surprised he did not vote for Sotomayor, since she clearly was qualified in terms of her resume and intellect, the no vote carries no effect, and even uber-conservative Pat Toomey said he would have voted for her because she was qualified and President Obama nominated her.
By , at
Fri Aug 07, 09:51:00 PM:
Nice stuff, escort. Agree with you to a point. I think that McCain is a shill for the far right wing of the Republican Party, afraid to cross them for fear he be seen as "unpatriotic" eventhough he was a "hero". Look what the Republican party did to Max Cleland, a true hero. What he should do is go gentle in to the good night, retire and return to sunny Phoenix with his wife and daughter. Retirement would be good for him.
I was actually a HUGE McCain fan, as was my 23 year old daughter, right up till the time he became a mouthpiece and an panderer to uber right wing causes.
By JPMcT, at
Sat Aug 08, 06:10:00 PM:
"Look what the Republican party did to Max Cleland"
Boy, it's amazing how often this CRAP resurfaces! The only thing the Republican party did to Max cleland was to beat him in an election.
He blew himself up picking up a friendly fire grenade on a non-combat mission. Simple, straightforward and true.
He did not even get a Purple Heart for the injury...because it was not combat acquired.
If it all ended there, my heart would go out to the guy and I would still considerhim a man who went to a foreign shore in the service of his country and oost his limbs.
But it DIDN'T end there.
His political ads and his liberal media support "sexed up" his injuries. He was in battle, he jumped out of a helicopter under fire, he was injured by an enemy grenade...blah, blah, blah.
...and it was all a lie...
So, yeah, vickie...keep on drinking the kool aide and reading the New York Times and blaming Republicans for "destroying" Max Cleland.
Facts are stubborn things....
By Trochilus, at
Sat Aug 08, 08:08:00 PM:
On Politickernj, an ostensibly "neutral" political website, owned by Jared Kushner -- son of the convicted McGreevey pal and former fund-raiser, Charles Kushner -- they have begun locating Corzine ads in the space ordinarily reserved for the "lead" blog story.
It would be like the NY Times locating a faux story, one that is really an ad, at the top fold, far right column of their paper.
The latest one is this Corzine Ad about limiting gun purchases. But they change them periodically.
However, though they have included the ads in the lead story slot, they have not disabled the comment threads.
So, several of us have simply taken to posting challenging comments -- not necessarily ones on topic -- right on the Corzine ads! Notice that one has 14 comments, of which only one is "friendly."
Memo to self: I keep forgetting to write to Jon to thank him!
By , at
Mon Aug 10, 01:47:00 PM:
JP, you're out of line.
Cleland thought it was one of his grenades, where he had already bent the pin to keep it safe during transport.
He also got both the Bronze and Silver Stars for combat action.
If you can match your record up against his, that would be pretty impressive.
More info here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Cleland#Early_life_and_military_service
