Jeff Van Drew’s defection from the Democratic Party began with a vote against the impeachment of President Trump and ended with a handshake in the Oval Office.
With his promise of “everlasting support” for Mr. Trump, the New Jersey first-year congressman unleashed all the fury of his old party and got a quick hug from the Republican President, who promptly held a rally for Mr. Van Drew in South Jersey. , declaring it “Trump country”.
The apostasy launched a surprisingly toxic race that has become a moral crusade for Democrats thirsty for political retribution in a state where they outnumber Republicans by 1 million voters.
“We have to give this guy an example: kick his butt,” said Michael Suleiman, chairman of the Democratic Party in Atlantic County, who helped send Mr. Van Drew to Congress in 2018 during the so-called blue wave. .
But Tuesday’s main race between Democrats vying to compete against Van Drew has largely been divided along the political flaws that have divided the party.
On one side is Governor Philip D. Murphy, who offered a late endorsement to the candidate with a celebrity surname: Amy Kennedy, a mental health advocate and former history teacher married to Patrick J. Kennedy, a former congressman and son of the Senator Edward M. Kennedy.
In the other are two of Murphy’s political rivals, George E. Norcross III, a South Jersey power broker, and Stephen M. Sweeney, the Speaker of the Senate, who support Brigid Callahan Harrison, professor of political science and right.
That lineup was the only predictable element in the race.
The two senators from the United States of New Jersey are supporting Dr. Harrison, establishing ground in front of Mr. Murphy, an ally and fellow Democrat, as well as many labor organizations.
Ms. Kennedy is supported by public employee unions that often align with Mr. Murphy, as well as progressive groups that oppose Mr. Norcross and are working to undermine the power that county leaders in New Jersey have to anoint candidates.
With the help of Mr. Norcross, Dr. Harrison won the support of six of the district’s eight district presidents, but Kennedy won the coveted Democratic Party line in Atlantic County, where more than a third of voters live. from District.
The coronavirus has turned the contest around since it has prevented the more traditional campaign.
Instead, the race has been marked by a series of competitive press releases, Zoom fundraisers, and an online-only debate broadcast on YouTube. (The three-party debate drew a total of 256 viewers to its live broadcast.)
The election itself was postponed for a month, until Tuesday after a bank holiday weekend. And the vote is carried out almost entirely by mail ballots, the first large-scale test of a method that was used in May but tainted by fraud allegations.
Mail-in ballots must be mailed or delivered in person before Election Day, and the race, if closed, may take more than a week to decide.
“There is almost no anchor to grab,” said Professor Micah Rasmussen, who teaches politics at Rider University and was press secretary to former Governor James McGreevey. “There is no sense of normality.”
Other closely watched races on Tuesday include a Republican primary between Kate Gibbs and David Richter, who had planned to compete against Van Drew, but changed districts after the defection. The winner will compete against Representative Andy Kim, a first-year Democrat in a vulnerable southern Jersey district.
Further north, Representative Josh Gottheimer faces a progressive challenger, Arati Kreibich, as does Representative Albio Sires.
“I really think people just look around and ask, ‘Why is everything so screwed up?'” Said Héctor Oseguera, a 32-year-old lawyer who is running in the Democratic primary against Mr. Sires, who has I’ve been in Congress since 2006. “And they start to say that maybe the people who’ve been in charge for so long haven’t been doing such a good job.”
A third candidate in the race to oppose Mr. Van Drew, Will Cunningham, 34, a lawyer and former investigator for the House Oversight and Reform Committee, makes a similar argument.
“Those closest to pain should be closer to power,” said Mr. Cunningham, a black man who experienced homelessness as a child.
It is his second campaign against Mr. Van Drew: Mr. Cunningham obtained 16.8 percent of the vote in 2018. Still, the race is widely viewed as a two-person competitive competition between Dr. Harrison and the Mrs. Kennedy.
Senator Cory Booker, who is running for reelection, filmed a television commercial for Dr. Harrison and is joining her on the ballot.
Ms. Kennedy was endorsed last week by Steny H. Hoyer, the majority leader of the House of Representatives. “She is the best candidate to beat Jeff Van Drew and turn this seat blue again,” Hoyer said in a statement.
The debate that has taken place on issues has focused on infrastructure and economic needs along the Jersey shore, healthcare reform, and the legalization of marijuana. The district stretches from Atlantic City west to the Pennsylvania border.
Mrs. Kennedy, a mother of five, has emphasized her experience as a teacher and her role advocating for mental health and addiction reform as director of education for the Kennedy Forum, which was founded by her husband.
Dr. Harrison, a professor at Montclair State University, has focused on the difficult economic situation facing Atlantic City, the legalization of marijuana as a social justice problem, and the costs of medical care.
If Ms. Kennedy wins the primaries, she will be on the ballot in November along with a question from the voter referendum on whether to legalize marijuana in New Jersey, a proposal that Murphy has advocated but does not support.
Kennedy, who has spoken frequently about his fight against addiction, is an ardent opponent of legalized marijuana.
Professor Rasmussen, who helped lead Van Drew’s campaign for the State Legislature, said Kennedy’s opposition to the legalization of marijuana is unlikely to upset many general election voters in the moderate district where Trump won. five percentage points in 2016.
But that has not stopped observers from noticing the political dissonance.
“It is troubling that any candidate is ambivalent about legalization, especially any candidate who claims to be progressive,” said Amol Sinha, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, which has assembled a broad coalition of groups pushing to legalize marijuana
Both candidates have repeatedly resorted to negative campaign messages involving fundraising, political alliances, and the role of super PACs.
Dr. Harrison has highlighted the embrace of Mrs. Kennedy from Craig Callaway, a former Atlantic City council chairman who served 42 months in prison on a bribery charge and who is known for leading aggressive vote-by-mail operations.
He has also questioned Ms. Kennedy’s campaign contributions from officials at Wellpath, a for-profit health care provider at correctional facilities who appointed Mr. Kennedy for his board in February.
Ms. Kennedy’s campaign has focused on Dr. Harrison’s alliance with Mr. Norcross, who paved the way for him to run on the Democratic Party line in most district counties, just as he did with Mr. Van Drew in 2018.
Advertisements sent to voters advertise an opinion essay written in 2011 by Dr. Harrison that encouraged former Governor Chris Christie, a Republican close to Mr. Norcross, to run for president.
Tuesday’s election is also considered a referendum on the mail-in voting process, which is expected to lead to more voter participation, but has been plagued by problems.
Some voters received the wrong ballots; other ballots never reached voters. A flaw involving a barcode on the envelope caused some ballots to be mailed back to voters.
“These primary elections are going to have an asterisk next to them,” Sweeney, the president of the Senate, said last week.
A special May election for the Paterson City Council, held by mail vote at the height of the pandemic, led the attorney general to charge four men with electoral fraud. Trump, who has criticized the vote by mail, referred to Paterson’s arrests on Twitter.
Amber McReynolds, executive director of the National Vote at Home Institute, said expanded voting options are fundamentally healthy for democracy.
“Like in-person voting, like early voting, there are risks,” he said. “It is not an accusation of politics. It’s just one more demonstration that you have to implement it correctly. “
“It is a science,” he added, “and an art.”
