After a great election win, the winners can usually explain how they came to the top. But the progress of democrats from South Jersey have difficulty with it.
They say that they are not sure how strongly they defeated the Norcross Camden County Democratic Committee Inc. supported by George. (CCDC) in the original elections last week to become members of the Cherry Hill Poviat Committee.
“We were just stunned – we couldn’t believe it,” said 60 -year -old Susan Druckenbrod Last week’s main week.
The progresses took him from 62% of votes in elections to the party committee.
“It was such a surprise,” said 42 -year -old David Stahl, another winning candidate.
“Nobody – nobody – he thought we would win,” said 67 -year -old Ren Margulis, the third winner.
According to Yael Bromberg, a lawyer and lecturer at Rutgers University Law Machine in the election, there is an vital political machine of Camden’s Camden, which is contrary to the expectations of-“David will show Golith”, a lawyer and lecturer in the election law at Rutgers University Law School, who was involved in court proceedings related to the termination.
“Earthquake”, according to Julia Sass Rubin, director of the Public Policy Program in Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy in Rutgers.
And because it is such an anomaly: “It would not shock me if CCDC suffered,” said Kate Delany, head of South Jersey Progressive Democrats, a bottom -up political organization that conducts candidates for office.
Delany said that the main nervousness means that progressers will be able to make dozens of nominations to the committee.
CCDC does not agree.
In a statement for Inquirer on Tuesday evening, the chairman of CCDC James Beach, who also represents Camden’s unit in the Senate New Jersey, claimed that his group, not progressors, would fill the remaining 71 places of the poviat committee.
Although he did not mention the dispute, a person with knowledge about the issue that has no right to speak, said: “Oh, he definitely goes to court.”
How did we get here? There is a lot to solve in the Byzantine world of Camden’s Camden policy.
So what is the poviat committee and why is it vital?
Voters in the communes of Camden elects representatives of the Democratic Party to the District Party Committee of about 522 people.
The number sent from each commune is proportional to its population. Because Cherry Hill is the largest commune in the county of over 78,000 inhabitants, it can send the largest contingent – 74 people – to the Poviat Committee of the party. The same 74 will also represent the Democratic Party in Cherry Hill in the so -called City Committee.
Experts say that the main duties of the party’s related committee are vital. They can make political support at all levels, from the local office to the president and fulfill free jobs in political work.
The latter part has become controversial due to the pejorative process known Through the county county as “Camden County Shuffle” or “Cherry Hill Shuffle”. What is happening, the progressors say is a person full of a selected office, such as a commissioner of the Ferrity, resigns from another political work before the end of their term. The Democratic Committee of the County then chooses a deputy. When it is basic, the deputy acts as an inclination, which gives a great advantage over every claimant.
“So the democratic machine actually chooses the person who works, not the voter,” said Delany.
Progresses who try and failed not to comment on the poviat committee for these elections, explain that if they had power, they exclude replacing the office and have a basic with recent candidates.
Delany said Shuffle is one of the main reasons why progressers were voting last week.
What conditions have changed to aid progressiody cherry hill in the original?
The biggest change in the election in Camden was the elimination of the so -called Linear control.
Until last year, voting cards in New Jersey would provide preferential treatment to candidates who were supported by the Poviat Party. The party would certainly mention the names of the preferred candidates in one line, from the president to the city council. Meanwhile, the named names of the pretenders will be mentioned “in voting in Siberia”, said Delany away from the line.
Voters would simply answer by voting for all candidates on the line. Because the format gave approved candidates such an advantage, Senator Andy Kim (D., NJ) sued before last year’s Senate of Primary And he won in court. The legislator in New Jersey then adopted the law eliminating the poviat line.
“Kim changed the world,” said Rubin.
But even after removing the line, another problem with voting arose.
In the race of the Cherry Hill South Jersey Council, the Democrats clerk sued Camden, Pamela Lampitt in April, claiming that she violated the recent basic right to vote, without placing Ovale next to each of the names of the candidates.
Lampitt office said that It was not technically possible To do this with 77 people applying for the poviat committee.
“On the basis of this,” said Lampitt in a statement on Tuesday – “It was necessary that we vote for everyone, because all 74 people could not be replaced [CCDC] Names of the vote itself. “
She added that the decision about this “was kept in the Supreme Court and approved by the judge.”
This created a voting card that showed the names of three progressors (Druckenbrod, Margulis and Stahl) next to one oval, and 74 names of district democrats next to their own oval.
Ironically, despite the fact that the progressers lost the case, the decision could aid them win the election, said Delany.
Delany said that if the progressers won the fight for ovals, the vote would contain 77 names, each with oval. Druckenbrod, Margulis and Stahl would be identified as progressive democrats listed in the composition of 74 CCDC candidates.
“Even if we won, they would have 71 in the committee,” said Delany. But the separation of voting insisted by the official’s office meant that the voters chose between three progressors and 74 candidates for the unit.
The proceedings did not play to win, but simply vote without a line and give people except for the choice than people from CCDC.
“We had no other strategy,” said Margulis.
To determine which group would be at the top of the vote, the progressers won the draw that placed their names over 74 CCDC names. It could have been in their victory, Delany and others said.
Delany said that although the progressors have only placed three candidates for the voice, the organization will soon set their own list of 71 people. “Nothing on the vote said that you need to apply 74 names on him,” she added.
“We won, so we can choose the committee makeup,” she said. “We already have 90 possibilities.”
By questioning this claim, Beach claimed that CCDC won won the remaining 71 places and that the victory of the progress was restricted to three places.
“Over 3,000 voters from Cherry Hill voted for 74 qualified candidates who worked hard to win their names. Three random candidates who are unable to collect the full list of qualified candidates cannot get rid of over 3,000 voters. In short, we won 71 seats. After the southern T -shirt, progresses who won 3 places.
What will happen next CCDC?
The day after the basic CCDC, he congratulated their victory to the progressers and said that he would reserve further comments on election certification. It is expected to take place on Monday.
But Beach’s comments to Inquirer before the certificate seem to establish post-edge about the make-up of the committee, which will probably mean a return to the courtroom for two democratic fractions.
If CCDC would “prevent us from choosing 71 people, it would be a bad appearance – Democrats were trying to refute the election,” said Delany. “It’s very Trumpian.”
Druckenbrod agreed. “Now we control things and make decisions,” she said.
Eventually he warned Margulis, nobody says that the progressers “defeated the machine. They have a lot of money and power.
“But the elections suggest that the machine’s frustration is greater than I expected.”
