MyDD :: NJ-Gov: Forrester's Ads Busted

NJ-Gov: Forrester's Ads Busted

by Scott Shields, Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 12:55:16 AM EST

Tomorrow, I expect to write a full wrap-up of tonight's Gubernatorial Debate between Jon Corzine and Doug Forrester here in New Jersey. For now, check out Matt Stoller's coverage at Corzine Connection, where you'll also find some sneak previews of my commentary.

The television spots Forrester has been running on television here in New Jersey are incredibly lame. That's not just me being partisan. They're really bad. You can see for yourself at his website. There's absolutely nothing of substance in any of them. In fact, there's no actual mention of any sort of policy. One has Forrester's wife talking about how he takes care of his family, so he'll take New Jersey families. It's like something put together for a seventh-grade class president's race, only with better production values. The other shows a list of Democrats complaining about corruption and vowing to vote for Forrester. It would be a much more effective spot if anyone in the ad cited any specific allegation.

Late this afternoon, a few hours prior to tonight's debate, it was revealed that there is at least one incredibly misleading aspect of the "Democrats for Doug" spot. One of the 'Democrats' isn't really a Democrat. And corruption apparently doesn't bother him nearly as much as he claims it does.

One of the ad's principals, Dave McGraw, a registered Republican until two months ago, was fired from his post as court clerk in Essex County. In fact, Mr McGraw served as an Essex County Republican Committeeman.

Mr McGraw was charged with embezzling $55,000 in court funds and lying to the county prosecutor in 1985. The assignment judge removed him from his post after a hearing officer found that Mr McGraw stole cash from court deposits, had other employees cash checks knowing they would bounce and attempted a cover-up by deceiving investigators.

In the ad, McGraw grumbles, "the corruption is out of control." Well, I guess he should know.

Tags: Governor 2005-6 (all tags)

Permalink :: 9 Comments :: Post a Comment

Conga line of corruption (none / 0)

hahaha. That has to be one of the dumbest ads I've ever seen. Thanks for the link, Scott.

Rudy Giuliani hates firefighters. And puppies.

by Fran for Dean on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 02:28:58 AM EST

Hey! (none / 0)

I ran for class president in 7th grade, and my ads had a lot more substance than that!

by craverguy on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 02:37:26 AM EST

Re: Hey! (none / 0)

No offense to any seventh graders out there. More new kickballs and a longer recess are certainly more of a substantive platform than is laid out in this ad.

by Scott Shields on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 10:28:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Well... (none / 0)

I WON my 7th grade class president... simply because I got the endorsement of a cheerleader who was the football coach's daughter. I didn't have to run ads or campaign. Brandy Collier told everybody to vote for me and they did. I was her pet project or something.

Invest in nature

by NCDem on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 10:57:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

55k in bounced checks (none / 0)

Its a question of scale. 55k in bounced checks, if I were on the jury - I'd want to see exactly how McGraw +knew+ they would bounce in advance. E.g. if you're doing 200,000.00 of deposits every two or three days, it is possible to ascribe it to error, honest or otherwise.

55k sounds like a lot to the average joe, what is the scale? What is the context?

In any poll, also, lets know - what is the context? For example. One major news organization refused to allow people to say "get the money to fix katrina from iraq" - and so the people replied "other govt. programs" -

This kind of loss of context is harmful. The GOP can use such a device to say "see, people want to cut healthcare" or something like that.

In this case, a guy has basically floated some checks. Do we know its part of Dr. Evil's plan?
How much money was commonly moved around. My guess
is that there is a big number here.

And I frankly don't see how he himself got the money. If his clerks are cashing checks, great - but whose checks? His? Is the cash accounted for in state coffers once received?

by turnerbroadcasting on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 09:59:52 AM EST

Re: 55k in bounced checks (none / 0)

BTW this post says he +stole+ money but I am confused about this. Theft is a crime, possibly
a felony crime.

What is a "hearing officer". How come this guy didn't get convicted? Did he do prison time?

Alot is troubling here.

guilty before proven innocent.
no punishment of the guilty.
loss of context and scale

I am curious to know if we as a country are more about scandal that we are about justice.

by turnerbroadcasting on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 10:02:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 55k in bounced checks (none / 0)

All very good questions.

But the scandal aspect of this doesn't bother me nearly as much as the fact that the guy is presented to TV viewers as a Democrat who's fed up with Democrats and supports Doug Forrester. That's a flat out lie -- he's a Republican.

Here in NJ (and by extension, NYC and Philly), these ads have been running non-stop for weeks and it's about time someone called bullshit on them, both from fact and substance perspectives.

by Scott Shields on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 10:32:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

it's not an awful ad (none / 0)

I watched the "Democrats for Doug" ad, and aside from the obvious scandal that's gonna from from using this McGraw character in it, I don't see why it's inherently an ineffective ad. If it ties in to real currents in public perception, it might be a very good ad.

Most people don't vote by considering the merits of policies mentioned in TV ads. There's no particular reason why an ad has to talk about specific policies to be effective (although some ads that do so can certainly be effective). Ads are about marketing and message. If there is a general perception or even a persistent undercurrent in New Jersey, that local or state government is corrupt and that the Democratic party is implicated, and if part of Forrester's message is that the Democrats are corrupt and he'll clean it up, then this ad definitely gets the message across and could be effective.

by cos on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 01:17:03 PM EST

its an empty add (none / 0)

first of all, Ive only seen the "Doug never let down his family" add here in Jersey City. I have not seen any of the other adds. Are they running?

secondly, precisely which corruption are they referring to in this add? Granted, I dont watch NJN...but other than a male governor with a male lover who ws appointed to a high level position....just what is the "corruption" they are referring to?

or is it that districts 1 and 2 (and perhaps a few others) want to ceceed or dominate?

I think Forrester is trying to create concern and worry where there is none. I think he using the Dems for Doug add simply to create an issue to use against Corozine when there isnt really one there to build.

Of course we may experience things slightly differently over here in Jersey City and Newark.

by Evolution on Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 06:39:46 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.