Kean wins N.J. race; Riley leads in Ala.

AP on Yahoo ^ | 6/6/06 | Robert Tanner - ap

[NormsRevenge]

New Jersey Republicans picked Tom Kean Jr., the son of a popular former governor, to challenge Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez in the fall as eight states held primaries on Tuesday for governor, House or Senate.

In Alabama, Gov. Bob Riley led Ten Commandments judge Roy Moore in early returns for the GOP gubernatorial nomination. Alabama returns also showed overwhelming approval for a state constitutional ban on gay marriage.

But the biggest race of the night was the special election in Southern California to fill the House seat of imprisoned former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, with the political world hoping for clues to the public mood ahead of this fall's midterm elections.

Money and attention from around the country poured into the San Diego-area election, with the Democrats seeing a rich opportunity to capture a solidly Republican district. Cunningham, a Republican, was sent to prison for eight years for taking bribes on a scale unparalleled in the history of Congress.

In New Jersey, Kean easily defeated a more conservative candidate. Menendez, who was appointed to his seat after former Sen. Jon Corzine (news, bio, voting record) won the governorship, beat a little-known challenger. Kean picked up three-quarters of the vote with a third of precincts reporting.

In Alabama, with 6 percent of precincts reporting, Riley led with 32,376 votes, or 69 percent, to Moore's 14,698 votes, or 31 percent. Among the Democrats, Lt. Gov. Lucy Baxley was ahead with 17,075 votes, or 54 percent, against former Gov. Don Siegelman — who is on trial on corruption charges — with 13,757 votes, or 44 percent. Voters were supporting the ban on gay marriage by a 4-to-1 margin.

Another Washington corruption case figured in Montana's primary, where GOP Sen. Conrad Burns (news, bio, voting record) sought the nomination for a fourth term. After his ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff became known, Burns saw his popularity fall, and Democrats John Morrison, state auditor, and state Senate President Jon Tester jumped into the race.

Iowa, California, Mississippi, New Mexico and South Dakota also held primaries, as many states reported low turnout.

In the weeks leading up to Alabama's gubernatorial primary, polls showed Riley had pulled ahead of Moore, the former state chief justice who became a hero to the religious right in 2003 when he was ousted over his refusal to remove the Commandments monument from the state judicial building.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger faced no major competition for the GOP nomination, while state Treasurer Phil Angelides and Controller Steve Westly fought a close and nasty contest for the Democratic nomination that left many voters dismayed.

In Iowa, the retirement of Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack set off a scramble for the Democratic nomination, with Secretary of State Chet Culver considered the front-runner. Republican Rep. Jim Nussle (news, bio, voting record) had no primary competition.

But California's special election drew particular attention, largely because polls showed Democrat Francine Busby with significant support against Republican former Rep. Brian Bilbray.

With national polls showing deep dissatisfaction with Congress, President Bush and the war in Iraq, Democrats hoped to score a victory and build momentum for the fall midterm elections.

Among the House incumbents facing primary challenges Tuesday were GOP Rep. Richard Pombo (news, bio, voting record) and hawkish Democratic Rep. Jane Harman (news, bio, voting record), both of California.

Voters also decided whether to create a $2.4 billion universal preschool program in California and ban gay marriage in Alabama.

A few races brought back some familiar names:

• Jerry Brown — the former California governor, presidential candidate and current Oakland mayor — sought the Democratic nomination for attorney general.

• Chuck Espy, a state lawmaker and nephew of Mike Espy, Mississippi's first black congressman since Reconstruction, sought the Democratic nomination for the House against incumbent Democrat Bennie Thompson.

• George C. Wallace Jr., son of the former Alabama governor, ran in the GOP primary for lieutenant governor.

[Antoninus]

Now maybe this time NJ conservatives could take the hint, realise they can't get one of their own to the general election, and actually back the republican instead of hanging him out to dry.

Sorry, I don't vote for liberals. See tagline.

I held my nose and voted for Forrester last two times. Fat load of good it did me.

In this case, Kean is wrong on just about every issue.

Thanks, but no thanks. If he's going to win, let him win with liberal votes. I'm writing in John Ginty.

[Antoninus]

In a Democrat controlled Senate Harry Reid will be majority leader, Chuck Schumer will be chairman of the Judiciary Committee ... want me to go on?

And Tom Kean Jr. will be member 15 of the Gang of 14.

Sorry, fear does nothing to inspire me to vote for a candidate.

[Antoninus]

This may sound completely childish, but I can sum this up in five words....Schundler '01. Payback's a bitch.

Amen to that. I haven't forgotten--and won't forget--what the liberal Republicans did to Bret Schundler in '01. Talk about "hung out to dry". They came out for McGreevey!

I'm at least prepared to be a bigger man than they were during that race--I won't actively and publicly support the Democrat.

[Antoninus]

Here, I'll draw you a picture:

Thanks for the picture. Here's what I consider "shooting yourself in the foot": Allowing liberal elitists to take over your party lock-stock-and-barrel.

Thanks, but no thanks.

[Wolfstar]

Thanks, but no thanks. If he's going to win, let him win with liberal votes. I'm writing in John Ginty.

Did you vote in the primary? If you did, I presume you voted for Ginty, who lost. But you don't accept the results of the primary, so you're going to write in his name anyway next November. In other words, you don't accept elections unless they go you're way. Whether or not you realize it, that means you don't accept our Constitutional system.

I can understand your dismay at having Kean be the Republican candidate. If he's anything like his father, I would have a hard time voting for him, too. But in a liberal state like New Jersey (where I was born and raised), the Republican is still better than the Democrat under all but the most dire circumstances.

Life is not about easy perfect choices. It's about making the most you can out of the hand you're dealt. If you absolutely cannot vote for Kean, you would honor the Constitution more if you voted for the nominee of a minority party rather than stubbornly write in the name of a candidate who lost his party's primary.

[Antoninus]

Did you vote in the primary? If you did, I presume you voted for Ginty, who lost. But you don't accept the results of the primary, so you're going to write in his name anyway next November. In other words, you don't accept elections unless they go you're way. Whether or not you realize it, that means you don't accept our Constitutional system.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

I accept the results of the election. There is no law that says I must vote for one of the following two liberals/socialists in the general election or that I can't write in the candidate of my choice. The two-party system is found nowhere in our Constitution.

I won't vote for a liberal Republican. I'm done voting for liberals just because they have an "R" after their name. If that causes certain liberal Republicans to lose, that's too darn bad.

[Wolfstar]

I accept the results of the election. There is no law that says I must vote for one of the following two liberals/socialists in the general election or that I can't write in the candidate of my choice. The two-party system is found nowhere in our Constitution.

Actually, you don't accept the results of the primary election. You demonstrate that by insisting on voting for the loser of the primary.

True, there is no law that say you must vote, let alone vote only for candidates of one of the two majority parties.

It's also true that political parties are not found in the Constitution (although they began with Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and others in our first elections). Our method of electing representatives is in the Constitution, however. By refusing to accept the results of an election you are dishonoring the Constitution.

You have several choices open to you other than writing in the primary loser's name in November. Voting for the person you deem the most conservative of the minority party candidates actually would be more effective than writing in the name of the primary election loser.

I'm not telling you what choice to make, but am pointing out that you do have choices other than writing in a loser's name, and other than the Dem or Rep if you don't like them.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Who are you paying back?

You think the moderate republicans really mind having Menendez?

[Antoninus]

Actually, you don't accept the results of the primary election. You demonstrate that by insisting on voting for the loser of the primary.

Please don't tell me what I do or don't accept. I'll speak for myself, thank you.

True, there is no law that say you must vote, let alone vote only for candidates of one of the two majority parties. It's also true that political parties are not found in the Constitution (although they began with Washington, Hamilton, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and others in our first elections).

No kidding? Who are the Whigs running this time around? Do the Federalists have a candidate?

You have several choices open to you other than writing in the primary loser's name in November. Voting for the person you deem the most conservative of the minority party candidates actually would be more effective than writing in the name of the primary election loser.

Thanks for the advice. I'm not interested in voting 3rd party. I'm registering a protest vote. That said, if a 3rd party candidate emerged who supported my key positions, I'd give him a serious look in this race.

I'm not telling you what choice to make, but am pointing out that you do have choices other than writing in a loser's name, and other than the Dem or Rep if you don't like them.

No, you're just telling me that by writing in "John Ginty", I am an unAmerican dirtbag who rejects the Constitution. Great way to garner votes for whatever fringe party you happen to represent.

[Calpernia]

>>>>In other words, you don't accept elections unless they go you're way. Whether or not you realize it, that means you don't accept our Constitutional system.

Sounds like you have missed all those articles about voter fraud.

[Brandon]

And Tom Kean Jr. will be member 15 of the Gang of 14.

And that would be bad ... why? Ever since that deal was brokered, Bush has got his nominees to the floor to a vote, and thence to the federal bench. We've confirmed not one but two conservative Supreme Court justices, when I would have bet big money against one being confirmed 18 months ago. Sure, some conservatives were aching for the "nuclear option", but which would you really rather have -- judges confirmed, sitting on the bench and rendering decisions, or a food fight?