[princess leah]

THe wise decision here would be for the NJSC to simply state that the deadline has passed for Torricelli to withdraw his name off the ballot...However, Mr. Loutenburg can run as a democrat WRITE-IN and thus you do not disenfranchise any voter...any other answer disenfranchises all MILITARY personnel as well as the mail in voters!

[Smedley]

THe wise decision here would be ... any other answer disenfranchises all MILITARY personnel as well as the mail in voters!

Wonderful point. Not all absentee voters would be disenfranchised, but many -- perhaps most -- will be.

But, hey, we're talking about creating legislation to keep Dems in power!

[Little Bill]

I agree, but this is NJ. We Massholes are a corrupt lot but we write tight election law.

[gridlock]

The wise decision here would be for the NJSC to simply state that the deadline has passed for Torricelli to withdraw his name off the ballot

This would be the least disruptive remedy and is the correct decision under the law. Let the ballot stand and have a write-in campaign for Lautenburg. Torricelli's position on the ballot does not belong to him and he cannot withdraw it. He made a committment to the people of New Jersey, and the court should force him to honor it.

[scannell]

any other answer disenfranchises all MILITARY personnel as well as the mail in voters!

I just called NJSC hotline and said I was a US Serviceman that voted for Torricelli (lie for theoretical purposes) and if I knew that Forrester would have been running against Lautenberg I would have voted for Forrester because I dislike Lautenberg as much as Torricelli does. Then I said what about my vote that I want to change to Forrester if you change the slate to include Lautenberg and not Torricelli. She said she would forward my concern to the clerk.

[TheDon]

Either that, or having dropped out, the Democheat runner up in the primary becomes the Dem candidate. At least some of the voters voted for him/her!