[San Jacinto]

What the democrats fear above all else is actually LETTING him face the election counts.

No question Torch was going to lose to Forrester, but Forrester has not been able to get solidly above 50% even against Torch. This seems to indicate Forrester is a sitting duck to any semi-well known late replacement for Torch. The bottom line of all this is that the Dems probably get to keep a seat they were destined to lose.

The problem seems to be getting the new guy's name on the ballot since the deadline has passed. According to the RNC memo which has been posted, the deadline has been waived once before when a candidate died. The question is -- Can the Dems get a new name on the ballot for Nov. 5?

[LisaFab]

Only if he resigns. Then the guv gets to appoint an "incumbent" who would automatically get on the ballot.

[Miss Marple]

OK. Forrester suddenly gets ill and we run Rudy Guiliani.

I have had it with the Rats. You can't even run a decent campaign because they change the candidates and the rules.

[Henk]

...the deadline has been waived once before when a candidate died

Uh-oh. Better watch your back Torch.

[SauronOfMordor]

The only Constitutionally-valid approach would be for Torch's name to stay on the ballot. If Torch wins but is unable/unwilling to serve then the NJ Gov gets to appoint a replacement