Talking about the reporting on the NJ senate race the other day, which has the Republican candidate Hugin in a dead heat - and in some polls pulling ahead - of Bob Menendez. The anti-Menendez ads have been pretty harsh and I’ve heard a lot of people, Democrats, who won’t vote for Menendez - they just won’t pull that lever at all.
And someone said, “If Menendez sinks any further, they’ll just pull a Torricelli.” Back around '02, Democrat Torricelli was facing Republican Forrester for a NJ senate seat. Torricelli, weathering some scandals, was more than 10 points down in the polls, and 35 days before the election, he stepped down as the candidate and the Democrats appointed Frank Lautenberg in his place. It became a court case - NJ law allows candidates to be replaced 51 days before an election but the court ruled that the law didn’t specifically prohibit switching candidates with fewer than 51 days before the election, and held for the Lautenberg nomination - Lautenberg won.
The guy I was speaking with believes that if Menendez sinks any further, the party will pressure him to step down and run another candidate.
I moved to New Jersey last year, so this was really my first election cycle exposed to Bob Menendez.
Not a fan.
His ads have not really dealt with the issues and have only attempted to paint Hugin as some kind of ghoul who preys on cancer victims. There are so many issues he could be running on that I don’t see why over the top personal smears is all he has.
The Democrats need some younger, energetic voices who can actually speak to the concerns of their base. Instead we have a plethora of 65-80+ year olds who simply can’t relate to voters a few generations removed.
Thanks for reminding me of this particular bit of lawlessness (the court basically asserted that the statute was without practical limitation despite it being clear since it enumerated a limit) from Loutenberg’s past.
