Cory Booker's Slump: Real but Overrated

Reporting on Politics and Policy.
Oct. 7 2013 10:53 AM

Cory Booker's Slump: Real but Overrated

94150465
Is this the face of a worried man?

Photo by Mike Coppola/Getty Images

The political conventional wisdom machine has put Cory Booker through the Stations of the Gaffe. A month ago, it was assumed that Booker would win the New Jersey race for U.S. Senate in a walk. Since then he's fallen from a lead in the high double digits to the low ... double digits. His comeuppance has come in local coverage, in Politico ("it’s a chance to test whether Booker has a glass jaw"), in the New York Times, and now in a Chris Cillizza tweet that tells readers just how damning the New York Times story is:

David Weigel David Weigel

David Weigel is a Slate political reporter. 

Advertisement

As one of those easily wooed reporters who met and liked Booker early (in 2006), I'm glad to see him sweat a little for this win. But he's only sweating a little. In the Times, Michael Barbaro quotes Monmouth's pollster saying Booker should be winning by no less than 20 points. In the RCP average of polls, he's leading by 18. In Monmouth, Booker's gone from a 16-point lead in June to a 16-point lead in August to a 13-point lead in October. At this rate, Republican candidate Steve Lonegan will overtake Booker at some point in 2015.

The election is next Wednesday.

Has Booker's lead fallen? Yes. Most coverage of the Booker slump has been proved by a link to the Quinnipiac poll, which showed his lead slipping from the mid-20s to 12 points. That same poll has shown Gov. Chris Christie increasing his lead from the mid-20s to 32 points over poor state Sen. Barbara Buono. It obscured the fact that most polls also show Christie slipping while still winning. In Monmouth, for example, Christie's gone from 42 points up (February) to 30 points up (June) to 19 points up (September).* There is no coverage of a shambling, stumbling Christie campaign, because the partisan model is reasserting itself, and he's doing what was always likely—winning a massive victory that falls short of the 70-30 landslide Tom Kean won in 1985, when the state was less Democratic generally.

So is the Booker slump real? Read my headline again! Booker's campaign was faced with the choice of defining Lonegan early or blitzing late, and the choice of keeping the candidate on the trail constantly or letting him raise funds out of the state. These were tough choices. Lonegan's probably the most conservative candidate for statewide office in New Jersey since 2001 (he opposed, on live TV, the Hurricane Sandy relief package), but history is full of losing campaigns that erred by attacking their opponents early and raising their name ID ineffectively. Booker has to run again in November 2014—did he want to win a smaller victory with a massive war chest, or a larger one with a depleted war chest?

This looks like a campaign that's largely followed its strategy while suffering very minor setbacks from 1) the candidate talking himself into two-day "scandals," like the ridiculous nonsexual DM with a Portland stripper, and 2) the press acting unexpectedly like the press. It's giving Booker his first-ever tough scrutiny, while generally portraying the Republican candidate as a scrappy underdog instead of a well-connected conservative activist with Americans for Prosperity.

UPDATE: Oh, I ignored the hook of that A1 NYT story—Mike Bloomberg is spending $1 million to help Booker in the stretch. It's billed as Bloomberg's largest donation to a campaign, though his Mayors Against Illegal Guns spent $2 million to boost Democrat Robin Kelly in a primary for a safe Democratic seat. That donation was always overrated; the pro-gun Democrat crushed in the primary had previously been crushed by Jesse Jackson Jr. when his scandal was already known.

*Correction, Oct. 7, 2013: This post originally misstated Chris Christie's lead over Barbara Buono in a June Monmouth poll. He led her by 30 points at the time, not 32.

David Weigel is a Slate political reporter. 

TODAY IN SLATE

Politics

Don’t Worry, Obama Isn’t Sending U.S. Troops to Fight ISIS

But the next president might. 

IOS 8 Comes Out Today. Do Not Put It on Your iPhone 4S.

Why Greenland’s “Dark Snow” Should Worry You

How Much Should You Loathe NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell?

Here are the facts.

Amazon Is Launching a Serious Run at Apple and Samsung

Television

Slim Pickings at the Network TV Bazaar

Three talented actresses in three terrible shows.

Foreigners

More Than Scottish Pride

Scotland’s referendum isn’t about nationalism. It’s about a system that failed, and a new generation looking to take a chance on itself. 

The Ungodly Horror of Having a Bug Crawl Into Your Ear and Scratch Away at Your Eardrum

We Could Fix Climate Change for Free. Now There’s Just One Thing Holding Us Back.

  News & Politics
Weigel
Sept. 17 2014 7:03 PM Once Again, a Climate Policy Hearing Descends Into Absurdity
  Business
Business Insider
Sept. 17 2014 1:36 PM Nate Silver Versus Princeton Professor: Who Has the Right Models?
  Life
Outward
Sept. 17 2014 6:53 PM LGBTQ Luminaries Honored With MacArthur “Genius” Fellowships
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 17 2014 6:14 PM Today in Gender Gaps: Biking
  Slate Plus
Slate Fare
Sept. 17 2014 9:37 AM Is Slate Too Liberal?  A members-only open thread.
  Arts
Brow Beat
Sept. 17 2014 8:25 PM A New Song and Music Video From Angel Olsen, Indie’s Next Big Thing
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 17 2014 7:23 PM MIT Researchers Are Using Smartphones to Interact With Other Screens
  Health & Science
Jurisprudence
Sept. 17 2014 4:49 PM Schooling the Supreme Court on Rap Music Is it art or a true threat of violence?
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 15 2014 9:05 PM Giving Up on Goodell How the NFL lost the trust of its most loyal reporters.