Corzine endorsed by Philly Inquirer
Oct 27th, 2009 by David Anderson
That is hardly news, but the reasoning is entertaining. The paper admits that he has lost the support of the majority of the people. They admit that he has fallen short. They call him timid about shaking up the corrupt Trenton establishment. They say his victories have been qualified and his successes halting, but he has moved forward. His opponents are not convincing to them.
I could make their case a little easier. Corzine is an embarrassing, timid, half-measure pol who is not up to these challenging times. Almost 60 percent of you would vote for the man in the moon before him, but get over it. He is a Democrat. Those other two guys are Republicans.
For those who believe insanity is repeating what consistently fails, vote for Christie. He has been a success the past 4 years. He won’t be worse than Corzine. He may be leaps and bounds better. The Democrat/media establishment would rather fail with Corzine than succeed with Christie. That is the bottom line.
Much of Christie’s emphasis, which has become sharper in recent weeks, is correct. The state needs to do more to improve its cities and their schools, as well as to end state control of Camden. Trenton must be tougher on public-employee unions, and easier on taxpayers. Ethics laws must be strengthened.
Daggett would expand the sales tax to more services and goods and use the revenue to reduce property and corporate taxes. Given New Jersey’s outlying position on the national property-tax map, his idea is much closer to what’s needed on the issue than the failed rebate program his opponents have embraced.
Beyond that, though, Daggett’s platform is sketchy. He relies heavily on his status as an independent who can “bring people together” – which sounds good, but could mean almost anything.
As such, his (Corzine’s) administration’s victories have been qualified, its progress halting. On finances, the governor took a principled stand for funding pension obligations, only to have to retreat from it amid the downturn. He budgeted cautiously, but then made exceptions under political and economic pressure. He put forward but abandoned a controversial proposal to retire state debt. He won important concessions from state-employee unions, but often seemed too cozy with labor.
