What New Jersey’s Democratic Primary Says About the Direction of the Party

In 2017, even the bankers are running as populists.

Joe Biden and Phil Murphy

Michael Brochstein/ZUMA Wire

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On Tuesday, Republican and Democratic primary voters in New Jersey will choose their nominees for what former Vice President Joe Biden has called “the single most important” election of the next three years: the race to succeed Republican Chris Christie as governor.

Biden made his declaration late last month while campaigning for Democrat Phil Murphy, the party’s likely nominee. New Jersey, despite Christie’s best efforts, is a blue state that rejected Trump by a wide margin in the presidential election, and the Democratic primary victor will head into the fall as the front-runner. (Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno is the favorite for the Republican nomination.) Considering that national attention on the primaries has already been dwarfed by coverage of the congressional special elections in Kansas, Montana, and Georgia, as well as next Tuesday’s gubernatorial primary in Virginia, Amtrak Joe’s comments may sound like typical Biden bluster.

But despite the lack of fireworks so far, the race does tell us something about the direction the Democratic Party is heading: In 2017, even the bankers are trying to run as populists.

In the months after the November presidential election, an ascendant populist wing has pushed for the party to distance itself from its often cozy relationship with Wall Street. Trump may have stocked his administration from the break room at Goldman Sachs, but he enjoyed his greatest career success by excoriating Democrats as the party of globalist bankers. A revamped Democratic Party, in this line of thinking, would look more like the Bernie Sanders campaign, drawing its money and politics from small-dollar regular donors on a populist economic message. That’s what happened in Kansas and Montana, and to a lesser degree in Tom Perriello’s insurgent campaign for governor of Virginia.

Murphy is an awkward fit for that brand. Among his principal qualifications are that he was a former executive at Goldman Sachs and has given the state party and its elected leaders a lot of money ($1.15 million) over the yearsā€”which incidentally were the same qualifications of the last Democrat to be elected governor of New Jersey, Jon Corzine. (Murphy also served as ambassador to Germany from 2009 to 2013, a position that it not typically seen as a stepping stone to Trenton.) 

But he has adopted a progressive platform that has helped insulate him from the obvious charges about his background, pushing a $15 minimum wage (nearly double what it is now), a tax on millionaires, marijuana legalization, and a state-run bank like the one proposed by Sanders. The Vermont senator never backed a candidate in the raceā€”but his son, Levi, campaigned with Murphy.

It’s a delicate balance that another Democrat in the race, Jim Johnson, a former chairman of New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, fought hard to disrupt. Johnson sought the mantle of Sanders-style progressivism, receiving matching public funds and attacking Murphy for his work at Goldman. In the campaign’s final stretch, he ran an ad featuring Sanders ripping into the company during last year’s presidential race. All the essential Sanders catchphrases were there: “rigged system,” “political machine,” and “dark money that poisons our politics”:

But it may have been too little too late; by that point Murphy had pulled well ahead of the pack.

In many ways Murphy’s platform, in a state with close ties to America’s capital of high finance, represents another sign of the Sanders wing’s policy momentum. (Quick: name a prospective 2020 candidate who doesn’t support a $15 minimum wage or single-payer health care.) But for a movement rooted in animosity toward the donor class, Murphy’s checkbook ascendancy highlights the gap between where the party is and where the Left still wants it to be. A populist ex-banker, after all, is still an ex-banker.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate