Torricelli Says Race is Not About Me
Steve Adubato, Ph.D.

Sure, Bob Torricelli is a lot more vulnerable today than he was a few months ago. And yes, Republican Senate candidate Doug Forrester was given a legitimate shot of beating Torricelli when "The Torch" was "seriously admonished" by the Senate Ethics Committee for his dealings with David Chang. And let's not forget that lots of Democrats aren't sure how close they want to be to Torricelli for fear that his ethical taint will rub off on them and their political fortunes. But this race is far from over.

Bob Torricelli has developed a new strategy and it goes something like this; "This election is not about me." Torricelli's argument is that voters should overlook, or at least put in context, his accepting gifts from David Chang and his public humiliation on the floor of the US Senate. The real issue, says Torricelli, is who controls the Senate and which policies most New Jerseyans believe in. Listen to the Senator's recent comments; "There are consequences for everybody's life that are more important than me. Don't defeat the things you care about, issues that matter, because I made a mistake. Don't do damage to New Jersey because I did damage to myself."

Torricelli's basic argument is that Doug Forrester's politics on issues like abortion, gun control and the environment are not consistent with the beliefs of most New Jerseyans. Forrester opposes partial birth abortion and is against Medicaid funding of abortion for poor women. Forrester thinks that the current gun laws are just fine and don't need to be changed. Torricelli's goal is to paint Forrester as a Bret Schundler clone who he hopes most voters, particularly independents, will reject in November. Torricelli is also playing on the fact that the US Senate currently has 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans and 1 Independent. His argument is that if he loses to Forrester, the Republicans may take control of the Senate. That would be disastrous, according to the incumbent who says the GOP would then be able to not only cut back on abortion rights and water down gun control laws, but along with President Bush, will weaken environmental regulations and endanger social security. Torricelli says it would be a "real tragedy" if that happened.

On the surface, this approach seems like a pretty cynical ploy to ask voters to ignore, if not take lightly, ones' own transgressions because the boogie man (the Republican party) is a lot more dangerous. Cynical, yes, but also a pretty shrewd political move. The fact is, New Jersey has not elected a Republican US Senator in over 30 years, the last one being Clifford Case. For a variety of reasons, voters in our state are more likely to vote for a Republican Governor than a Republican US Senator. Part of the reason is that the Republicans have often nominated candidates who were not especially moderate and often leaned too far to the right. But that's not necessarily the case with Doug Forrester. He seems pretty middle of the road. What Torricelli is saying is not really about Doug Forrester, it's really about the Republicans in the south and other parts of the country who would be in control of the US Senate and thereby implement policies counter to what New Jerseyans want.

If Torricelli can scare enough seniors into thinking that social security would be at risk in a Republican controlled Senate, a lot of voters over 65 will ask themselves some hard questions like; "How much do I really care that Bob Torricelli doesn't appear to be the most honest guy in the world? Should I vote against him and for Forrester thereby risking the Republicans in the Senate taking money out of my pocket? What's really in my best interest here?"

The same thing is true with those who call themselves pro-choice or gun control advocates and those who believe that polluters should foot more of the bill for the environmental problems they have created. All of these constituencies as well as others Torricelli will soon appeal to are going to have to ask themselves some tough questions. And one of these questions Torricelli hopes they don't ask is; "Who seems like the more honest, ethical and decent candidate between Bob Torricelli and Dough Forrester?" On that one, "The Torch" loses hands down. But if you confuse and complicate the issue by saying there are bigger issues at stake, Doug Forrester's candidacy becomes problematic. Until the Republican nominee publicly clarifies his position on critical issues that a Republican controlled Senate is likely to address, he will continue to be vulnerable to the Torricelli argument.

Bob Torricelli has never lost an election for public office and it has become increasingly clear that he is willing and able to do just about anything to make sure he doesn't lose this one.