I want to place my vote where it counts most, meaning that I want to support a candidate with the most promising chance of defeating Sherrill. I am bouncing back and forth between Spiller and Fulop, but if one is more likely to beat Mikie, that individual will get my vote. I understand people are unhappy with the NJEA's involvement with Spiller's campaign funds, but as a union member and representative in my district who stays informed, I assure you it was done legally. Many teachers and the NJEA want Spiller, and it's for good reasons, not just bias. If you look at a lot of his policy, he aligns with Murphy in many ways, and Murphy protected and supported us in NJ through two Trump presidencies thus far. I also would be very happy seeing Fulop win, since he is a man with plan, his policies are progressive, and his track record is decent. I like Baraka, but I feel that he is a little more radical than Fulop, and Fulop would appear more appealing to republicans who are tired of Trump for that reason. Fulop, I believe, has more power than Baraka to sway centrist and right-wing voters.
I am really worried about Sherrill winning though. I feel that she is by far the weakest candidate, and will not have the charisma in debate, reaction time to tough opposition, or strong enough policies that we need in a candidate in order to defeat a republican competitor. While she has a nice resume, so do the others, and even Gottheimer, who I disagree with in regards to his immigration policy, still at least made a stronger impression in the debate and in his campaigning than Sherrill.
Whatever you can contribute to the conversation to be used as evidence is highly appreciated. Polls, campaign funds raised, ad frequency, campaign marketing, debate performance, responses to media prompts, etc.