But, New Jersey Voters Deserve a Choice!

Northeast | 10-01-2002 | Northeast

[Northeast]

But, New Jersey Voters Deserve a Choice!

Let me see if I have this correct.

On June 5th, 2002 the voters of New Jersey went to the polls in a State Primary election and chose to put Torricelli back on the November ballot. The State Democratic Party did not choose to run anyone against him in the primary, as they were happy whit the sitting Senator. So let the campaign begin, and let the voters begin to make a choice. He has an early lead over his Republican challenger Forrester.

July rolls around, Torricelli is leading in the Polls, and is scheduled to testify under oath in a Senate ethics probe. By the time early August arrives, the Senate ethics committee has issued a “letter of admonition”, Daschle releases a statement claiming the Torch is innocent, and the Democratic party circles the wagons around their choice for the November election. Forrester is pulling even in the Polls.

But then, in mid August, the wheels begin to come off the Torch’s wagon. The voters of New Jersey begin reacting and Forrester moves into the lead in some polls. The choice of the Democratic Party begins to flounder. The party continues to support him, there is still plenty of time to replace him, but no one suggests it.

September. The debates begin, the charges fly. The voters focus on ethics and integrity and Torricelli is the choice of fewer and fewer voters. The deadline for replacing him on the ballot quietly slips by as the rhetoric heats up.

The week of September 23rd saw the Washington heavyweights come to town. President Bush campaigning for Forrester, and Daschle for the Democratic party choice, Torricelli. It also saw the release of more damaging evidence of the corruption of the Democratic party choice. By the time the weekend rolls around, it’s clear the electorate is choosing Forrester.

On September 30th, the Democratic party chooses to remove their candidate from the race, as it is apparent he has no chance to win - despite party heavyweights coming to town, attack ads, and the support of the Governor.

This morning, on October 1st the Democratic party - and indeed the Governor himself - were assaulting the media with a single coordinated message: The voters of New Jersey deserve a choice between two candidates from the major parties. We will go to court to give them that choice. Earth to Democrats! They did have the choice, and they weren’t choosing you. You chose to remove that selection from the voters yourselves.

The Democratic party took away the voters choice because they didn’t like what the voters were saying. Now, in a spectacular “do over” bid, they will go before the New Jersey Supreme Court and request that they flout election laws in the middle of an election because they were losing.

And their argument is that the voters deserve a choice.

Do I have that right?

[Northeast]

Heya Southack! You are correct. But it is the argument they are using in their brief to the Court. My post was intended to show how absurd thier argument is.

Regards

[Cyber Liberty]

Interesting. It's headed ultimately for the SCOTUS, you know....

[IVote2]

Let me rephrase their position.

The Democrats bought this seat, it is their seat, been their seat, should remain their seat.

It is their Senate, they owned it for years, they "won" it back, should remain their Senate.

The voters selected Torricelli. Unfortunately he had to withdraw. He can't allow an unfit person to be in office, so he and his liberal buddies are totally justified in making sure that they keep this seat. Whatever has to be done to keep it, as long as it is a Democrat holding it,is legal, ethical, appropriate, and even if it isn't it will be fine because Democrat liberals are born to rule.

(/sarcasm off)

[Gothmog]

Perhaps an easy way to explain to people the false argument about voters being denied a choice:

The "Dem Corruptors" football team is playing the "GOP Champions" on the Dem field, where they have a distinct advantage and have not lost for many years.

By the end of the 3rd quarter, the Dem Corruptors are down 20-10. The Dem Corrutors call a time out and appeal to the refs to stop the game and let them bring in a whole new team, the Dem Cheaters, to finish the game because -- and only because -- the Dem Corruptors are too tired and fear they will lose.

When the GOP Champions complain, the Dem Corrupters (and the announcers in the booth) argue that the paying fans (voters) will be cheated out of the rest of the game if a new team is not allowed to take the field.

The NFL would never allow this, Pee Wee footbal would not allow this. Explained in a simple way, the GOP should be able to steal back the 'fairness' issue. Otherwise, they will be portrayed by the Dems and the media as 'meanies' who have to go to the courts to prevent voter choice.

The voters do have a choice -- Torricelli -- it's just that nobody likes that choice.

[pikachu]

Big Question: If 'the Torch' has the majority of the vote in the election, will/would he take the seat??

[steve in DC]

New Jersey Democrats have made their choice. It's not the Republican's problem that they deliberately chose a criminal

Yes, and now the New Jersey electorate has a clear choice. They can chose to support a criminal and vote for the Democrat candidate, or they can vote Republican, or they can vote for the Green Party candidate.

Choices abound!

If the Democrat party didn't want to give the electorate such a clear choice (ethically challenged extortionist v. apparently honest businessman), then they should have worked harder to seat a better candidate in the primary.

Right now the electorate has a choice among three candidates. If the court allows the Democrats to remove Torrielli from the ballot, then there will still be two candidates running.

Will the Democrats argue that there is a constiutional right for the Democrat party to have a "viable" candidate on the ballot, and at the same time argue that they get to determine what "viable" means and when the "viability" means test gets applied?

[Northeast]

Well said Gothmog and an excellent example. Forrester put all his efforts and money into this race and focused on the opponent. Now, in the last month of the campaign, the rats try to slip in a shill, backed by DNC money and force Forrester to do backflips in his campaign.

It's so blatant it's sickening.

Regards

[Northeast]

Darn tootin IVote! Why, the Dems are entitled to that seat, it's just not faaaair! /whine.

Regards

[Rook]

This is pitiful! The pure arrogance of the
Dumbocratic party.Telling the people they own the United States Senate.Is that Democracy? What kind of soviet
styled system do they want to force us to live in?

[IVote2]

"Will the Democrats argue that there is a constiutional right for the Democrat party to have a "viable" candidate on the ballot, and at the same time argue that they get to determine what "viable" means and when the "viability" means test gets applied?"

Yes... :) Because they can.

You are too logical, you know. You make too much sense.

Regards, Jen

[Still Thinking]

Will the Democrats argue that there is a constiutional right for the Democrat party to have a "viable" candidate on the ballot, and at the same time argue that they get to determine what "viable" means and when the "viability" means test gets applied?

It's enough to make my chad dangle.

[Northeast]

If the Democrat party didn't want to give the electorate such a clear choice (ethically challenged extortionist v. apparently honest businessman), then they should have worked harder to seat a better candidate in the primary.

Exactly. And now they seek legal redress because they made a bad political decision. Using the courts to counteract stupidity. *daschle voice on* It's outrageous, outrageous /daschle.

Regards

[steve in DC]

Dumbocratic party.Telling the people they own the United States Senate.Is that Democracy? What kind of soviet styled system do they want to force us to live in?

No, it isn't Democracy.

It's Democratcy.

[Verginius Rufus]

Sometime during the first hour or two of his speech yesterday, Torricelli mentioned how he won his first office as a write-in candidate...He was traveling around in Europe on election day but his mother and sister wrote his name in for some local office, and he won 2 votes to zero.

[p. henry]

To pull this stunt, the Dems must be truly fearful of losing the Senate. Apart from NJ, NC, SD, Minn, and Ark., what are the close Senate races this year?

[Jim Noble]

You forgot to add:

"The Democratic candidate owns 96% of the black votes, 81% of the Jewish votes, 69% of the Hispanic votes, 100% of the illegal alien votes (oops!). Any election result that does not have all of these votes for the Democratic candidate is "flawed", has failed to "count every vote", and cannot stand up against the will of the people".

[Northeast]

Any election result that does not have all of these votes for the Democratic candidate is "flawed", has failed to "count every vote", and cannot stand up against the will of the people".

You mean "count every democrat vote"

Can't let any of those pesky military ballots mess up the works, y'know.

Regards

[IVote2]

I can't remember when I've enjoyed two weeks of unending liberal debacles. It began with Gore pontificating on Iraq with his hair hanging down, looking like the doofus he is. Daschle having a meltdown with his whispering imitation of Rush imitating Mccain on the Senate floor. Robert Byrd in high hysteria, screaming "It's WRONG, It's WRONNNNNNNNNNNG... It's WRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!"

But then we had the expert on dung, Harkin, who first denied everything about a tape of his Republican opponent's meeting, then fires a young staffer and finally his campaign manager. But.. his campaign people didn't know anything about it.

Two House Representatives, Bonior and McDermott, call the President a devious liar and praise Saddam while standing on Iraqi soil, this after Daschle and Gebhardt say they support war, just not this war, at least not now, they need more facts but they support the President by gosh!

Then just when I thought it couldn't get any better, Drudge lets us in on Bab's memo with Gephardt's name spelled wrong. It gets better yet! we have Babs and her fundraiser where she misquotes Shakesphere. (I bet she was never blonde!)

Yesterday we had the spectacle of a Senator who was severely admonished by his peers, weeping about how much good he had done, sniviling about his opponent not being fit for the job, whining that he couldn't come close to being as strong as his mentor Clinton, yearning to regain his life. So he's quitting. (But not quite yet.)

I mean.. It's only Tuesday!

[dubyagee]

Socialist - Greg Pason

Hey, how come the Dem's get to put two on the ballot, anyway?

[IVote2]

Oh shoot! I did forget that. Silly me!

Regards, Jen