Posted on 11/14/2005 2:27:32 PM PST by Wuli
I expect most New Jersey Republicans will never again allow themselves and the party to be abused by Mr. Forrester.
Forrester lost not because of George Bush, but because he was not George Bush (who by the way was not even on the ballot).
Forrester used his money and the party establishment to get the nomination against a number of primary opponents who, though less well funded, were powered-up by a base of conservative activism that had voted for Bush in 2004. As a result, a good many local activists, among those who voted for Bush in 2004, set aside their activism for the Republican party for the year, right after the primaries.
Then Forresterr went on to run a fairly liberal, country club Republican campaign and failed to excite many conservative activists from the primaries during the general election campaign.
Both parties stayed home in greater numbers and %'s than they did in 2004. But, the Corzine vote was only 35% less than Kerry's 2004 tally, while Forrester's vote was 40% less than Bush's 2004 tally. Its not that more Democrats ran out to vote against Bush. Fewer Republicans rushed out to vote for Forrester.
In 15 out of 21 counties, a higher percentage of registered Republicans failed to vote in 2005 compared to 2004, than did registered Democrats. In no New Jersey county did Forrester increase the number of Republican votes, over the Bush vote in 2004; including in the six counties where more Democrats stayed home. In other words, Forrester did not draw out a large block of new Republican voters.
Even in six counties - Atlantic, Cape May, Morris, Sussex, Ocean and Warren - where registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats, a higher % of registered Republicans stayed home in 2005 compared to 2004, than did registered Democrats. If Forrester had just got Republicans to not stay home by a greater % than the Democrats, in those counties, Forrester would have made up 18.78% of his loss to Corzine.
In two counties with large Hispanic communities, Hudson and Passaic, Forrester lost many of the conservative and independent Hispanic voters who voted for Bush in 2004. Forrester's Hudson county vote alone was 71% less than Bush got in 2004; even with 48% of the county's 2004 Democrat voters staying home. Just staying even with Bush in those two heavily Democratic counties, Forrester would have erased 10.53% of his loss to Corzine.
If Forrester had managed to get registered Republicans to not stay home in a greater % in 2005 compared to 2004, than the Democrats, in seven counties with majorities of Democrats - Union, Salem, Middlesex, Glocester, Essex, Cumberlin and Bergen - he would have held onto enough of the 2004 Bush votes to narrow his loss to Corzine by 24.56%.
Under three conditions - Six Republican majority counties, two heavily Hispanic counties and seven major Democrat counties - Forrester decreased the Republican % of the vote, compared to Bush in 2004. Those losses account for 53.87% of his loss to Corzine.
In six counties - Burlington, Camden Hunterdon, Mercer, Monmouth, and Somerset - where registered Repubicans did not stay home in as great of %'s as did the Democrats, Forrester did improve the % of the county vote for himself, over the Bush % in 2004. However, in none of those counties did Forrester's number of votes surpass those of Bush in 2004. And, his slight increased % margins in those counties were so small, the total only reduced the "depressed" stay-at-home Republican losses enough to makeup 7% of his loss to Corzine.
In 2004 George Bush got 46.47% of the New Jersey vote. In 2005 Forrester got 45.40% of the New Jersey vote.
In 2004, Bush got 702,693 more votes than there are registered Republicans (1,587,494 vs 884,801). If Forrester had got slightly more than 1/4 of those 702,693 votes, even with the lower turnout, he would have exceeded the 193,892 votes by which he lost to Corzine. Instead, his own Republican vote was lower.
Forrester lost because he did not excite the Republican vote. It was depressed more than was the total off-year election turnout. It's that simple.
If anything Forrester proved that a lot of us conservatives would rather stay home than vote for a RINO. Now Forrester is blaming Bush. Good riddance.
Conservatives lose another election for SPITE !!
Abortion should not determine how New Jersey's CORRUPTION continues to raise taxes.
Sounds just like Bush.
In the end, I wasted my vote on Forrester, because I was deluded into thinking that he might have a tiny chance of ousting that socialist criminal Corzine.
Well, at least I know I've wasted my last vote on that guy.
Its like Ronald Reagan and his landslide victory never existed. Its real simple, if the Republican party wants to totally dominate, they need to quit running toward the middle. Nothing worse than a milk toast middle of the road politician.
Let's put it the other way around. Fiscally conservative Republicans should not nominate pro-abortion candidates and expect pro-lifers to vote for them.
The bottom line for pro-lifers is the right to life. Nothing is more important. If you believe that killing babies is wrong, then you can understand that.
So, country club Republicans who want lower taxes, an end to Democrat corruption, and the like, had better realize that they need to compromise with their brother pro-life Republicans on the abortion issue. Otherwise this kind of fiasco will happen again and again.
You got that right ... rivals over the IDENTICAL political turf..
Forrester lost because he is Forrester!
You're absolutely deluded if you think Forrester would have done a single thing to end corruption in this state.
He just would have made sure he got his.
Forrester was the first candidate I was ashamed top vote for. I always go right down the (R) column-but using Corzine's ex-wife was a B.S move. Keep the families out of it. It was the first time i was ever ashamed of my vote. What a punk.
The GOP in New Jersey is like Pauley Walnuts to the Democrat's Tony Soprano.
They scrounge around pathetically, looking for whatever scraps of graft Bob Torricelli and Sharpe James might have overlooked.
You are wrong. Abortion was not my lead issue, or many conservative's lead issue against Forrester. Conservative interests cover a variety of issues, of which abortion is but one and not always one for all conservatives. The "sum" of Forrester's agenda simply was not that "conservative".
We didn't lose, you did, because your moderate was too moderate for too many of us. RINOS need to decide where they really should make their compromises, with their friends or with their enemies.
Maybe you chould get your facts straight. Conservatives want to cut taxes and make them permanent. RINO's want to take away tax breaks, and institute new Taxes (Olympia Snowe).
I don't give a damn what Forrester said in his campaign. The test of the real man came afterwards when he couldn't own his own loss, instead blaming it on the President. With that single action he justified everyone that wouldn't vote for him.
I personally can tolerate a Liberal Republican like Rudy as Governor or Senator. Forrester would have joined the Whitman's of the Party that I despise. Good riddance.
BTW, conservative or no the Republican would have lost. This is NEW JERSEY! It's corrupt to the bone and the RNC appartus has been gutted. What they need to do is differentiate themselves from the Liberals and start building from ground up a movement and stable of conservative talent. 10-20 years the state could be won by Reps, IF they want to make the effort.
So true. The pubbies that put their vote to this RINO again gave approval to this liberalism. Should have gone to the polls but voted 3rd party & tell the exit polsters what & why they did it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.