Who Will the Republicans Choose To Take on Torricelli?

March 28, 2002 | Son of Soprano

[wheezer]

We've got a tremendous opportunity to get rid of Bob Torricelli this year

The Department of Justice had a tremendous opportunity to get rid of Bob Torricelli, but decided he was (like all democrats), above the law.

Another feather in Ashcroft's cap.

[Clemenza]

The Torch will win, although I would LOVE to see ANYONE elminate the SOB. Remember, Jerseyites have a high tolerance for corruption and have not ELECTED a Republican Senator since the liberal Clifford Case. Jersey is the place where people identify as "moderates" yet vote "liberal."

[Fzob]

bump for later

[Free the USA]

Check the Bump List folders for articles related to and descriptions of the above topic(s) or for other topics of interest.

[Free the USA]

fyi

[Exit 109]

Son of Soprano

member since March 28th, 2002

Hmmmm . . . hi Bill!

[KQQL]

YO......! I say TONY SAPARONA would kick Da Torch Butt....

[KQQL]

YO......! I say TONY SAPARONA (not Soprano ) would kick Da Torch Butt....

[Coleus]

This is not an endorsement

John Matheussen, Republican Candidate for United States Senate will appear on News 12 New Jersey's Power and Politics this weekend. Please take a few minutes to tune in and see for yourself why John Matheussen is the best candidate in the Republican Primary to defeat Bob Torricelli.

The show can be seen on Saturday at 11am, 3pm, 10:30pm and on Easter Sunday at 11am and 3pm

If you have any questions about the Matheussen for Senate campaign please contact the HQ at 856-228-4473

[dead]

Donnie DiFrancesco and the moderates burned too many bridges to the conservatives with their performance in the gubernatorial campaign. Not content to merely shut up and stay home, Donnie and his boys actively worked behind (barely) the scenes to defeat Schundler.

They preserved the corrupt bipartisan machine that is NJ politics.

It really doesn't matter anymore whether the political insider on the take carries a D or an R after his name.

Like the Sopranos, they're all family now.

I'll whistle past the graveyard and vote Libertarian.

[Coleus]

I'll have to be "dead" before I ever vote for a libertarian, how about someone from the Conservative or Constitutional Party?

[firewalk]

Thanks for the heads up Coleus, I'll watch Sat. night.

[Exit148]

Well, this is a start ---- getting them all in one place. We have your view, SoS. Anyone else want to expand?

Does The Torch have the primary to himself?

[Antoninus]

Diane Allen ... she's far too liberal for the average GOP primary voter

I won't vote for Diane Allen either in the primary, or the general if (heaven forbid) she should get that far. She's a back-stabbing RINO. Didn't she try to steal the spotlight from Schundler when he had Carl Rove up here during the campaign by hosting a competing event on the same night?

I'll vote for whoever Bret Schundler endorses, assuming he makes choice. (I hope he'll at least make a private endorsement here on FR...)

[Antoninus]

4) Doug Forrester.

I've seen this guy's direct mail. I've been to his web site. I'd like to get excited about him, but I can't figure out what the heck he stands for, if anything. His message seems to be: "Elect me. I'm not as corrupt as Torricelli." That's great, but I won't vote for a guy if I don't know where he stands on 1.) abortion, 2.) Taxes, 3.) The 2nd Amendment, 4.) Special rights for homosexuals. I've seen no trace of his opinions on these matters anywhere, except what you've written above.

So far, I have absolutely no one to get excited about here. It's looking like I'm going to sit back and watch this unfold and register a vote for the most conservative candidate when the primary comes around. Then, when a RINO gets the nod, I'll vote 3rd party in November. I will NEVER vote for another RINO again.

[firebrand]

ping for New Jersey voters

[Son of Soprano]

Forrester is a conservative. He supports a ban on partial-birth abortion, parental notification, and will vote to confirm pro-life justices. His position on the 2nd Amendment is simple -- he recognizes the individual right to self-defense contained therein, and believes there is no need for new gun laws; rather, we should enforce the laws already on the books. He vehemently opposes McCain-Feingold campaign "reform" as an assault on the First Amendment (he's especially irked, he said on NJN back in February, by the provisions banning issue ads within 60 days of a general election and 30 days of a primary election, noting (correctly) that this is EXACTLY the time when an electorate begins to pay serious attention; and, therefore, incumbents' attempts to prohibit such discussion can only be interpreted as an incumbent protection measure). For similar reasons, he opposes public financing of campaigns, and he whacked Diane Allen at the same NJN appearance for her support for public financing.

The issue in the fall campaign is going to be a simple one -- do the voters believe Torricelli deserves another term, or not? Forrester appears to be the only one positioned to make that argument with clean hands. He's got a strong Republican Party history, is a successful businessman willing to put his money where his mouth is, and he's personally disgusted by the Torch, and wants to take him out.

What more could you ask for?

[Son of Soprano]

Oops, forgot taxes and "special rights" for homosexuals.

He's a businessman, and it's a small business, so it's probably incorporated as an S Corporation, which means he's paying 40 percent off the top before he gets to see the fruits of his own labor. He doesn't like taxes any more than the next guy, and wants them cut. He supported the Bush tax cut proposal, but doesn't think it goes far enough.

But he's also quick to point out that -- especially given the experience of New Jersey under Christie Whitman -- it is irresponsible to cut taxes with one hand while increasing debt with the other. The key is to get a handle on government SPENDING -- if you don't turn off the spigot, it doesn't make any difference whether the water is hot or cold, you're still WET.

So he wants to take a big whack at federal government spending, and reorder priorities along more market-oriented lines.

As for "special rights," it's my understanding that he believes no one should be granted "special rights" on the basis of sexual orientation. In addition, he's a known strong supporter of the Boy Scouts -- he's a former Eagle Scout himself, and at some of his campaign events, he's even had Boy Scout Color Guards present the flag.