Kerry Spot [ jim geraghty reporting ]
TWO CONFLICTING TAKES ON NEW JERSEY [10/27 06:07 PM]
From NYC-based radio show host Kevin McCullough:
The reasons why Kerry is doing badly in New Jersey is partly not his own doing but his party's. New Jersey has the most corrupt state government in the entire Union. The Democrats are in control of everything - and as could be expected - everything is a mess. Governor McGreevey named his gay lover to the position of "Homeland Security Advisor", the man wasn't even a U.S. Citizen, nor could he even get the clearance needed to attend Federal security briefings. And this is happening in the second most impacted state following 9/11.
BUT weren't those "boys nights out" fun...
The Democratic corruption has left a bad taste, but voters in New Jersey are also realizing that they don't have any state-wide elected officials that they really had a voice in putting there. McGreevey is stepping aside and an "appointed" Governor will run the state for 18 months. One of the Senators bought his way to the Senate. The other was a bait and switch for New Jersey voters.
Look for a voter's rebellion...sick of the corruption, New Jersey voters will choose President Bush as their choice, even some out of protest.
With the 16 electoral votes that go with it, New Jersey will significantly change the electoral college count. And if it goes BUSH early on Tuesday night - a state that BUSH spent almost no money in, Kerry can kiss the White House goodbye.
A more pessimistic take from Kerry Spot reader Jon:
New Jersey is still a predominately Democratic state. The few Republicans who are elected in New Jersey could easily pass for mainstream to liberal Democrats in what the New Yorker crowd contemptuously refers to as the ‘flyover’ states. That aside, there may well be broader BC support than is superficially evident, but because of the near psychopathic nature of the disturbingly large, growing and increasingly unrestrained barbarian wing of the Democratic party, there is a strong tendency for supporters to reserve their views for the voting booth. For example, at my company, which is involved in overseas construction for the State Dept and the military, KE supporters number less than 10%, but there is not a BC04 bumper sticker to be seen in the parking lot. Paint jobs and windshields are expensive.
I am not sure that any observer here can accurately divine whether the lingering aftereffects of 9/11 will counterbalance the widespread, if misguided, dissatisfaction with Iraq. Have our multitudinous soccer moms really turned into security moms? Will endorsements from the likes of Ed Koch move a usefully large segment of New Jersey’s large traditionally Democratic Jewish community into the Republican column? I have my doubts.
My acquaintances, colleagues, and I will be voting Tuesday, but our hope is less to carry New Jersey than to keep the KE plurality down with an eye on the national totals. I expect to see a closer vote than 2000, but enough for NJ to go red? Unless observers are badly misreading the mood of the electorate or the Republicans have found a heretofore unknown mother lode to mine, I doubt it, though no one would be happier to be proven wrong.
POLL ROUNDUP [10/27 05:18 PM]
The gist from RealClearPolitics today: Bush gains a point in the Washington Post tracking poll, but still trails by one point; Rasmussen's robots have Bush up 2, Zogby (urgh) has Bush up 1; TIPP has Bush up 4; ICR has Bush up 3.
Detroit News has Kerry up 1 in Michigan, and two polls show Bush up in Missouri, but maybe a little closer than Team Bush would prefer.
I am also informed that Susan Estrich recently said on Fox News that this evening CBS will release a poll showing Kerry up 6 in Florida. She reportedly added that the New York Times was afraid to go with their own poll yesterday but that CBS will go with it tonight. She also, according to a Fox watcher, said Democratic internal polls show Kerry up ever-so-slightly in Ohio and that Minnesota and Wisconsin were "trending toward Kerry".
I don't believe any of that stuff. Are we really supposed to believe that the New York Times wouldn't trust a poll showing bad news for Bush? |
