Stomping Grounds: Debate night, Altman’s ad, Helmy’s new job and the Taylor Swift factor

New Jerseyans aren’t always polite, but it’s still possible for a liberal Democrat and a conservative Republican to have a reasonable and pleasant conversation about the state’s politics. Dan Bryan is a former senior adviser to Gov. Phil Murphy and now owns his own public relations firm. Alex Wilkes is an attorney and former executive director of America Rising PAC, which advises Republican candidates in New Jersey and across the country, including the New Jersey GOP. Dan and Alex are both experienced strategists who currently sit in the room where high-level decisions are made. They will meet weekly with David Wildstein, publisher of the New Jersey Globe, to discuss policy and issues.

New Jersey Globe: How do you rate the performance of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in this week’s presidential debate? And how do you rate David Muir and Linsey Davis from ABC as presenters?

Alex Wilkes: The Vice President’s five days of nonstop preparation and memorization obviously served her well in this debate. She didn’t abuse the English language in her usual way and laid out enough bait to rattle President Trump. However, I found some of her reactions to be over the top and her nervous manner of speaking in the first ten minutes detracted from her performance for many Americans who tuned in right at the start.

I will say this: President Trump has debated on a presidential stage more than half a dozen times in the last nine years and not once the mainstream media, editorial pages, or pundits have declared him the winner (with the exception of the June debate against Joe Biden, which was really more of a televised human rights violation). In almost every subsequent election campaign, sections of the public that are always overlooked in popular opinion have cast their votes in rejection.

Why? Everything they needed to know was said in the first five minutes. Vice President Harris did not answer the question Americans want to hear every cycle: Are you better off than you were four years ago? By any objective measure, you are not better off. It’s an extraordinarily close election and the debate did little to change that, in my opinion, but I don’t think the Harris campaign would be calling for another debate if they didn’t feel they needed it.

ABC News and the anchors were an absolute abomination. For all of us who survived Candy Crowley’s real-time fact-checking that ended up being wrong against Mitt Romney, this one-sided portrayal felt like PTSD on steroids. We’re apparently not allowed to complain about referees in this match, but if that had happened to my friends on the left, they’d be setting themselves on fire in the street in protest. Bottom line: The Republican Party should never participate in an ABC-sponsored contest again.

Daniel Bryan: Vice President Harris was fantastic. She was well prepared, strong and confident. She knew what she wanted to accomplish and achieved her goals regardless of the questions she was asked. She and her team clearly planned to make former President Trump lose his mind at the size of the crowds and defend his record, a plan he was happy to go along with.

Perhaps her best line of the night was the one she delivered after being again linked to President Biden: “I am not President Biden and I am certainly not Donald Trump—I represent a new generation of leadership.” This line was clearly written and rehearsed in advance, but it came at the perfect time and was delivered perfectly.

Aside from the Trump headline, I wish some of her answers had been more convincing. Unfortunately, her weakest answer was on the economy, arguably the most important issue of this campaign. And when asked to explain her evolving views on fracking, she sounded too much like a typical politician instead of simply owning up to them.

But that’s like complaining about a few bad passes from the quarterback who just won 41-10. That was an absolutely dominant performance from the vice president and a horrible performance from the former president.

I thought the moderators were solid. Their fact-checking wasn’t petty or intrusive – it was mostly limited to debunking topics like, you know, baby executions and eating pets. They asked both candidates tough questions and stuck with each one. Those who say the fact-checking was one-sided have to respond: Well, that’s what happens when lies are one-sided. The truth is known to have a liberal bias.

NJ Globe: Sue Altman is on air with her first TV commercial this week in her bid to win a congressional seat in New Jersey’s 7th District. What do you think?

Dan: Sue’s new ad accomplishes the two tasks she must accomplish in this election campaign: disqualifying Tom Kean and introducing herself to the voters of the 7th District.

Among Congressman Kean’s more heinous acts is setting up two websites: one to target moderate voters in the 7th District and a “secret” website to target right-wing extremists. I’m glad Sue called him out on this, and I hope voters hold him accountable for this blatant insult to their intelligence.

As a friend of mine likes to say, every election these days is a change election, and Sue presented herself here as an agent of change. Focusing on fighting corruption is smart, especially given the track record and integrity Sue has on this issue. Saying you’ve taken on both parties is the same as saying you’ll work with both parties – you’re signaling to voters that you work for them, not for the party bosses. And having that message come from her district Republican is smart, considering the voters she needs to win over.

Listen, this is going to be a tough election for the Democrats. There are more registered Republicans than Democrats in CD7. But with Sue campaigning so aggressively and an incumbent burdened with the weaknesses and name recognition of Congressman Kean, anything can happen.

Alex: I think it’s conceptually a good idea to represent Republicans in a Republican-leaning district who support your candidate – assuming they’re actual Republicans.

I have been a Republican and a conservative all my life. I asked for a subscription to National review at Christmas when I was 12. In a previous life, I was twice elected national chairman of the College Republicans. I have never in my life heard a Republican – not even a pro-life one – use the phrase “secret anti-abortion agenda.”

It wouldn’t be the first time that “Defund the Police” Sue has been easy on her actors. She also published an ad with an allegedly “independent” business owner who actually runs their small business in the much more favorable tax environment of South Carolina. Pro tip for Democratic companies: If they have blue hair, you are probably one of them!

NJ Globe: On Monday, George Helmy Taking office as the new US Senator from New Jersey. What can the people of New Jersey expect as interim Senator?

Alex: George Helmy, DC, is chilling for the next three months! As someone who loves that giant middle finger to Andy Kim, patron saint of empty water bottles, I mean this in all seriousness: enjoy it, man. Use your perks for tours of the Capitol dome, good seats at the Kennedy Center, a prime table at Le Diplomate, or whatever is trending. See you on the other side of the revolving door!

Dan: First and foremost, Senator Helmy will restore ethics and integrity to an office that desperately needs it. He will allow us to put Senator Menendez behind us and look forward to better days.

But I also think if anyone can really accomplish something in the U.S. Senate in just a few months, it’s George. He knows the U.S. Senate as well as he knows the state of New Jersey, so he won’t need any time to get up to speed. I had the honor of attending his swearing-in on Monday, and I’m excited to see what he can accomplish for the people of New Jersey.

NJ Globe: Taylor Swift’s Support for Kamala Harris received considerable attention. Why do voters care when a celebrity endorses someone in a political campaign?

Dan: By and large, I don’t think they do. But I think Taylor Swift’s support is a bit of a unicorn. She’s the most popular artist in the world right now, and her fans don’t just focus on her music. They identify with her personality, her life story, and her values. If she tells them she’s made a decision she cares deeply about, I wouldn’t be surprised if she generates attention and excitement for the Harris campaign and brings more than a few moderate voters to her side.

Typically, celebrity endorsements are more important for attracting attention than for changing opinions. If you’re in a race and struggling to make headlines, it makes sense to hire a celebrity – you get free media attention and it helps generate a certain level of excitement.

Alex: Everyone has the right to support whoever they want. Apart from Ronald Reagan, Republicans have never been particularly popular with Hollywood fans, but have nevertheless managed to win elections in recent decades. The crucial question is whether support translates into follow-up measures (e.g. voter registration, voter turnout) and If the support mobilizes voters who were not already inclined to vote for Kamala Harris. I have my doubts about these points in this case, but I also do not deny the power of celebrity in a close election.