Replies

I'm inclinded to agree with fieldmarshaldj on this one, even after Pennacchio's "mainfesto" bombshell hit, he's probably still a better candidate than Sabrin. Sabrin's actually pretty good on the issues and leans very conservative for a Libertarian, but Pennacchio is a much better fit for the average NJ voter -- it's a heavy urbanized, blue-collar, Italian Catholic state. Fieldmarshaldj also correctly points out that since Sabrin is a Ron Paul cheerleader, he might have some even "kookier" past views than Pennacchio that won't come out of the woodwork until the general election and then we're screwed.

Overall I see the same problem here that was present when Estabrook was in the race, and now it's been magnified with Zimmer running and Pennachio losing support: Pennacchio and Sabrin are likely to split the traditional pro-life, pro-family, anti-tax, smaller government conservative voters and RINO loser Dick Zimmer will be the nominee again. We've seen this scenario time and time again with the Bill Brady/Jim Oberweis split in Illinois giving Topinka the nomination and the Ed Bryrant/Van Hillary split in TN giving Corker the nomination.

Sabrin's solution the whole time has been to get Pennacchio to withdraw. If Pennacchio polls better with the average NJ voter, shouldn't Sabrin withdraw? This was the same arguement I made in Illinois when the Oberweis camp proclaimed they had more money and more name recongition than Brady, while ignoring the fact that Oberweis had far higher negatives and Illinois voters were sick of him.

There's really no good solution here, unless the GOP could dump all three of the current candidates are rally around a new, untainted candidate acceptable to all factions of the NJGOP, while Lautenberg is blooded up in the Dem primary and left helpless in November.

it's a heavy urbanized, blue-collar, Italian Catholic state.

Actually, we are also the wealthiest state in the union in terms of median income, and are in the top five in terms of % of the population with a college degree (I believe were are number 2 behind Virginia, but I could be wrong).

The GOP has polled well in the white, white collar counties in north and northwest Jersey (Morris, Somerset, Warren, Sussex, and Hunterdon), as well as those portions of other counties with a similar demographic (NW Essex, northern Bergen, etc.). What has cost the GOP the state in recent presidential elections has been the blue collar white vote (especially in Middlesex and southern Bergen counties) and the white collar non-white ethnic vote (New Jersey has the most East Indians and Koreans per capita of any state in the union, and the wealthiest immigrant population in aggregate). There is weakness among suburban women, but it is not as extensive as weakness among the aforementioned groups (weakness among the blacks in the urban areas, and the Jewish population in Essex, Bergen, and Monmouth counties goes without saying).

In order for a candidate to win statewide in New Jersey, they need to win the party's white collar base in the NW part of the state and along the shore, while making inroads among white collar Asians and/or hispanics in the northern and central portions of the state, along with blue collar white voters in the counties facing Philadelphia, to say nothing of Middlesex and Union Counties. We have been getting killed among blue collar voters, especially in South Jersey (those counties within the Philadelphia media market) since 1992.

I should also mention that the assimilation of many, if not most of Italian Americans means that having a vowel at the end of one's name is not as important as it used to be. Most white collar Americans of Italian decent (as I am) don't place much importance around ethnicity. If anything, it would matter most among senior citizens, many of whom now live in retirement communities near the shore.