General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMurphy Wins NJ Democratic Primary
A wealthy former Goldman Sachs executive and Obama administration ambassador has won the Democratic nomination in the race to replace unpopular term-limited Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.
Phil Murphy defeated five rivals in one of only two statewide races in the country. His victory means he will take on the winner of Tuesday's Republican primary in November.
Murphy was an ambassador to Germany under Democratic President Barack Obama. He poured more than $20 million into the contest and won endorsements from the state's powerful county political machines.
He promised to check Republican President Donald Trump if elected and to fully fund the state's pension system, ramp up education spending and rejoin a regional greenhouse gas alliance.
Murphy survived attacks from top rivals that compared him to former Gov. Jon Corzine (KOHR'-zyn), another one-time Goldman Sachs executive.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-jersey/articles/2017-06-06/the-latest-wall-street-trump-play-in-governors-race
still_one
(92,204 posts)stillsoleft
(80 posts)Can't get rid of Christie soon enough
still_one
(92,204 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Christie is term limited. He'll be out of office by next January regardless of what happens (earlier if he resigns to take a job in the Trump administration).
Our eagerness to see Christie gone shouldn't obscure the serious concern about the role of money in our elections. The multimillionaire Murphy poured his own money into the race. His spending swamped that of all his rivals plus all the Republicans, combined. To call it "buying the election" might suggest there was bribery, which AFAIK there was not, but that phrase does point to a real problem.
Demsrule86
(68,582 posts)than any Republican...let's win this.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)of big money out of politics. Because, as a very prominent political scientist pointed out, even though Democrats also like the perks that come with their offices, (very unlike conservatives) almost all do believe in using government to serve the electorate. They want to do that.
And before that can happen, they have to get enough power to overcome the enormous forces against them.
So, good. On the the general. And thank you, Gov Christie, for all the assistance you've given us so far.
Demsrule86
(68,582 posts)The reason we have money in elections is because some left of left Greenies led by Nader allowed Bush to win in 2000 which gave rise to United. There is nothing we can do about it until we get enough power to fix this...good thing this guy has money with all the dark money coming against him from the GOP and possibly the Russians.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)First, because this topic is so fraught with emotion for so many people, let me make clear that I'm not one of those enemies that some people jump to hate. I've never donated to or voted for a Green Party candidate in my life. Furthermore, I have quite a few posts on DU condemning Nader's decision to run in the general election instead of in the Democratic primaries.
That said, the 2000 election and the Citizens United decision had absolutely nothing to do with Phil Murphy's ability to swamp his opponents with money. Murphy is a former Goldman Sachs executive whose personal wealth is believed to be several hundred million dollars. He used his own money for his direct campaign spending and in spreading money around elsewhere in New Jersey in ways that gained him support. I haven't heard that he benefited from any corporate money being directed to "independent" expenditures, the subject of Citizens United. What he did would have been perfectly legal even if Citizens United had been decided 9-0 the other way.
I also haven't heard about any "dark money coming against him from the GOP and possibly the Russians." It's not likely to be a problem. Any of Murphy's principal opponents (Johnson, Wisniewski, or Lesniak) would have been a heavy favorite against any of the Republican candidates, even if Putin had decided that he cared who was in Drumthwacket.
As an aside, I disagree with those who dismiss any investigation of Russian activities as a "witch hunt"; but, at the other extreme, I also disagree with invoking the specter of Russian influence in every discussion, whether or not there's any evidence. My guess is that Putin has never even heard of Drumthwacket. (It's the official residence of the Governor of New Jersey.)
ETA about Murphy's spending to counter GOP "dark money": Murphy has stated that, in the general election (unlike the primary), he'll accept public matching funds and the associated spending limit. See this story for details. That means that Murphy will be spending LESS against the Republican nominee than he did against his fellow Democrats.
Demsrule86
(68,582 posts)is out of office anyway...kind of disturbing.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)People not familiar with New Jersey politics might say that criticism of the primary process should be kept in perspective because the Democratic Party has now picked its challenger to Christie. That was my (possibly mistaken) interpretation of stillsoleft's comment in #2 ("Can't get rid of Christie soon enough" . I was simply correcting an error that some people might understandably make. Chris Christie is term limited and won't be on the ballot.
It would be kind of nice for us if he WEREN'T term limited. Murphy will probably beat the Republican candidate, Lieutenant Governor Guadagno, but a candidate picked at random out of the phone book could have beaten Christie this year.
RandySF
(58,873 posts)That many people in NJ work in the NY financial sector.
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)Some here would benefit by looking up North Jersey demographics and the term "Bedroom State".
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)If you mean that Murphy's enormous spending was fueled by donations from wealthy New Jersey residents who work in the New York financial sector, that's not the case. He used mostly his own money.
If you mean that some voters considered his past association with Goldman Sachs to be a plus, I'm sure that's true but not very important. It was a plus with some voters, a minus with others, but neither group was very large.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)It is not seen as big as a liability in the Tri-state area as it would in other states.
seaglass
(8,171 posts)undercutting Bernie:
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/article/2017/04/levi-sanders-speaks-on-campus
When asked why he had endorsed Murphy instead of John Wisniewski, who ran Bernie Sanders' campaign in New Jersey, Levi Sanders said that he thinks Murphy's positions align with his own.
Phil Murphy believes in a $15 minimum wage, Sanders said. He's a gutsy guy! He believes in the legalization of marijuana. He believes in criminal justice reform, Sanders noted.
...
[Murphy] believes in all of things that I believe, Sanders mentioned. He wants to give back, he later noted.
This is a win and should not be a problem for anyone supporting Democrats.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)He won and now we hope he wins.
Foamfollower
(1,097 posts)Demsrule86
(68,582 posts)Now vote for the person with a "D" next to his name.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)That doesn't stop some people from looking at the process and thinking about how it could be improved. Even aside from the Russia question, there's the renewed agitation to abolish the Electoral College.
As a New Jersey resident, I plan to vote for Murphy in the general election. That's not inconsistent with pointing out the problems with the rules under which he won the primary.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)display very strong patterns of preferring loss to compromise. Their burden is to be the righteous few, the special people who are capable of seeing the truth and having the answers in a world overrun by all us corrupt people who cannot see.
Seriously, it must be hard for them.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)is better than electing a rich democrat who uses his own money to finance his run. The purists seem to have an underlying belief that all rich people are evil, even proven progressive democrats that happen to be rich.
spanone
(135,838 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)SaschaHM
(2,897 posts)Why shouldn't he spend his own money to get his message and name out there? If anything, he gets to say "I'm not beholden to X donor, because I put my own money into this campaign". Hell, given how every democratic fundraiser gets thrown back into the candidates face by whomever on the left or right has a problem with them, I'd self fund my own candidacy as well if I could.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)The fact that he is rich rubs some raw.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)For example, a candidate who qualifies for matching funds, including the acceptance of a spending limit, could get a bigger match. IIRC the New York City campaign finance rules allow a bigger multiplier for the matching funds going to a candidate who has an opponent who hasn't accepted the spending limit. Under the current interpretation of the First Amendment, a wealthy candidate can't be prevented from spending unlimited amounts of his or her own money, but the government could do more to diminish that advantage.
InformedElitist
(39 posts)As far as I could tell, there wasn't much daylight btw. all the (D) candidates. I voted for Johnson as he was the only one to speak explicitly of NJ corruption. As someone who puts a high priority on education, barring any SERIOUS scandal, I'm fine with voting for Murphy in Nov.
The article mentions it, and it's true, that the Goldman Sachs stench is worse in NJ than even nationally b/c of Corzine.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Boy, is that gonna chap Christie's Fat fucking ass.