Incumbents sweep New Jersey Congressional  Primaries (NY Times)

N.J. congressional incumbents win primary elections despite tea party-backed challenges (Star Ledger)

GOP incumbents in New Jersey Beat Back Tea-Party Challenges (Wall Street Journal)

The real question here is why is the impact of the Tea Parties so much stronger away from New Jersey?  I suspect it has more to do with the feelings of the voter’s belief in other places that they can actually effect change.  And since primary day in New Jersey is really all about parties and the games has always been wired there, most people just didn’t pay attention. 

I read a blog comment earlier that the reason NJ was unaffected by the “tea party” surge experienced by other states is that our citizens are so much more educated unlike their “stupid redneck uneducated brethren in the south”.  Not sure how this jibe with California and Nevada but let’s go with it.

If New Jersey voters are so smart, why do they routinely accept corrupt machine politicians as status quo and almost NEVER hold them accountable.  If they are so smart, why do they accept that government employee unions literally control Trenton, from candidate funding in the assembly and senate to their local school board.  And why would a really smart person fall for one of the dumbest talking points of all time: Tax the rich guy because he has too much and he can pay for the state’s problems instead of me (This same ‘smart’ person of course has seen their property taxes go up 100 percent in the past 5 years and their gross state tax burden increase by at least a third since Bush was elected).

That’s not smart.  That’s stupid.  And when this  same person bemoans the lack of real choice in November here while spirited competition is running red hot in California, Nevada, Florida, South Carolina and many other states, remind them how smart they were on a day in June.

That’s McCartney 679 votes ahead of her partner, Vic Cirilo, who is 183 votes ahead of the Jerry Guarino and 498 votes ahead of Joe Krakoviak.

If the remaining 5% of the districts are about the same in number, they constitute about 852 votes — 426 people casting two votes each. It seems very, very unlikely that McCartney would receive fewer votes than Cirilo; it’s impossible for Jerry Guarino would receive more than 426 votes, and he needs 679. Hence Susan McCartney will receive the most votes in the Council race.

For Guarino to get ahead of Cirilo, he’d need to get 21% more of the vote than Cirilo: not 21%, but 21% more, so that if Cirilo got 10%, Guarino would need 31%. For Krakoviak, the number is 58%, which is impossible. Barring a miracle, Cirilo will get the second seat in the Council race.

—–

In the mayoral race, it’s much closer, but not close enough. Schmidt has 49.1% of the vote, or 4590. Parisi has 50.8%, or 4750. That’s a difference of only 160 votes out of 9349.

Again, doing the math, the 5% of districts not yet reported may have about 492 votes in them. To catch up, Schmidt needs to overcome that 160-vote lead, which would require him to get 326 votes and Parisi to get 166 votes, or 66% and 33% of the vote, respectively. Though possible, that seems unlikely. I’m calling Parisi the winner.

I could be wrong if there’s a greater population density (i.e., more than 852 Council votes, more than 492 mayoral votes) left in those districts. I could also be wrong if there’s an unusual demographic in those districts (e.g., a higher density of orthodox Jews, who are more likely to vote for Schmidt). But unless something’s wacky, we’re stuck with the status quo.

If Schmidt couldn’t win this year, he will never win. Conservatives need a different candidate.

Cirilo was elected, at least in part, by riding on McCartney’s and Parisi’s coattails. They used the same basic collateral, and they had people at the polling booths touting all three candidates. Conservatives need to be less independent, and create a slate. That would have been pretty lousy this year, because Schmidt isn’t a good candidate; however, in the future that kind of synergy will be very important.

I’m more pissed off than I want to admit.

The state has the highest property tax rates in the nation. Last year, voters approved 73% of school budgets, which included new levies.

Voters rejected 314 of 537 budgets. Here are the official results from the New Jersey School Boards Association.

Christie, a freshman Republican, called yesterday’s vote “a seismic change that reflects, I believe, a changed attitude in New Jersey.”

“They’ve had enough. They want real, fundamental change,” Christie said at a press conference this afternoon.

Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions however it seems that given voters past history, this election represents a serious statement from citizens much as the election of Chris Christie made a statement last year. However, not everyone seems to get it:

“Clearly, the voters sent a message yesterday to the governor and the Legislature,” said Barbara Keshishian, president of the New Jersey Education Association. “They need to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new budget plan, because this one is killing public education and driving property taxes even higher, neither of which is on the public’s wish list.

“The governor should start by reinstituting the ‘millionaire’s tax,’ which would restore $800 million in revenues.”

What an interesting assessment by the NJEA. The governor asks teachers to accept a pay freeze and not only did the NJEA oppose it, they went on the attack. It was interesting to note that 80% districts that accepted pay freezes passed their budgets (USA today). That tells me that the ‘millionaire tax’ notwithstanding, voters knew what they were doing. And the NJEA clearly wants recast this debate to be about gouging another class of voter to continue to pay for out of control education spending.

The problem the NJEA has is that the many of us in New Jersey in the private sector have accepted wage freezes for several years now. It isn’t just the past two years issues. Ever since 9/11, companies have been scaling back wages and benefits. And the downturn has made the average person more appreciative of maintaining their employment. In this climate, “demands” for pay increases for the highest paid teachers in the country are not resonating with the average person.

On Tuesday evening I went to my local polling place in Burlington county after my son’s baseball game. When we walked up to the door of the polling place, I couldn’t help but notice that 4 people were standing just off the walkway with a giant bag emblazoned with NJEA on the side. The bag measured roughly 36 inches wide and about 24 inches tall. I mentioned to the polling judges that standing outside a polling place and politicking is normally considered illegal in our state they went and investigated. The teachers claimed they didn’t have any signs. But it was clear what they were doing. They were looking for voters with children in the school to remind them that “it’s all about the kids”. The problem is that we know and they know it isn’t-it’s about them. And just like they don’t get simple rules like keeping polling places free of intimidation, they don’t get that we have had enough of their never ending money grab.

And following in their pathetic footsteps is this gem from a real classy Democrat Don Fowler.

The only saving grace is that outside of bitter and mean spirited Democrat party circles, regular people don’t care for this kind of politics.

The Soprano State-New Jersey’s Culture of Corruption

If the book is half as good as the article about it, I can’t wait to read the details. One of the references from the book discusses why it has become such a problem to get spending under control.

“In New Jersey, government is not about taking care of what people can’t do for themselves. It’s about jobs,’’ reads the introduction. That’s government jobs, of course, and not just in the huge state bureaucracy.

It’s jobs in Jersey’s 566 towns, 616 school districts, 21 counties, 486 sewage and other authorities, 187 fire districts and 92 special agencies with the power to tax.

Of course, this is just the beginning.

The book says there are 444,000 local government workers, 154,500 on the state payroll and 19,119 elected officials, not counting the governor, and 120 state lawmakers. It works out to 81 government workers per square mile, compared with the national average of 6.

So when the Governor says that it would be horrible to cut state employees and just the other day was so proud that the state employee roll was cut by 1,500 since he came to office…..that’s just one percent of the state headcount, we should be a bit skeptical.

Get out and read the book. I intend to and will post on what I find personally.

“Maybe if we had a more effective U.S. senator, the governor wouldn’t have to borrow $40 billion,” Pennachio said.

I didn’t live in New Jersey under Christie Whitman’s administration, but apparently she beat up Democrat Bill Bradley during the Senate race in 1990 because he didn’t repudiate Gov. Florio’s tax hikes — and came within 2 points of him.

This is particularly choice:

Lautenberg spokesman Brendan Gill said the Republican candidates “will say anything to avoid talking about how we are going to bring our troops home, stimulate our economy, improve health care and boost education. Sen. Lautenberg is working for New Jersey to tackle those problems now.”

In other words, Senator Lautenberg is working for New Jersey by trying to federalize everything — making New Jersey’s statehood less relevant — and would really rather avoid talking about what’s happening in his own back yard. Fortunately, he has said that “now is not the time to be raising tolls.” Even Corzine’s friends aren’t his friends on this topic.

Hello Jake,

When Michelle and I talked about my running for president, one of the goals we both shared for this campaign was to leave the political process better off than we found it.

We wanted to create a campaign that would energize and empower activists, and hopefully create new ones who would stay involved for years to come. We believed that at this moment in our history, we had an opportunity to move beyond cynicism and remind our fellow citizens of the potential of politics to transform our country.

This campaign has come from a long way back to be competitive in the Democratic primary. Many said we couldn’t do it, but we are here because people are ready for change and ready to work together to bring it about.

Today, you can help.

If you live in one of the 22 states that are holding primaries and caucuses today, make sure you vote. But also make sure to bring someone with you.

You can find your polling location on our website:

http://action.barackobama.com/feb5statepages

No matter where you live, you can also get involved right now — by volunteering to help get out the vote or by making calls from your own home using our online calling tool:

http://action.barackobama.com/call

We have an opportunity to give our country a new direction. We can replace the politics of division and destruction with a new politics of engagement and hope.

Thank you for your support, and thank you to the JohnKerry.com community for all you’ve done for the Democratic Party.

Thank you,
Barack Obama

I’ll say this for him: he gives the impression of being positive, poised, and professional. I can’t help but respect him as an orator. But what is he actually saying? I find no substance in his words.

He claims he won’t be divisive or cynical, but his beliefs are far to the left of mine. If he wants to “make progress” or “give our country a new direction” then he will have to do it by fighting me and people who think like I do.

He talks about “engagement and hope”; since this email reaches his base, it must be things that he thinks they agree on: universal health care, citizenship for illegal aliens, and a pullout from Iraq. But I don’t hope for those things. I don’t want him to engage in those things.

If he wants to talk to me about them then I’m happy to discuss non-governmental and non-federal solutions to health care and the immigration problem, but what little he has said indicate that his solutions and mine won’t coincide.

And I find that cynical. He claims not to be divisive so that he can get elected by a populace that is sick of division, but he’s far enough to the left that he will surely divide the reds and blues as much as GWB did. He is not, as my friend Dennis says, offering something new. It’s still “pap”, in Dennis’s words, just not John Edwards-style pap.

As a side note, Dennis and I were talking today, and he reiterated something he’s noted before: if the left hadn’t become so overrun with hatred for GWB, they could have compromised with him much more and advanced their agendas better. His positions on education, health care, immigration, and other things clearly put him to the left of this year’s Republican candidates — why couldn’t they work with him? GWB should have been more divisive for Republicans (think No Child Left Behind, Harriet Myers, etc.) than he was for Democrats. At least when someone’s in the other party you expect them to be against your programs.

His podcast on Super-Duper Tuesday is a keeper. One point he makes that few others have discussed is this: the Super Tuesday primaries only matter if they decide the Democratic nominees. The states who moved their primary earlier in the year did so to increase their relative importance, but if there’s no clear winner today, then they will in fact be less important than the states with later primaries. As Bruce says, changing the primaries often has unintended consequences.

That’s just one little bit — the whole podcast is well worth listening to.