We're winning a state Obama carried by 15.5% by 4% and winning a state Obama won by 6% by 17%.

I would like to say even though I haven't lived in the state for 9 years, I still called it right, and was really close on the percentage. I would have won the contest at Eagleton this year.

Ah, I miss election day at Eagleton--for lunch, you'd have fried chicken and bourbon, and then you'd spend the afternoon sleeping at your desk.

jerseyhoya wrote:We're winning a state Obama carried by 15.5% by 4% and winning a state Obama won by 6% by 17%.

yea but the democrat guys were pretty horrible candidates.

on a more local level, it's really frustrating to see someone win simply because they've held the position for so long when the person running against them (who I personally know) is just objectively TONS smarter and would be better at the job.

VoxOrion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If I'm a Republican, and I care about the long term health of the party, that 18-30 year old number scares the $#@! out of me. Considering new voters are considered most persuadable, the fact that even in given Corzine's incredibly low approval rating you can capture more than 30% of those voters is a bad sign. A very bad sign.

If those kind of numbers persist, you might see a last Republican hurrah in 2010, but that will be it.

Dude there is no way you can make any broad observations about Republicans by observing the voting behavior of youngsters in New Jersey. The only lesson for the GOP in NJ is: you will win if the other guy sucks hard enough, you will never win any significant anything any other way.

Except the pattern is pretty common all over the nation. Look, Republicans can sit around and convince themselves they don't have a medium and long term problem, it's no skin off my nose. But they do, and the numbers bear it out. Karl Rove understands this.

our local school board it looks like all the republicans are going to win which is really a bad thing from a teachers perspective. they are going to cut funding in already overcrowded schools and fire teachers. my buddy just got a job last spring at a HS in the district so his job may be in jeopardy now.

CalvinBall wrote:our local school board it looks like all the republicans are going to win which is really a bad thing from a teachers perspective. they are going to cut funding in already overcrowded schools and fire teachers. my buddy just got a job last spring at a HS in the district so his job may be in jeopardy now.

they're lazy and they get summers off!

pacino wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:our local school board it looks like all the republicans are going to win which is really a bad thing from a teachers perspective. they are going to cut funding in already overcrowded schools and fire teachers. my buddy just got a job last spring at a HS in the district so his job may be in jeopardy now.

they're lazy and they get summers off!

yea that is the common sentiment i guess. and that is why people voted for the republicans. it is a pretty scary thing really.

TenuredVulture wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If I'm a Republican, and I care about the long term health of the party, that 18-30 year old number scares the $#@! out of me. Considering new voters are considered most persuadable, the fact that even in given Corzine's incredibly low approval rating you can capture more than 30% of those voters is a bad sign. A very bad sign.

If those kind of numbers persist, you might see a last Republican hurrah in 2010, but that will be it.

Dude there is no way you can make any broad observations about Republicans by observing the voting behavior of youngsters in New Jersey. The only lesson for the GOP in NJ is: you will win if the other guy sucks hard enough, you will never win any significant anything any other way.

Except the pattern is pretty common all over the nation. Look, Republicans can sit around and convince themselves they don't have a medium and long term problem, it's no skin off my nose. But they do, and the numbers bear it out. Karl Rove understands this.

I'm not disagreeing with that, I'm saying you won't find the answers in New Jersey one way or the other.

I don't buy any of this business that GOP wins today mean anything significant, I won't if they have significant gains in 2010 either. I also don't buy this fantasy that the Republican party is going to "go away" because they lost in 2006 and 2008. It's the craziest small sample size snapshot-in-time hysteria ever. Would you listen, even for an instant, to someone who said the Democrat party was over because they lost ground in 1996? Or in 2002? Or in 2004? You wouldn't pay them any mind, and you shouldn't. I don't understand why the reverse is so seductive.

if you really think that i feel sorry for you.

VoxOrion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:If I'm a Republican, and I care about the long term health of the party, that 18-30 year old number scares the $#@! out of me. Considering new voters are considered most persuadable, the fact that even in given Corzine's incredibly low approval rating you can capture more than 30% of those voters is a bad sign. A very bad sign.

If those kind of numbers persist, you might see a last Republican hurrah in 2010, but that will be it.

Dude there is no way you can make any broad observations about Republicans by observing the voting behavior of youngsters in New Jersey. The only lesson for the GOP in NJ is: you will win if the other guy sucks hard enough, you will never win any significant anything any other way.

Except the pattern is pretty common all over the nation. Look, Republicans can sit around and convince themselves they don't have a medium and long term problem, it's no skin off my nose. But they do, and the numbers bear it out. Karl Rove understands this.

I'm not disagreeing with that, I'm saying you won't find the answers in New Jersey one way or the other.

I don't buy any of this business that GOP wins today mean anything significant, I won't if they have significant gains in 2010 either. I also don't buy this fantasy that the Republican party is going to "go away" because they lost in 2006 and 2008. It's the craziest small sample size snapshot-in-time hysteria ever. Would you listen, even for an instant, to someone who said the Democrat party was over because they lost ground in 1996? Or in 2002? Or in 2004? You wouldn't pay them any mind, and you shouldn't. I don't understand why the reverse is so seductive.

Well, in 2002 and especially 2004 I would have disagreed with anyone who said that the Democrats would retake Congress anytime soon, and that they would win the Presidency in 2008 pretty easily. However, the demographic trends that favor the Democrats have been known for some time, and not only are the Republicans are engaging self-destructive strategies given those trends.

Events have interesting ways of overwhelming these trends, but I'd say the Republicans are very much in a situation similar to the Dems in the late 60s. That was the beginning of what would have been 2 decades of Republican dominance, had it not been for a 3rd rate burglary.

YES WE CAN echoing out

Suck my balls Barack

If this speech proves one thing, it's that our new governor is fat.

If it proves a second thing, it's that New Jersey Republicans really aren't used to winning.

jerseyhoya wrote:YES WE CAN echoing out

Suck my balls Barack

congrats. your state now has a governor who is going to cut taxes but then what.

i think suck my balls is a little much.

No it's very appropriate

Man, Christie carried Middlesex County. I guess that's what happens when your party boss goes to jail. Christ, Corzine won 59% of the two party vote there last time. Obama won 61%.

i really think this has to do with how horrible corzine is and nothing to do with obama. the only thing that i can imagine it has to do with obama is much fewer democrats were inclined to go vote for bad candidates so they didnt and republicans were desperate for some sort of victory so they went out and voted.

If I'm Christie, I might just as much as possible ignore the long term budge mess, and focus on jobs and corruption.

Uncle Milty wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:if you really think that i feel sorry for you.

Was this for me? If so we might need a breakout thread.

yea, good teachers arent lazy. that is really a terrible stereotype that is not true.

CalvinBall wrote:i really think this has to do with how horrible corzine is and nothing to do with obama. the only thing that i can imagine it has to do with obama is much fewer democrats were inclined to go vote for bad candidates so they didnt and republicans were desperate for some sort of victory so they went out and voted.

I was talking about the yes we can chant.

jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:i really think this has to do with how horrible corzine is and nothing to do with obama. the only thing that i can imagine it has to do with obama is much fewer democrats were inclined to go vote for bad candidates so they didnt and republicans were desperate for some sort of victory so they went out and voted.

I was talking about the yes we can chant.

oh. ok. well i totally misinterpreted that then.