[Torie]

It would render the deadline of 45 days a total dead letter. It would replace a bright line test with some amorphous test as to when a switch could be made. It is not authorized by statute. It would allow manipulation of campaigns. If it gets close to the election and you are behind, why just put someone else in, who the other guy hasn't been campaigning against. The policy reasons not to go down this road are enormous, and there are almost no policy reasons going the other way. It will not stand. The courts will not do it.

[crasher]

Given what you just said, the obvious counter-point is the Democrats must think they can do it, and the question is why?

[Petronski]

Here's another argument: The NJ legislature was very serious about having a bright line deadline. We know this because the last time the legislature considered the issue, rather than the deadline being softened or shortened, it was actually EXTENDED from 34 days to 51. We cannot now presume that legislative intent gives us enough latitude to permit a change at 33 days...

[GYPSY286]

I just listened to portions of Torch's speech. Pretty disgusting, self-serving, pity me party - but then it hit me,that's what it is all about. A sympathy campaign if I ever saw one. He's not resigning from the Senate. Therefore, his name remains on the ballot. The Dems will take polls for the next few days to see if the sympathy campaign helped his numbers go up. What do you think?