Mark it Corzine, with reluctance

In all probability, the strongest of the three main candidates for governor of New Jersey cannot win. That candidate would be independent Chris Daggett, who has run both an admirable and credible campaign.

Voting for Daggett presents a dilemma, however, both for people who will cast ballots on Tuesday and for newspapers that have not endorsed a candidate this close to the election.

No reliable polls have shown Daggett getting more than 20 percent. He's likely to get less, once voters give up trying to find his name in Siberia on major-party-tilted ballots. So, is a vote for him "wasted?" That's true only to the extent that possible Daggett voters think going for the independent will propel the candidate they dislike most either Republican Chris Christie or Democrat incumbent Jon Corzine into office and make New Jersey substantially worse.

Corzine's failed policies or, perhaps more often, his failure to follow through on some good policies promise more of the same.

Christie asks voters to accept on faith that he can cut taxes, restore pared-down property tax rebates, and fully fund some educational needs, all with cuts he says he can make from the state budget. That hasn't worked in the past, and it's a prime reason for uncontrolled state debt.

It's not a nice choice, especially when Daggett seems to know better but can't win. He freely admits what Corzine and Christie won't tell you flat out: To reduce onerous property taxes with certainty, you need another mechanism to raise revenue in Daggett's case, expanding the services subject to the 7 percent state sales tax.

However, to limit the choices to those who can win, the incumbent is the better pick.

Corzine is the first governor in years who put New Jersey on a course of tough love when it came to taxpayers' obligation to resume contributing to public employee pensions. He got the courts to accept a new funding mechanism for the much-discussed "Abbott" school districts, to reverse the trend of outsized increases in state aid to these 30 urban districts alone.

Corzine has also begun to get serious about money-saving combined services and even merging the state's too-many municipalities and school districts. He's kept sound priorities aid for schools, health care for kids, help for the unemployed in recent, shrinking budgets.

Corzine, though, has fallen down on Job 1, reducing property taxes. The special session of the Legislature he demanded in 2006 was mostly a waste of time. He's also shown a disturbing pattern of telling public employee unions to accept significant givebacks, then backing off.

Christie is correct when he says that the incumbent never put enough weight behind the campaign finance and ethics laws that Corzine also professes to want. Christie, the former U.S. attorney for New Jersey with the stellar public corruption prosecution record, would push much harder for these.

But the unknowns of Chris Christie economics are a big risk. In a best-case scenario, he'll find enough waste and fraud to pare the budget enough to fund his tax-cut and other priorities. In a worst-case scenario, he'll combine the worst thing about Christie Whitman (relentless tax cutting without substantial program cutting) with the worst thing about Jim Florio (reckless zeal to get his agenda passed, with no flexibility and little regard for the concentrated impact).

New Jersey has seen far too many worst-case scenarios. Because of that, our state would be better off with the guy who pushed New Jersey in a better direction, but with too many pit stops to reach the destination.

If you want to pick between the two possible winners Tuesday, we're recommending Corzine over Christie. Either way, don't expect miracles on your real-estate tax bill.

We think the difference between the two major-party standard bearers is perceptible enough to say "Corzine." If you don't, a vote for Daggett could send Tuesday's victor a strong message about how fed up you are with your property taxes.