WHAAAA! Hogwash!

Sylvester The Cat (as I like to call her) was rather upset with the loss. Somehow, this editorial wasn't chewed up, and spit out by any of us here on BlueJersey.net. Fellow Blue Jays (thats the official/unofficial name for members of Bluejersey.net by the way) please accept my appologies and engorge in the following snarky deconstruction of Sheryl "Sore Looser" Sylvester's Asbury Park Press Editorial.

Amazing what you can get away with on the weakest blog day of the week. Anyway, Sheryl is obviously pissed that she probably wont ever get to run another campaign again. (At least not in this state).

Where to begin?

Only 45 percent of registered voters bothered to go to the polls.

Hogwash.

Turnout was low Tuesday because a significant chunk of the Democratic majority in this state could not bring itself to vote for Jon S. Corzine. New Jersey is one of the bluest states in the nation, as socially liberal and anti-George Bush a place as you are likely to find anywhere outside France.

Oui mon Shery, nous Jersians sont comme les Frances, havez vous un Galloisses? I actually accept what the professional non-partisan pollers like David Rebovich have to say on the turnout issue:

As such, it seems reasonable to conclude that the 2.1 million people who cast their ballot for them were voting for property tax relief and ethics reform. Likewise, given the finding of several polls, it is fair to assume that many of the folks who decided to sit out this election are nonetheless hoping that the state's next governor can do something about these issues. Thus, public opinion, if not votes, does provide Corzine with a mandate, and a strong one, to take action on property taxes and government ethics.

If anything his analysis is more level headed and a bit more distant than both campaigns. Unlike yours Sheryl, but hey, I would miss seeing my name in the papers everyday just as much. I feel your pain.

At this point in the state's history — a low point by most counts — it does not appear possible that any Republican could win a statewide election. Democrats are loyal voters and they are angry at the president for everything from the war to global warming. But even in their frenzy to make Bush look bad, many voters simply did not want Corzine to be their governor.

Well enough to make him Governor. What else ails you Sheryl, mon cheri?

Our tracking polls going into Election Day showed Corzine with the highest unfavorable ratings of any U.S. senator in the country. Even his supporters believe he bought his Senate seat in 2000. New Jersey's liberal newspapers — The Star-Ledger and The Record — ultimately gagged at the thought of having Corzine at the helm of the state. In a stunning stand for principle over politics, they joined the Asbury Park Press in endorsing Doug Forrester.

WOW! A double whammy, first some hooey about Corzine's approval rating, then some more hooey that the Star Ledger and APP were somehow principled in backing Forrester? Sylvester, you may make a good columnist after all is said and done. Perhaps one of them principled papers will give you a job. According to Survey USA's October 25th poll Corzine had 49%/44% aproval/disapproval, this may not be top notch but I am sure the negative campaign dragged down both NJ senators. Either way, the point is mute, Jon Corzine was elected governor, and Democrats had a lot to do with it.

Any more hogwash?

Of course, pundits are saying it was Forrester's decision to run an ad with comments from Corzine's ex-wife that dragged the race into the gutter.

More hogwash.

Not according to the like the Star Ledger (which endorsed Forrester by the way). They make a pretty clear case that JoCo's late race talk and Forrester's use of it actually turned some folks off.

The Corzine campaign ran 17 negative ads against Forrester including one featuring a paraplegic teenager in a wheelchair erroneously proclaiming "Doug Forrester doesn't support embryonic stem-cell research, therefore I don't think he supports people like me."

Corzine's ads — mostly ugly blue video footage that appeared to come from security cameras — repeated distorted and false allegations. Forrester's statements were taken out of context or completely fabricated. Corzine outspent Forrester two to one on television ads, almost all of which were negative.

By contrast, Forrester's ad quoting Joanne Corzine was elegantly simple with no sound, just music. This text was presented on a black screen: "When I saw the campaign ad where Andrea Forrester said, "Doug never let his family down and he won't let New Jersey down,' all I could think was that Jon did let his family down, and he'll probably let New Jersey down, too."

Now as a voter, I lost count of how many ads there were, negative or positive, it all seems like a blur to me, the barrage was too much for my senses to handle. As for picking on Corzine's choice of producer and director, well I find that highly irrelevant. The Carl ad was controversial, but it did force your man to flip flop on stem cells. So wether it is perceived as negative or not, it worked to some extent.

By contrast, Forrester's ad quoting Joanne Corzine was elegantly simple with no sound, just music. This text was presented on a black screen: "When I saw the campaign ad where Andrea Forrester said, "Doug never let his family down and he won't let New Jersey down,' all I could think was that Jon did let his family down, and he'll probably let New Jersey down, too."

The quote was taken from The New York Times, arguably the most respected Democratic-leaning newspaper in the country. It was not embellished in any way or taken out of context. Mrs. Corzine did not contact the Forrester campaign to ask that the ad be taken off the air.

In fact, in a subsequent interview with The Star-Ledger, Mrs. Corzine expanded her assertions that her husband had sold his soul to the state's party bosses. She stressed her belief that New Jersey should know that her former husband, who she had campaigned for and helped get elected to the Senate, had cast aside his principles in order to garner political support.

Rather than backfiring, as many Monday-morning quarterbacks have suggested, our final tracking showed the ad was effective in driving home questions the Forrester campaign had raised for months about Corzine's character and integrity.

Again, you should use outside pollsters to do post mortems (if you can still afford them). As for whatever it was Joanne Corzine was getting off her chest, she sure waited a long time to do it, and also seemingly came at an opportune time for the Forrester camp. Again JoCo's statements stink of suspicion.

Finally this gem:

On election night, Corzine blamed the negative campaign on his opponent and portrayed himself as the victim of "painful" political attacks. His victory speech did not include the traditional conciliatory statements that lay the groundwork for compromise and healing. Instead he continued to attack Forrester and his campaign. Mrs. Corzine appears to have been right. Her ex-husband is already letting New Jersey down.

Personally I am surprised she didn't use the fact that Jon Corzine is in Mexico this week to make the case she was trying to make in the last sentence.

The best is that she is crying for conciliatory messages from Jon Corzine himself. I remeber a speech full of togetherness, and the warm and fuzziness Sheryl seems to longing for these days.

Also, what does it say when the PR person from the other side writes a scathing post-election loss editorial? Coming from someone who should (by representing the other side) be "laying the groundwork for compromise and healing," these comments fall a wee bit short of "conciliatory."

Hypocritic, yes. Conciliatory, no.

If the Forrester camp will keep pumping this type of stuff out, I prefer the "blame Bush" meme. It comes accross as less emotional, more reactionary, and more in line with Forrester's character.