Research 2000 for Daily Kos (10/20-22, likely voters, 9/17-19 in parens):
Dennis Shulman (D): 40 (34)
Scott Garrett (R-inc): 47 (49)
Other: 2 (2)
Undecided: 11 (15)
(MoE: ±5%)
This is a tidy improvement over R2K's first poll in this district, reflecting in part the fact that Shulman went up on the air between the two surveys. It also helps explain Scott Garrett's wild freak-out and sick smears against Shulman. (My favorite: Shulman, an ordained rabbi, is "soft on Israel." Uh huh.) You may also recall that earlier this week, the Club for Growth, which usually cares naught for incumbents, endorsed Garrett and may be getting ready to drop some bucks on his behalf.
In this expensive NYC metro district, Shulman will likely need some outside help of his own if he is to unseat Garrett. There's still time for the DCCC to come in with a big moneybomb in this (and many other) districts. (Last cycle, for instance, they nuked Charlie Bass in NH-02 on Halloween.) We'll soon see if Shulman has the momentum to pull off a major upset here.
Bonus finding: McCain leads Obama 51-39 (it was 52-37 in the last poll).
Americans appear ready to sweep a lot of Democrats into office on November 4. Not only does Barack Obama maintain a solid lead in the popular vote and electoral vote estimates, several Senate races that appeared safe Republican holds a few months ago are now considered tossups.
Polling is harder to come by in House races, but here too there is scattered evidence of a coming Democratic tsunami. Having already lost three special Congressional elections in red districts this year, House Republicans are now scrambling to defend many entrenched incumbents.
In this diary, I hope to convince you of three things:
1. Some Republicans who never saw it coming are going to be out of a job in two weeks.
On a related note,
2. Even the smartest experts cannot always predict which seats offer the best pickup opportunities.
For that reason,
3. Activists should put resources behind many under-funded challengers now, instead of going all in for a handful of Democratic candidates.
Last night, I joined a rally of Lobbyists for Republican Scott Garrett, who gathered to thank Garrett for supporting the financial industry that has run our economy into the ground. Scott Garrett, who represents New Jersey's fifth Congressional district, doesn't just accept campaign donations and personal loans from the financial giants that caused our current economic crisis - he hired a former Countrywide lobbyist as his chief of staff. Garrett is among the nation's strongest supporters for deregulation of the financial industry that puts profit before people struggling thanks to today's economic crisis.
Research 2000 for Daily Kos (9/17-18, likely voters, no trendlines):
Dennis Shulman (D): 34
Scott Garrett (R-inc): 49
(MoE: ±5%)
This is the first public poll of the race in New Jersey's fifth congressional district, where Rabbi Dennis Shulman is taking on retrograde wingnut Rep. Scott Garrett. There are a number of things worth pointing out about these results.
On the positive side, Garrett is below the fifty percent mark, which is always troubling for an incumbent. At the same time, his favorables stand at a weak 44-38 - almost as many people dislike him as like him. On the flipside, Rabbi Shulman's favorables stand at 36-26, which means that nearly 40% of likely voters don't yet know who he is. In other words, he has room to grow.
It's exactly that growing room which gives Shulman the chance to make up the fifteen-point gap that R2K says he faces. Shulman's doing pretty well among Dems, winning them at a 72-11 rate, while Garrett is doing ten points better among members of his own party, taking Republicans by 77-6. The real issue, though, is independents. Garrett cleans up here 48-35. The good news for Shulman is that this group is the least familiar with him: fully 45% of indies say they have no opinion of the Democrat - an opportunity, if Shulman can get his name out there.
Those independents are the real X-factor in this poll. They make up a huge 54% of the sample, while Republicans clock in at 27% and Dems at 19%. This is actually pretty close to where registration stood in the district before Super Tuesday. However, Dem registration has shot up since then; I'm told that more recent figures indicate the district's makeup is more like 44I-32R-24D today. But knowing registration numbers is one thing - figuring out who will show up on election day is quite another.
And in that regard, NJ-05 is a bit of an electoral engima. The district voted for Bush in 2004 by what looks like a daunting 57-43 margin. In 2000, however, the margin was half as wide, just 52-45. Why the seven-point shift, when Bush only gained about three nationwide? Most analysts I've discussed this with believe there was something of a "9/11 effect" here, just as there was in many parts of the tri-state area.
If this assessment is accurate, then this right-ward shift may have been temporary. One possible piece of support for this thesis is the presidential head-to-head, which shows McCain leading Obama 52-37. Obama trails past Dem performance quite significantly, but McCain is at Bush 2000 - and not Bush '04 - levels, for the moment. In a red district, though, undecideds are more likely to drift Republican, so McCain's current 52% may not be his ceiling.
One final thought: Neither candidate in the fifth CD (which is covered by the ultra-expensive NYC media market) has gone up on the air yet, so there is plenty of potential for this race to move.
Stuart Rothenberg on Rabbi Dennis Shulman, running for Congress against GOP Rep. Scott Garrett in New Jersey:
Finally, at times, the rabbi seems very un-rabbi-like. He is quoted as using the "s" word very matter-of-factly in Toobin's piece and using the "b.s." word in Time. I expect a lot of folks in the district may wonder about that.
And Shulman's rhetoric seems more like a Democratic insider than a man of the cloth, such as his comment that Garrett is "in the pocket of Big Oil" and that the runup in energy prices "is the direct result of Big Oil and their cronies like Scott Garrett blocking sound energy policy for years."
This is as ugly as it is wrong. In his column, Rothenberg criticizes a New Yorker profile of Shulman by Jeff Toobin, saying that the author's "forte is simply not politics." Yet when did Rothenberg appoint himself an expert on religion?
Indeed, reform Judaism - the sort practiced by Shulman - embraces a diverse body of beliefs, styles and personal choices. It is Shulman's congregants - not Beltway blowhards - who determine what standards their clergymen ought to meet, and whether they meet them. As a practicing Jew myself, the thought of a smug DC pundit who isn't even a member of my synagogue proclaiming my rabbi spiritually unfit offends me to no end - especially when the "sin" in question is a violation of some ossified standard of bipartisan gentility that never actually existed in the first place.
In fact, in pluralistic America, I'd expect all those who respect the rights of others to observe their religion as they see fit to be displeased about remarks like this. They have no place in our politics or our houses of worship. And as I say, this kind of statement isn't just offensive, it doesn't even pass muster as good political analysis. Case in point: While I'm sure some Catholics didn't think Fr. Robert Drinan - who beat a 28-year incumbent on an anti-Vietnam War platform and supported abortion rights throughout his career - "acted like a priest," that didn't stop him from winning five terms as a Congressman in Massachusetts. He only stepped down because the Pope - not his constituents - forced him to.
If Rothenberg wants to critique Shulman on the merits, fine. But leave religion out of it. Period.
In the last couple days, there have been several posts across the blogosphere citing what various candidates running for Congress have said on FISA and retroactive immunity for the telecoms. But so far, it's been all over the map. I'll try to corral all their statements into this diary, so you can see who the "good guys" are.
First, let's start off with the current House and Senate members who voted against this bill. They do deserve credit, as it's their jobs on the line.
Follow me below the fold to see the dozens of Democratic challengers who are standing up for the Constitution, and are against this FISA bill and retroactive immunity.
Following a week in which the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) lobbed several attacks on Congressman Scott Garrett's (R-Wantage) skewed priorities, Congressman Steve Rothman (NJ-9) joined the General Wesley K. Clark, Teamsters Joint Council No. 73, New York Governor David Paterson, and numerous New Jersey political figures in endorsing Dennis Shulman's campaign to unseat Garrett in New Jersey's Fifth Congressional District.
"After meeting with Dennis and hearing about him from people throughout Northern New Jersey, I am convinced that he will make an excellent Member of Congress. I am committed to working with Dennis in 2008 so that, together, we can help solve the problems of New Jersey and the nation in 2009," said Congressman Steve Rothman.
Did you catch that? Rep. Steve Rothman of New Jersey's 9th congressional district just the other day endorsed Rabbi Dennis Shulman, who is taking on Republican Scott Garrett in New Jersey's 5th CD. That is to say, an incumbent Dem endorsed a challenger running against a member of his own state's delegation.
But what does DCCC Executive Director Brian Wolff have to say about endorsements like that?
Brian Wolff, executive director of the DCCC, says the bloggers are making "much ado about nothing," noting that it's "customary" for members to remain neutral in races involving GOP members of their respective congressional delegations.
Quick, someone call up Steve Rothman! He's violating a long-practiced custom! How dare he! Does Chris Van Hollen know about this breach?
Seriously, folks, I think we know this "custom" is bullshit. Debbie Wasserman Schultz herself recognized this back in 2005, when she unhesitatingly supported challenger Ron Klein against fellow Floridian Clay Shaw:
"It's not good for my relationship with Clay Shaw, but Democrats can't afford to leave a seat like that uncontested," she said.
Scott Garrett is a total recidivist crumb-bum, and the people of NJ-05 deserve better. Rabbi Shulman knows this, and that's why he's running to replace him. And Rep. Rothman knows this, too, which is why he's backing Rabbi Shulman. Surely the good folks in South Florida deserve no less from Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
It is only a matter of time before he bursts forth onto the national scene and captures the hearts and minds of thinking people everywhere in this country.
Come November (and likely well before) he will be a national phenomenon: Russert will interview him on Sunday morn; Olbermann will speak of him while delivering a special comment; the gray lady will profile him; NPR will consider all things related to him; the right will be disarmed by him; and the left will celebrate him.
Dennis Shulman, the inspiring blind doctor and rabbi who is seeking to unseat Republican incumbent Scott Garrett in NJ-5, has just secured the endorsement of Paul Aronsohn, who ran and lost to Garrett on the Democratic ticket two years ago.
With this crucial endorsement, in addition to raising nearly $200,000 in 2007, Shulman has established his bona fides and is increasingly looking like the Democratic candidate to beat in this district that finally has a real chance to swing blue.
In other NJ-5 news, Steve Goldstein, the Garden State Equality chair and another supporter of Shulman, found just the rights words to capture the uniqueness and potential of Shulman's campaign when he commented:
And it is these words, and this man, that have inspired rabbi Dennis Shulman (D) to challenge conservative extremist Scott Garrett (R) in NJ-5 this 2008.
Like his spiritual forefather, Shulman has concluded that he can no longer speak about God and remain silent on Iraq, as well as many of the other pressing and important issues of our times.
