Quote:
Originally Posted by tahiti
Somerset was closer than I expected.
|
+1
Somerset County--with the exception of Franklin Twp-- is predominantly Republican. In my recent drives around the county, I don't recall seeing any lawn signs for Booker, while the Lonegan lawn signs were definitely a presence, even if they weren't a major presence.
When I went to vote yesterday, at ~12:30, I noted that I was the 121st person to vote in my district, which is actually a fairly heavy turnout for what had been predicted to be an election that most people would sit-out. At the time, I interpreted this turnout to be favorable for Lonegan, in view of the volume of lawn signs, but...apparently not, as Lonegan captured only a 1% plurality in the county. I guess that this shows how relatively inaccurate something like lawn signs can be when it comes to predicting an election's outcome.
Anyway, it is difficult to view the results as anything other than a referendum on both The ACA and The POTUS, since Mr. Lonegan railed about both almost non-stop, with little mention of what he would do for NJ. (Of course, Booker also said very little about what he would do for NJ...)
When Booker asked during the second debate, "Is Mr. Lonegan running against me or against the President?", Lonegan's shouted response was, "both!". In DC, the gridlock was (correctly) attributed by the majority of the public to the intransigence of the GOP and to John Boehner caving to the demands of 30 or so Teabaggers.
If nothing else, Lonegan's repeated statements in support of the GOP's tactics was most likely what did him in. Even though NJ does tend to vote as a Blue State, the bottom line is that most folks are more middle-of-the-road than of either political extreme. By trying to appeal to only the political extremists on the right, Lonegan doomed his NJ candidacy. If he had been running in...Tennessee...or South Carolina...or in some other states, his strategy would have likely worked, but to think that his strategy would work with the majority of the electorate in NJ was pure folly.
The Star-Ledger's conservative/Libertarian columnist, Paul Mulshine, almost always produces thought-provoking analyses of NJ politics, and today's column was--IMHO--particularly insightful. I suggest reading his analysis of the outcome of the Senatorial race, which I believe to be right on target:
A Lonegan win just wasn't in the tea leaves | NJ.com
For those who don't have the time or the inclination to read Mulshine's column, here is the
Cliff Notes version of it:
The GOP shot itself in the foot, nationwide, by allowing itself to be dominated by Ted Cruz and ~30 other extremists, and, in addition to helping to doom Lonegan's chances in NJ, they likely weakened themselves in the long-term.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
