New Brunswick, New Jersey
Frank Lautenberg is on his way back to the U.S. Senate tonight, defeating his Republican opponent Douglas Forrester by 64 to 36 percent of the vote in a truncated campaign defined more by legal and ethical questions than any issues of substance.
Lautenberg, who replaced the ethically challenged incumbent Robert Torricelli a month ago, fought a lengthy court battle to get his name on the ballot and Forrester has made the legality of his candidacy a campaign issue much as he did Torricelli's ethical lapses.
But if there is any lesson to be drawn from Forrester's defeat, it is that a campaign of moral indignation is sufficient only to defeat an opponent who is already thoroughly discredited. Forrester's outrage had him coasting to an easy victory over the disgraced Torricelli, but could not propel him to victory over the well-known and widely respected Lautenberg. The veteran senator's ability to open a wide lead so soon after entering the race revealed that Forrester had largely failed to stake out a strong, independent identity for his candidacy, a mistake he repeated against Lautenberg in the final month of the campaign.
Torricelli, the Democratic incumbent, recently emerged from an extensive investigation into charges that he accepted improper gifts from a campaign contributor. The investigation resulted in Torricelli's censure by the Senate ethics committee and Forrester made his ethical lapses the focus of the campaign, sometimes introducing himself as "the guy running against Torricelli."
A month ago, however, Torricelli abruptly dropped out of the race and was replaced by Lautenberg, an 18-year Senate veteran. But rather than beginning a prompt, issues-based campaign against his new opponent, Forrester instead chose to wage war on the legality of Lautenberg's candidacy, claiming that his name had been placed on the ballot after New Jersey's 51 day deadline. Forrester pursued the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court with little success.
As New Jersey's voters proved tonight, there was little to be gained from challenges to the legality of Lautenberg's candidacy. Lautenberg's supporters generally didn't care how he found his way into the race and those who thought that his candidacy was illegal were mostly Republicans who wouldn't have voted for him anyway.
Democratic voters at the Stentton Community Center, near New Brunswick, generally were unconcerned with Lautenberg's late entry into the race. Most were happy to vote for the Democrat despite lingering questions oflegality and were concerned only that New Jersey voters have a choice of Senate candidates.
Forrester also sought to make an issue of Lautenberg's age. Throughout the campaign, Forrester sought to portray the 78-year-old Lautenberg as confused and out of touch, seeking often to debate him in hopes of a misstep that would cast doubt on his ability to serve. After one debate, Forrester described Lautenberg as "cranky" and "incoherent."
But, like his legal questions, Forrester's focus on Lautenberg's age was largely irrelevant and failed to resonate with New Jersey voters. Lautenberg will be in good company in the Senate, many of whose members are of similarly advanced age and New Jersey voters seemed to realize this. Voters in Stetton generally believed that Lautenberg was fit to serve, or at least were willing to vote for him to secure a Democratic majority in the Senate.
Forrester's campaign also was hampered by his failure to focus on Lautenberg once it became clear that his new opponent's candidacy would not be overturned by the courts. Throughout the campaign, Forrester tried to connect Lautenberg to Torricelli's tainted legacy, despite the often bitter rivalry between the two democrats.
One Forrester TV ad claimed that "Frank Lautenberg and Bob Torricelli are teaching New Jersey kids the wrong lessons." The ad shows kids having trouble in school and sports, who soon give up and ask exasperatedly that Frank Lautenberg take over for them. Forrester also spoke often of the "Lautenberg-Torricelli" Democratic machine that had conspired to rob New Jersey voters of a fair election.
But such charges were largely inaccurate and fell flat, as tonight's results show. Rather than continuing to battle Torricelli after his departure from the race, Forrester might have done better to focus his energies on Lautenberg and to establish an independent identity with New Jersey voters.
By focusing on his opponents' problems at the expense of creating his own message and identity, Forrester left himself vulnerable to the kind of credible challenge Lautenberg made to his candidacy last month. A purely negative campaign was enough to defeat Torricelli, but Forrester should have realized sooner that Lautenberg was a serious candidate who could not be defeated by moral indignation alone. Forrester's failure to build a real candidacy and strong presence in the minds of New Jersey voters led to his quick change of fortune in this Senate race and brought an early end to Lautenberg's retirement tonight.
(Alec Solotorovsky's column usually appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at asolotorovsky@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
BURSTEIN: Federal workforce cuts target Virginia — and Youngkin’s response falls short
By Carly Burstein | 6 days agoForcing employees to choose between uprooting their families or losing their livelihoods is not just callous — it is economically reckless.
HUYNH: Virginia’s proposed ‘whippets’ law is laughable
By Viet Huynh | May 1, 2025As people continue to be harmed by nitrous oxide abuse, Virginians will see this new law as the ineffective, ultimately harmful policy that it is.
EDITORIAL: We can demand more of our university presidents
By Editorial Board | May 1, 2025We hope for greater transparency because for the principles of solidarity in this statement to be enacted and effective, stakeholders must be treated as partners in resistance.
