@ Thurman Hart:
Thurman, that’s a good try but no sale. (Or maybe I should no cigar.) Bill Clinton damaged himself by going one-on-one with the anointed one during the election, making his coattails shorter than they once were.

But the really conclusive proof will come next November. If NJ was a one-off deal that had nothing to do with Obama and he’s still “the man” among Dems and independents, then the midterms should break for the Dems. If on the other hand, independents have wised up, as I maintain, then 2010 should be a bloodbath for Democrats.

@ CK MacLeod:
Corzine was defeated in New Jersey for three reasons: 1) NJ has the highest taxes in the country and Corzine had actually raised them again; 2) NJ has a horrible problem with political corruption and Corzine was seen as tolerant of it, if not involved in it; and 3) He had had a net unfavorable rating for well over a year.

It’s true that Obama showed up to try and get a few more thousand people to the polls. It didn’t work. But Bill Clinton also showed up. So is the lack of votes for Corzine also a referendum on Bill Clinton? Or is the more likely answer that this election was almost entirely a local one?

Sometimes a cigar is a cigar.

@ fuster:
So I was right. It is the New Jersey Piece o’ Crap

The pile of crap with the largest circulation in New Jersey.

@ fuster:
What newspaper, buddy? The New Jersey Piece o’ Crap?

@ Howard Portnoy:I found it one of them there newspapers, Howard. The one what has good sports coverage.
You want I should go burn down the office?

@ fuster:
Your bias is showing, Mr. Middle of the Road. That’s a very official looking document you dredged up there.

Come to think of it, it’s hard to conceive of a purer political expression of “financialized neo-liberalism” than John Corzine and his failed re-election campaign.