General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNJ-GOV: N.J. governor's race is a dead heat, new poll shows
Democrat Mikie Sherrill has a 50%-49% lead over Republican Jack Ciattarelli in an AtlasIntel poll released this morning.
The poll gives Ciattarelli a 54%-46% lead among independents.
Donald Trump is upside-down in New Jersey, with approvals of 47%-52%, while Gov. Phil Murphy is also underwater: 43%-53%.
In a performance evaluation, Trump is at 49%-51%, Murphy at 53%-47%, Attorney General Matt Platkin is at 59%-40%, and Lt. Governor Tahesha Way is at 61%-39%.
https://newjerseyglobe.com/governor/n-j-governors-race-is-a-dead-heat-new-poll-shows/
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts).. they are shooting thermals in the foot twice
JI7
(93,615 posts)SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)JI7
(93,615 posts)SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)They also supported Obama (who ran as a populist).
They also will likely be supporting Talarico.
JI7
(93,615 posts)SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)He won NJ both times with almost 60%
He is probably the last good populist to be on a statewide ballot in NJ. In fact I dont think a Democrat has won that much of the vote in NJ since a populist like Obama ran.
FDR also won NJ every time he ran.
Seems to me NJ really likes populists but rarely has the opportunity to vote for the good ones. And they are often smart enough to know the difference between a good populist (like FDR and Obama) or a bad populist (like Trump)
JI7
(93,615 posts)SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)And embracing the change we need and could believe in for a system he made clear wasnt working for us (aka: populism). But more importantly true traditionalist Democrats are populists from the New Deal coalition which died mostly in the 60s and entirely by the 80s.
The New Deal was textbook populism. Obama embraced the rhetoric of The New Deal, but couldn't manage to actually codify it into policy .
Mark my words: The New Deal Coalition is making a comeback, and those who resist it will see political extinction.
JI7
(93,615 posts)Clinton gets hated from Nafta and Obama was getting hatred for TPP. Both supoorted global trade deals and got hatred from those saying they were from the left.
Tryng to paint Obama as a populist is a total rewrite of history. He didn't even present himself that way.
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)Clinton was a southern democrat who marketed himself not as a traditional democrat (because those people were losing elections) but a "im not gonna tax you but embrace capitalism and social liberalism" Democrat. There was nothing "traditional" about Clinton's brand of Democrat. In fact he called himself a "New Democrat" which was patently not a traditional Dem.
Obama however ran on an entirely anti establishment platform aimed at the needs of the working class. That is textbook populism.
At this point we can agree to disagree since all of these are things you can google. But if you think it will go anywhere, Im happy to continue
JI7
(93,615 posts)And FDR, Clinton, and Obama's were all pro capitalists.
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)Literally what he called himself. That is not traditional any way you stack it.
Being pro capitalist has nothing to do with any of this. Populism can be pro capitalist and the mixed economic social democratic policies of the new deal were very pro capitalist.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats_(United_States)/
JI7
(93,615 posts)They are just government programs funded by taxes. It was all a capitalist system jyst Kilmer FDR, Clinton. and Obama all supported.
They didn't support things like government run grocery stores.
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)He proposed an entire 2nd bill of rights entirely dedicated to such things. It isnt crazy to think that if given the opportunity (not dying), he would have went much further than a government funded grocery store.
Search for:
Economy & Economic Justice / Democracy & Government
FDRs Second Bill Of Rights
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
by Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Source: Franklin Delano Roosevelt / January 11, 1944
single image
Excerpted from Franklin Delano Roosevelts message to Congress on the State of the Union. This was proposed not to amend the Constitution, but rather as a political challenge, encouraging Congress to draft legislation to achieve these aspirations. It is sometimes referred to as the Second Bill of Rights.
It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however as our industrial economy expanded these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. Necessitous men are not free men. People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
Americas own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.
Consider also who one of FDRs main allies was: Mayor Fiorello Laguardia. NYC already has a number of city run grocery stores that were founded by the former Mayor. This idea isnt new, Mamdani is just looking to extend it. (And yes, former Governor of NY, FDR, was a supporter of such things).
https://www.vitalcitynyc.org/articles/government-is-already-in-the-grocery-business#:~:text=Beginning%20in%20the%201930s%2C%20Mayor,to%20adapt%20to%20current%20needs.
https://jacobin.com/2025/04/fiorello-la-guardia-nyc-mayor
Mamdani, again, is running as an extension to traditional new deal coalition policies that FDR and Laguardia (a republican), spearheaded.
JI7
(93,615 posts)and then say what FDR would have done as proof he is something he isn't.
Which Democrats don't think people have a right to food, housing, and education ?
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)Read the speech: FDR wanted the government to ensure those things and felt that was what the government exists to do. He made this clear with policies that involve the government in doing these things.
No. Not all Democrats think the government is responsible for ensuring people get a good education, housing and food. Quite the opposite for most folks. Hence your quip about publicly funded grocery stores which I imagine you mean is too extreme, but existed as part of the new deal coalition that FDR spearheaded.
JI7
(93,615 posts)Mamdani is a New Deal Democrat. Who is against him?
JI7
(93,615 posts)why don't you give me the name of Democrats that doubt support helping people with food, housing, and education ?
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)JI7
(93,615 posts)I said Mamdani says he is socialist .
SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)Why do you care that he also calls himself a socialist like Bernie, AOC -and others?
betsuni
(29,075 posts)SSJVegeta
(2,848 posts)Is the democratic people's republic of Korea democratic and a republic? They claim to be.
Maybe we should actually consider policies and practices then worry about what label somebody is given (either from themselves or by others).
FDR rejected the socialist label-and described himself as a capitalist, but his closest ally LaGuardia called himself a socialist and they advocated for the same policies. Does that make FDR a socialist? Or LaGuardia a capitalist? Does it matter?
Response to SSJVegeta (Reply #9)
SSJVegeta This message was self-deleted by its author.
Lovie777
(22,961 posts)Ars Longa
(524 posts)Wiz Imp
(9,991 posts)had him at a higher approval rating than most polls (latest is at 46 Approve, 51 Disapprove).
The other poll that had it as a dead heat should not be taken seriously at all (IMO). That one was from Emerson College which has had Trump's approval in net positive territory for most of the year.
karynnj
(60,965 posts)Worse for the Democrats. I would guess they may have a consistent bias to the Republicans vs most other polls. Possibly coming from the model they use to determine likely voters. It could also be the weights they give to the strata defining the universe.
But, for whatever reason, they are consistently different. Let's hope Tuesday suggest they are the ones who need to relook at their modelling.
In a time where only about 2 percent of those sampled answer, polling can't be easy.
Jersey Devil
(10,833 posts)That is completely ridiculous.
TheBlackAdder
(29,981 posts)BComplex
(9,912 posts)Just sayin'.
vapor2
(4,506 posts)when 17 million have been removed from healthcare, republicans let SNAP expire, they are illegally blowing up boats for possible regime change in Venezuela and Ice body slamming and deporting people without due process. What the f is wrong with those who are still voting R?? Asking for a country under siege
bushalert
(252 posts)I will obviously vote for her, but Sherrill is an uninspiring suburban moderate - not what we need in these times. Not feeling good about this election.
karynnj
(60,965 posts)Rodney Frelinghuysen did not run for reelection.
This was a district that in Presidential elections, the goal of volunteers led by the party was to minimize the Republican margin. She obviously was a good enough campaigner to win.
Since then her district was made more Democratic.
JBTaurus83
(1,379 posts)Democrats have lost so much ground to Cankles and the GOP in NJ. It was a pretty close win for Kamala as well. The last thing we need is to lose NJ from the coalition.
Aviation Pro
(15,574 posts)Need I say more?
W_HAMILTON
(10,333 posts)TheBlackAdder
(29,981 posts)Its similar to returns of prior years, where I get a refund.
This year, its over $1700 and theyve been slow walking it.
JBTaurus83
(1,379 posts)And we are no stranger to high taxes. The city income tax here is pretty ridiculous. That being said, taxes in NJ when I used to work in the mortgage industry were through the roof. Both candidates have been accusing the other of wanting to raise taxes in ads, so I assume this is really a sore spot for people who live there.