Trouble for Senator Torricelli

PoliticsNJ.com ^ | May 22, 2002 | Fairleigh Dickinson University Public Mind Poll

[Exit 109]

Every year is an election year in New Jersey, and this November all of New Jersey

[Exit 109]

Gender is part of, but not the total reason why this is happening.

[Exit 109]

I don't think we can open our mailbox without getting another flyer from Forrester. He has bucks to go over Torricelli. I'm willing to hold my nose and vote for a pro-choice (even RINO) so long as they are willing to vote to confirm Bush's judicial nominees. If they are so pro-choice (should I say, "pro-abortion") that they are going to vote with the Demorats against conservative judges, I'll have a lot of trouble pulling a lever for them.

I know. The mail just keeps on comin', doesn't it? Forrester's financial situation is beneficial for the fall race - don't think there's going to be megabucks floating around the state this year.

Per the abortion issue - with Doug, IIRC, the argument is in the first trimester. I'd prefer a pro-lifer, too. However, if he will vote to get rid of partial birth abortion AND require parental notification, I consider that a big step forward.

Of course I'm keeping in mind the point that BC Johnson said the one time I met him -- the Republicans need to control the Senate to control the committee assignments. Even if a NJ Rino doesn't help in the votes, controlling the Senate will be helpful, so I'll probably wind up voting for whoever the Republicans put up. Sigh. I guess I'll have to make my protest vote in the primary -- again.

We can't do anything if we don't have that control. They're less likely to fall into the DC game if we hold their feet to the fire once they get there.

[Exit 109]

These numbers are consistent (even more favorable to GOP) with another Quinnipiac poll like this from mid April.

Yup. The Torch continues to come in under 50% - that's a very encouraging sign.

[Exit 109]

Just for all of your info, They're starting push polls against Forrester, Got a call last night, don't know who was sponsoring it!

IIRC, the push polling started a few weeks ago. It's been spotty at best, and I think the one I heard about came from the Matheussen campaign.

[Exit 109]

Please give somone else a chance at the cookies. I just want my cookies back. I'm tired of supplying them to everyone else.

[Exit 109]

This is an apparent attempt to bend the truth Never expect objective opinion from Fairly Ridiculous University.

[Coop]

Bump to extinguish the Torch! (figuratively speaking, of course)

[Clemenza]

Never expect objective opinion from Fairly Ridiculous University.

Hey, don't knock Fairy Dick! It has the best dental school in New Jersey (my uncle went there)! :-)

[Question_Assumptions]

Per the abortion issue - with Doug, IIRC, the argument is in the first trimester. I'd prefer a pro-lifer, too. However, if he will vote to get rid of partial birth abortion AND require parental notification, I consider that a big step forward.

At the federal level, the three issues I'm most concerned about are the confirmation of conservative judges, the federal funding of abortion, and moving minors across state lines to avoid parental concent laws. The rest of the issues are really state issues, not federal issues. If Forrester is with us on those issues, then I can vote for him with little concern, though I would like to also see him vote on a federal ban for partial-birth abortion, though I'm not sure that's a federal issue.

Forrester could play a moderate pro-choice position into an advantage if he is willing to give the pro-life side enough of a reason to vote for him while being firm that his views are "mainstream" (according to many polls) and that he doesn't support the "extremist" pro-abortion support of partial-birth abortion and allowing children to have medical procedures without parental consent.