In the Right

Corzine achieved this dead-heat status just the way we predicted he would, way back in the spring — he spent millions of dollars on negative advertisements, driving Christie’s unfavorables through the roof. Christie, bound with one hand tied behind his back because he could not afford the cost of the television advertising Corzine so blithely throws around, was stuck in neutral, running out the clock.

But then a new face entered the scene — Chris Daggett, the former state Department of Environmental Protection chief and regional EPA administrator — running an independent campaign. Having raised enough money to qualify for state matching funds, he also qualified for inclusion in at least two gubernatorial debates.

As recent public polling data shows, Daggett draws from both Corzine and Christie — in equal numbers in some polls, slightly more from Christie than from Corzine in another.

But that’s not to say that Daggett poses the same threat to Corzine as he does to Christie. In fact, it’s just the opposite — Daggett is Corzine’s best friend, while he’s Christie’s worst enemy.

When an incumbent is running for re-election, there are only two kinds of voters: those who believe he or she deserves another term, and those who don’t.

If you’re challenging the incumbent, it’s your job to explain why he should be fired, and then — and only then — convince 50 percent plus one of the electorate why they should vote you in instead.

If you’re challenging the incumbent, your strategy is, as it must be, based on forcing voters into an either/or decision — either you vote for the incumbent, or you vote for me.

When a third-party or independent candidate enters a close contest featuring an incumbent running for re-election, it’s good news for the incumbent and bad news for the challenger, because the only kind of votes the independent candidate is likely to draw are from the pile of votes that weren’t going to the incumbent anyway.

And by drawing from that pile of votes, the independent candidate splits the anti-incumbent vote, and reduces the chances that the challenger candidate will end up with more votes than the incumbent.

So the proper strategy for Corzine, as explained more fully here, is to do everything he can to highlight Daggett’s presence in the race; the proper strategy for Christie is exactly the opposite — he wants to do whatever he can to get people to ignore Daggett.

And that leads to today’s commentary about the Christie campaign’s tactical brilliance but strategic lunacy.

Today, the Christie campaign rolled out what it called “a major endorsement.”

It first advertised this “major endorsement” Monday afternoon, via an e-mail to reporters to let them know that at 11 a.m. Tuesday morning in the statehouse in Trenton, there would be a press conference where Christie would accept this “major endorsement.”

Aside from the e-mail, simply announcing that Christie himself would be there was an indication of just how serious the campaign took it — putting your candidate in front of a hungry press corps is always a dicey proposition for a campaign, because the moment you open the mike for questions, you’re at the mercy of the press corps, and unless you’ve got a tremendously disciplined candidate, you’ve just lost control of your message.

At 8:20 a.m. Tuesday morning, I got a second e-mail, reminding me of the 11 a.m. press conference.

The press conference was held, the “major endorsement” — Christie’s endorsement by the members of the political arm of the New Jersey Environmental Federation — was rolled out, and the surrogate statements began to flow into my in-box:

At 11:35, an e-mail from New Jersey’s GOP Chairman (and New Jersey Assemblyman) Jay Webber; at 11:45, an e-mail from state Sen. Tom Kean Jr.; at 11:57, an e-mail from state Sen. Bill Baroni; at 12:10 PM, an e-mail from Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini; at 12:36, an e-mail from Assemblyman David Rible; at 1:06, an e-mail from Assemblywoman Amy Handlin; at 1:24, another e-mail from the Christie campaign, laying out the candidate’s strong environmental record; and, at 1:58, for anyone who had missed the 11 a.m. press conference, the press release announcing the endorsement.

As these things go, that’s tactically brilliant. Clearly, the Christie campaign wanted me to know that on Tuesday they wanted to talk about the environment, and they wanted me to know that Christie won the endorsement of the New Jersey Environmental Federation. And after receiving nine emails in the space of less than six hours, boy, do I know it.

But should I?

Remember, Christie’s strategic imperative is to have reporters ignore Daggett. That means Christie’s tactical imperative is, on a day-by day-basis, to feed the New Jersey media something other than Chris Daggett for them to write about.

The very last thing the Christie campaign should be doing is rolling out an endorsement from an environmental group — because, since Daggett is best known (to the extent he’s known at all) as the Mr. Green of New Jersey’s gubernatorial contest, it is inherently impossible for a reporter to write the “Christie endorsed by green group” story without including a few paragraphs about Daggett and what the reporters are calling his “surprising” debate performance last week.

It’s a good thing for a campaign to be able to execute a strategic decision. But it’s a better thing for a campaign to be able to make a strategic decision.

Follow me on Twitter!