[ssantomaur]

The NJ election is over. If the Senate refuses to sit Lousenberg, it will createa vacancy, which McGreedy can fill with a D congressman or a D from the State Senate or Legislature that will run as an incumbet in 2 years. The Louse quit since he was in the minority, he'll probably do so again and we won't need to run against an incumbent.

[Smackover]

Of course the Senate can declare the person with the highest vote total running an uncorrupted election as the winner for the full six-year term. In New Jersey a corrupted election of the Democrat must be declared void. The Senate shall be the judge of the election. It is not even subject to Court challegne.

Remember Missouri in 2000 wherein the Circuit Judge overruled the legislature and held the polls open in selected Democrat precincts in contravention of legislation mandating an earlier closing time.

Becky Cook then certified the dead Governor as the winner, claiming he was a resident, even though he had been dead for almost two weeks. (The Constitution requires that a Senator be a resident) Shortly thereafter, with a straight face the acting Governor declared the dead man was no longer a resident and the office was vacant. He appointed the widow to the Senate. This unconstitutional outrage occurred while Trent Lott was negotiating a, "power sharing arrangement" with the Democrats. This, "good deed" inflicted eighteen months of obstructionism on the country as the Republicans allowed the Constitution to be trampled.

There is very little downside to upholding the constitution and enforcing fair elections. When you are given power, use it or loose it.

Ask yourself, what happened to "power sharing" when the Democrats got control. What chance would a Republican have if he was the top vote getter in a corrupted election in New Jersey and the Democrats were in control of the Senate?