Letters from readers...or trolls....whatever.

We recently received the following communication to our email at njtaxrevolution.com:

r u contingent of the Republican Party? ... similar to Dems: "Victory ’09, a project of the NJDSC” (Democratic State Committee).

Regardless, any explanation for Daggett's surprisingly low tally, far lower than pre-election polls? Two-thirds of my property taxes go to the school system which, in turn, is mostly labor cost.

Wasn't Daggett the only major candidate to propose a specific, workable remedy? If so, any indication that property tax cut tied to municipal fiscal restraint (CPI cap) would garner support tho Daggett's candidacy was rejected?

Lastly, where's the best source (website) to find gov.-elect Christie's property tax plan.
Thanks in advance for any info and insight.

The first thing I would like you to know is that the email came from someone who resembles someone really close to the Daggett campaign. But that is neither here not there as the points he brings up are worth discussing.

First, as to njtaxrevolution.com being an arm of the Republican party. If you trace our history we started this web site around the time of Jon Corzine's sales tax hike. We finally had enough. Jake and I have full time jobs and are software guys. We have zero formal affiliation to the Republican party or the Libertarian Party who both link to our site. However, given that we are conservatives, it is obvious that our audience are mainly Libertarians and Republicans. We receive no outside funding from anyone. Our opinions are our own. And our editorial agenda is made clear on our site.

Regardless, any explanation for Daggett's surprisingly low tally, far lower than pre-election polls?

Frankly, I do not believe that Daggett had a surprisingly low tally. If you asked me before the election, based on the polls I would have had him between 6-8. Why? Daggett only surged in a very limited set of polls and in none of the polls that we consider the most trustworthy did he ever crack 12. Recognize that there are media outlets in this state that wanted Chris Daggett to do well. Why? Because they wanted to support the incumbent and Jon Corzine never cracked 42% in any legitimate poll. That means that he could not win without a split election three ways and the third candidate needed to get 9% or more.

When you couple Daggett's real core support (probably around 3-5 when you consider the last minute 'open to change' respondents) and his ballot position, he performed within the margin of error.

Wasn't Daggett the only major candidate to propose a specific, workable remedy? If so, any indication that property tax cut tied to municipal fiscal restraint (CPI cap) would garner support tho Daggett's candidacy was rejected?

We have no idea whether or not Daggett's remedy here was workable or not and neither does he. To declare that property taxes are too high and it is all about school salaries and fiscal restraint is somewhat questionable. There are many budget busters in every town and municipality in this state including:

- Abbott school redistribution
- Growth within formerly rural towns resulting in major capital expenditures
- Redundant spending on town infrastructure
- Too many municipalities and too much government infrastructure
- COAH requirements that force density on towns that don't want it

I will support the NJEA here (I know, shocker) and not allow the schools to be blamed for every property tax ill. There are some loose spending towns however there are also many towns that try their best but the budget is distorted by expenses outside their control through historical practices.

Lastly, where's the best source (website) to find gov.-elect Christie's property tax plan.
Thanks in advance for any info and insight.

I suppose this is a snark as a result of waking up and finding your candidate didn't win so it is forgiven. We went public on our opinion here as to the strategy in the Philadelphia Daily News. Jon Corzine spent 24 million dollars to attempt to defeat Chris Christie. It is clear to us that the Christie campaign made a specific decision to provide "just enough" information to avoid Corzine's negative advertising machine which twisted almost every moment of Chris Christie's life knowing that he didn't have the funds to fight back to every single attack. Specificity was not the Christie campaigns friend and you can thank Jon Corzine for that.

As a matter of fact, we can thank the New Jersey Democratic party for the lack of any real campaign for any statewide office. It wasn't that long ago that Frank Lautenberg campaigned without actually showing up anywhere or saying anything. Even our normally Democrat friendly newspapers trashed him for that. But he did it because he knew he could get away with it. We at NJTaxRevolution would love it if all candidates would stick to the campaigns instead of mud fights. But that isn't NJ is it.

As to the gentleman who submitted this email, I really respect your enthusiasm and am glad you are fighting for your beliefs and trying to make New Jersey better. Whether you supported Daggett, Corzine or Christie, I love the knowledge that this writer exhibits in his letter whether or not I agree with it. We need a lot more people in this state like him.

---

Democrats caught funding Daggett!!!

With Corzine's support stuck at no better than 42%, the candidacy of Chris Daggett has always been a bit too convenient. While we have not suggested that Jon Corzine has directly colluded with Daggett, we didn't rule out a connection between the two campaigns. Now the news comes out that Corzine's campaign paid for Daggett outreach to voters (from Instapundit and PolitickerNJ.com):

The Democratic State Committee now admits paying for a robocall to Somerset County voters that slams Republican Chris Christie and promotes independent gubernatorial candidate Christopher Daggett.

A Democratic spokeswoman says the party’s chairman, Joe Cryan, was not aware of the robocalls when he denied that the state committee had anything to do with them yesterday afternoon.

Cryan, who told PolitickerNJ.com yesterday afternoon that the Democratic State Committee had “absolutely” nothing to do with the call, could not immediately be reached for comment.

The call angered Republicans and further fueled conspiracy theories that Daggett is in cahoots with the Corzine camp. A disclaimer at the end says it was paid for by Victory ’09, “a project of the NJDSC” (Democratic State Committee), and gave the committee’s Trenton address.

Jon Corzine will say and do anything to get elected. And Team Corzine now admits to perverting this New Jersey election so that their inferior candidate who cannot win in a straight up fight can increase his chance of winning. And combined with the questions about absentee ballots, there is a pattern that does not bode well for the legitimate voters in this state.

Read the entire article here.

---

NY-23 Shocker: Scozzafava out - Now it's Daggett's Turn

Politico has reported that Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava has suspended her campaign for the NY-23 House seat. From this article on the announcement:

Republican Dede Scozzafava has suspended her bid in next Tuesday’s NY 23 special election, a huge development that dramatically shakes up the race. She did not endorse either of her two opponents -- Conservative party candidate Doug Hoffman or Democrat Bill Owens.

The decision to suspend her campaign is a boost for Hoffman, who already had the support of 50 percent of GOP voters, according to a newly-released Siena poll, and is now well-positioned to win over the 25 percent of Republicans who had been sticking with Scozzafava.

The NY-23 race has been interesting due to the fact that the Republican party put up a candidate they thought could win who was well to the left of Barack Obama. And in reaction, local conservatives put up backed Doug Hoffman who has come from behind and as of last week was either in a dead heat or ahead of the Democratic party candidate Bill Owens. The net is that Scozzafava decided she could not win and dropped out of the race.

Fast forward to New Jersey. As we have said all along Chris Daggett cannot win despite his ardent campaign staff. He will likely net a total of something less than 10 percent of the vote, serving only to be a spoiler. And frankly, if his candidacy only serves to help Corzine eek out a win(and Corzine then subsequently does what he promised which is to continue to destroy the business climate in the state and raise taxes), not only will he be completely unelectable for statewide office, he might have a hard time getting elected dog catcher. Toxic would not be a strong enough word.

Daggett has run a strong campaign given his resources. If he really wants to make a difference in this state, he should drop out now and live to fight another day. Unless of course his real reason to be in this race is to siphon votes from one or the other candidate. And if that is the case, toxic would be the correct word.

---

PPP: 72% think Daggett cannot win

Despite the response from folks at the campaign when we wrote that Daggett cannot win, a poll released today from Public Policy Polling suggest that New Jersey voters see it the same way:



One point I would like to make. If the Corzine or Christie campaigns were anywhere near as attentive as the Daggett campaign, I don't think that this race would be perceived as negatively by the public. We have already commented on the "let them eat cake" attitude of Christie's (formerly McCain) campaign staff. And it has been clear all along that Corzine wasn't even going to run a real campaign. His scorched earth strategy has been about as enlightening as the cardboard cutout campaign run by Frank Lautenberg (hide out for 6 months showing up in public just to convince people he wasn't dead). At least the Daggett folks are out there trying to do the best for their candidate.

Read the poll results here.

---

Daggett can't win. So why is he in this?

I continue to struggle to understand the candidacy of Chris Daggett. He is an independent candidate for governor and he is polling between 5-17 percent depending on whose poll you are looking at. Of course, I will likely get a comment on this about how he is charging and is going to win the race (and the email of the commenter will be a link to the Daggett campaign). But we are now late in the race and he has no chance of winning. So why does he continue?

Does he have aspirations to run for another office sometime in the future? Not sure. This isn't like the national stage where a big run here will equite to a book and speaking tour. And increased awareness. But it doesn't make sense here. The minute he loses in November he is once again a nobody except among party faithful - oops, he represents no political party so that logic is out. Run for something else? Democrats aren't going to stick to him long and Republicans will brand him toxic for splitting the anti-Corzine vote. No future in that either.

So what is left? The nagging feeling I keep getting is that his candidacy only serves to help one person and one person only. Jon Corzine. To that end, I tried to review Daggett's election filings. They can be accessed here. The only obvious trend I was able to take from an analysis of his donors was that they significantly trend toward one industry - financial services. I checked Christie's donors to see if I could get the same trend however I didn't see the same thing there. Another thing concerned me about Daggett's donors. They haven't increased as his awareness has increased. As a matter of fact, his big ticket donors seem to have dried up. Contribution limits or something else?

Do I believe that Corzine has set up Daggett as a stalking horse in this race? I doubt it. But would I accept the notion that Corzine's people arranged for a third party candidate to receive enough funding to damage his opponent? You bet.

---

Shocking news: NY Times endorses Corzine

(Tongue placed firmly in cheek) In a breaking news development today, the New York Times has endorsed Jon Corzine. The endorsement is unique for its sophmoric cheap shots on Chris Christie and Christopher Daggett while attributing "pragmatic" ideas to Corzine. And for his small ideas, Corzine apparently deserves another four years.

Here is my issue with this endorsement and Corzine in general. Our state is sufferring from rot deep within the core. The political system is a patronage mill monolith that will not be changed by a get-along-to-go-along politician like Corzine. We already have seen the lengths he will go to coddle unions and spread money around to keep people quiet about the ethical lapses he perpetuated to get it done. In all, he is a small man, with small ideas and absolutely zero leadership.

As for issues, the state had financial problems during good times. And when the economy went south, the state has taken a hit FAR greater than it should have. New Jersey has been bleeding jobs for 10 years due to its practice of driving business out of the state to friendlier business climates. And what are the top issues being talked about by Jon Corzine? Abortion, Christie's weight, mamograms and George Bush. And the voters of the state let him get away with it.

I guess the bright spot is that at least in this election, the Democrats actually let their candidate campaign unlike the last senatorial campaign when Frank Lautenberg was not allowed to be seen or engaged in public.

The joke is on the average New Jersey voter because they keep letting Corzine and the Democrats get away with providing no plan, no leadership and mudslinging. I was thinking the other day that deep down given the current trajectory of the state, I know that my family has to leave New Jersey. It really isn't a question of whether but when. No responsible person would sit idly by while the Democrats continue their quest to turn New Jersey into Michigan.

This state needs something different. I don't know that Christie is perfect but he has shown leadership as Federal attorney taking on the rot. I KNOW that Corzine will not even try. He isn't a leader and never will be. The New York times is right:

Mr. Corzine is hardly the perfect politician. Most New Jersey voters find him astonishingly inarticulate, and his credentials as a former co-chairman of Goldman Sachs do not seem as impressive as they did before the financial meltdown in 2008. He has poured lots of his personal wealth into this race, far too much of it for biting — and sometimes juvenile — attacks on Mr. Christie.

Only in New Jersey would this represent a incumbent candidate's shining achievements worthy of an endorsement by the "paper of record".

---

Star Ledged endorses candidate with 6% support.

In an amazing statement, the Newark Star Ledger endorsed Chris Daggett for Governor. While they are well aware that he only has about 6 percent support statewide, they still feel the need to make a statement. Their logic?

The newspaper’s decision is less a rejection of Gov. Jon Corzine and Republican Chris Christie than a repudiation of the parties they represent, both of which have forfeited any claim to the trust and confidence of the people of New Jersey. They share responsibility for the state’s current plight.

Interesting for the editorial board to lay claim to a moral stance regarding the state's political parties. But while they are correct that both parties are far too beholden to special interests, I wonder what they feel about their own support of the existing political system. Where was the Star Ledger when the mayor of Newark with no income aside from his government job acquired a yacht, a Rolls Royce and money to invest in properties around the city. Where was their investigative journalism?

Why do we not see the media in this state actually push the politicians to investigate anyone? For far too long, the media including the Star Ledger have acted as an arm of the corrupt New Jersey Democratic party.

What sounds more likely? The Star Ledgers editorial board really believes what they say about Daggett or they would like to split Chris Christie aka "the most disappointing candidate"'s vote thereby assuring the re-election of Jon Corzine. Sorry if I am going with the latter. It reminds me of The Philadelphia Enquirer endorsing Frank Lautenberg's opponent after allowing the senator to hide for 6 months.

---