Stomping Grounds: Mikie Sherrill, Steve Sweeney, Newark school board turnout, and David Hogg

New Jerseyans aren’t always civil, but it’s still possible for a liberal Democrat and a conservative Republican to have a rational and pleasant conversation about politics in the state. Dan Bryan is a former senior advisor to Gov. Phil Murphy and is now the owner of his own public affairs firm, and Alex Wilkes is an attorney and former executive director of America Rising PAC who advises Republican candidates in New Jersey and across the nation, including the New Jersey GOP. Dan and Alex are both experienced strategists who are currently in the room where high-level decisions are made. They get together weekly with New Jersey Globe editor David Wildstein to discuss politics and issues.

Mikie Sherrill has two new ads that touts her promise to reduce the cost of housing, health care, and utilities, and to stand up to Donald Trump and Elon Musk.  The ad comes as her campaign released an internal poll that shows her ten points up in the Democratic gubernatorial primary.  How do you rate the new ads?

Alex Wilkes: I think it was smart of her team to focus on her biography and to put it in her slogan on the ballot. It’s probably the most interesting thing about her — and with due respect (really) to her military service, I don’t mean that as a compliment as it relates to public policy.

I’m sure for Democrats that Mikie looks like a no-brainer: good biography, a voting record that appeals to the far left wing of her party minus the AOC and Jasmine Crockett rhetorical flourishes.

This might be a strange take, but there’s just something off about her. If I had to put my finger on it, I think she has an authenticity problem, which is an issue when running on character almost exclusively. Essentially, in standing for everything, she actually stands for nothing.

Disclaimer: It’s not a woman thing—I’ve worked for and deeply admire a number of female leaders. When she speaks, it’s like she’s looking through you, not directly at you. She presents in such a vanilla, generic way that it’s almost like an AI candidate or something. As a relative outsider to the state, I think you could swap out New Jersey for Virginia, Pennsylvania, or even North Carolina and not know the difference, and that feels pretty strange in a place filled with so many characters – male and female. I don’t know. The vibes are off. 

Dan Bryan: The broader dynamics of the Democratic primary race have been fairly static for a while now – Congresswoman Sherrill has maintained a healthy lead, as the other campaigns have raced to distinguish themselves and ascend above the pack. Sherrill has the advantage of being able to play her game on her terms, and that’s exactly what these ads showcase.

The ads tell us that the Sherrill team knows their strengths. Congresswoman Sherrill’s experience, bio, and inherent likability factor have made her the forerunner for the Democratic nomination from the start. These ads don’t try to do too much, and the simplicity works well.

In a primary where no campaign has been comfortable going negative on a fellow Democrat, there hasn’t been significant movement for a while now. That’s a problem for many of these campaigns, but the Sherrill team will take it.

Steve Sweeney has a new ad about his roots as an ironworker and a pledge to protect people who work with their hands.  What’s your take on the ad and his messaging?

Dan: In a six-way primary where as little as 20% of the vote can theoretically win the nomination, the former Senate President is clearly banking on the same moderate, working class voters that made up the base of his support throughout his decades in office. To that extent, this ad makes a lot of sense. It’s another example of a team knowing who their candidate is, and playing to their strengths.

Alex: Based on the narrower than expected margin of President Trump’s loss in New Jersey, I think it’s safe to say that there were plenty of Democrats who ditched their Party at the top of ticket and rejected the out-of-touch, corrupt, bait-and-switch candidate who had absolutely no messaging on key issues that mattered to them, like affordability and immigration. For this group, this is a smart ad that definitely speaks directly to them in a powerful way.

The problem for Steve Sweeney is that the number of people in his party who think like that is growing smaller and smaller. While the kind of guys who would support Steve Sweeney were out busting their ass on job sites, insufferable, college-educated, suburban women with Kindness Matters signs in their front yard took over his party.

I think what he has going for him is that you will have a fractionalized vote that will split many ways ideologically. Is it enough to get to a plurality? Time will tell.

In the first Newark school board election that permitted sixteen and seventeen-year-olds to vote, just 67 of the 1,771 registered voters under age eighteen actually showed up at the polls.  How will this affect Governor Murphy’s proposal to take the idea statewide – and his proposal to put $1 million in the state budget to advance the plan?

Alex: If we focus any kind of attention on Newark and children, it should be that astonishing numbers of children in the city’s public school system cannot read or do basic mathematics. The Democrats in power have failed a generation of children through unforgivable COVID shut downs, opposition to charter schools, and misappropriation of funds. Can we get the fundamentals right before moving on to this kind of stuff? What good is it if the eligible voter is unable to actually read the ballot?

Dan: My best guess at their response is this – these things are never overnight successes. It takes time for the culture of voting to catch up with new programs to open up democracy.

When Governor Murphy first proposed in-person early voting, he did so with the knowledge that it usually takes four to five years for serious uptake among voters. People have voted one way for decades, and though some are excited about a new option, it takes time for new habits to form and for word to get out. Sure enough, within that time frame, we saw serious uptake in in-person early voting in the 2024 election cycle.

So if they’re committed to this effort, it will take time to see significant uptake. My bet is, they know that and they’re committed to seeing it through.

David Hogg, the newly-elected 25-year-old vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is working on a side project to spend millions to back younger candidates against aging House incumbents in safe districts in the 2026 Democratic primary.  Should older lawmakers in districts not in danger of flipping to the other party be encouraged to stand down?  And should top party officials be involved in that effort?

Dan: I think two things are true.

One, lawmakers need to learn when enough is enough. Walking around the DNC this past summer, it was astounding to see the average age of Democratic lawmakers. Listen – we’re all aspiring senior citizens. I certainly hope to get there one day. But if we don’t make room for the younger generation to be represented in our party, we can’t be surprised when they don’t come out and vote for Democrats.

We need to ensure the Democratic party is a party for all Americans, and that includes all ages. We all have to put ego aside and know when it’s time to step aside and allow the next generation a seat at the table. There has been a serious deficit of this as of late in our party, and I hope it’s corrected.

Two, it is an extraordinarily stupid idea for Democrats to waste time, money, and resources fighting other Democrats, ones that even David Hogg agrees with 95% of the time. I understand the urge, but we simply have to be smarter. We implement policies that help working families when we win majorities and hold power, not when we impose purity tests.

The Democratic Party has to be big enough for David Hogg and for James Carville, for AOC and for Josh Gottheimer. If we don’t embrace a wide spectrum of voices, opinions, and ideas, we’ll have a small echo chamber of a party that will enjoy being in the minority for a long time to come. So while I agree that something should be done about elected officials staying on long past their prime (term limits!), I do not think Democrats should embrace Hogg’s effort.

Alex: I have three things on this: 1) I think a lot of these younger, more progressive candidates might underestimate how entrenched some of these incumbents are in their districts or state. We’ve seen it on the Republican side – even with some insurgents running as the supposed “Trumpier” Republican  – who are ultimately unable to deliver the goods because in their social media exuberance, they’ve missed the fact that a someone who’s been in office for 20+ years has probably had an opportunity to connect with a majority of  his or her constituents through help with matters like Social Security and passports through the official office, as well as the ribbon-cutting, baby-kissing, grant obtaining retail politics that keeps them on good paper with the people back home. I’m not arguing for these guys to necessarily occupy these positions until they need assisted living, but the incumbents who have not just been phoning it in over the years can absolutely outfox a newcomer. 2) If the DNC wants to get involved in creating 40 more AOCs and Jasmine Crocketts, by all means, don’t let me stand in your way! 3) If you’re taking your direction from David Hogg whose voice was taken seriously in recommending Tim Walz – a guy who put tampons in the men’s bathrooms – for the veep nomination, you should probably reconsider your life choices.