Undermining the democratic process in NJ-1

Did he actually say ... (0.00 / 0)

that Camille would not stand in November?

---

by: huntsu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 16:35:57 PM UTC

Re: (0.00 / 0)

I didn't transcribe the whole discussion, but that was my impression.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 16:42:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

If so ... (4.00 / 1)

he's finally given me a reason to vote against him and for Lautenberg.

---

by: huntsu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 16:50:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's very troubling (0.00 / 0)

Though it's only an extension of how the system (in practice) has worked for the statewide offices.

I bet Rob Andrews ends up the candidate.

Frank LoBiondo Record and Jon Runyan Watch

---

by: Hopeful @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 16:48:02 PM UTC

I doubt it (4.00 / 1)

To do that would destroy any chance he might ever have as a statewide candidate

---

by: huntsu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 16:50:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I suppose so (4.00 / 1)

Well, it's not my district, so I'll watch with interest.


Frank LoBiondo Record and Jon Runyan Watch

---

by: Hopeful @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 17:09:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm pretty sure... (4.00 / 1)

... next Tuesday's primary is the last chance he'll ever have a statewide candidate, anyway.

---

by: progressivemuslimnj @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 00:41:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

People may not even know it is his wife (0.00 / 0)

Since she has the same last name, I'm sure many will see "Andrews" and assume they are voting for the same person.

if they had a note: "placeholder candidate" I don't think she would have a prayer of winning.

---

by: AreYouWithMe? @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 16:52:53 PM UTC

CourierPost Type-O on Rob Andrews - Can you find it? (4.00 / 3)

From http://www.courierpostonline.c...

Following the live video broadcast of last Tuesday's GOP forum, CourierPostOnline.com will feature streaming coverage of the Gannett New Jersey editorial board with the candidates for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. today.

The three candidates are Republican Robert E. Andrews, 50; Donald Cresitello, 61, (mayor of Morristown); and incumbent Sen. Frank Lautenberg, 84.

The candidates will meet with editors from the six Gannett New Jersey newspapers. The three Democrats will compete in the June primary for the nomination to seek the U.S. Senate seat now held by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, a Democrat.

The event will come to you, live and in color, from the Home News Tribune in East Brunswick.

---

by: vingopal @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 17:03:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He switched parties already? (4.00 / 2)

Huh.

---

by: huntsu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 17:10:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What you're pointing to is bad; but it's the least of... (4.00 / 2)

......what's wrong with Andrews' candidacy.

If gets himself placed on the ballot, he'll be reelected; but I predict he'll be primaried out of office next time out.

If his Camille Andrews runs and wins; it'll be the same as re-electing Rob Andrews....maybe worse.

And if some Norcross hack/loyalist is appointed; then that person will be a one termer as the politics of this state evolve in the next two years.

After watching this debate, my conclusion is that Lautenberg has shown that he's more than competent to continue in the Senate.  That's, really, all he had to prove.

There goes the guts of Rob Andrews' "case" for his candidacy.

Was Andrews sharper, slicker, quicker and more able to recall specific facts?  Absolutely; yes.    

If this was an audition for a news anchors job or for a press secretary's job:  I would hire Andrews over the other two candidates....he's really quite a talented fellow, on that level!

Unfortunately for Rob Andrews, integrity, credibility and character are top priorities when one considers who to put into the US Senate.   Rob Andrews fails to meet minimum requirements on those three counts.

It occurs to me that, if someone only saw this debate and knew nothing else about the candidates, that they might conclude that Andrews was a "winner".    

I am disappointed that the Lautenberg campaign has chosen to go, relatively, easy on Andrews.  

They should use the "thermonuclear option" and confront him directly on the specific means and manner of his entry into this race.

I am confident that, if the people of NJ actually knew and understood the details of the back story of the genesis of Andrews campaign; they would reject him in massively overwhelming numbers.

As it is, I still think Lautenberg will pull off a victory by 10 to 15 points; but is should be 50 points.  

If the fallout from the superficial impression of these debates is very negative then Lautenbergs campaign will be forced to "go thermonuclear"  in the last 48 hours of the campaign.  (I just hope they were smart enough to have the ads "in the can" and ready to go.)

It disturbs me that Rob Andrews might still be in contention as a candidate for Governor; we can do much better in NJ.

Apologies to all the good and decent Democrats who've drunk the Andrews "Kool Aid"; I still see him as a sleaze.

Would I support him over a Republican?  Of course; but only because I see the overt Republican agenda as a direct threat to our survival and I would indeed choose "the lesser of the two evils".

Fortunately, that's a choice that we probably won't have to make! :-)

---

by: Nick Lento @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 17:36:35 PM UTC

Placeholder (4.00 / 2)

I have no doubt that she's merely holding his place.  The switch will come.  You can count on it.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 18:29:52 PM UTC

Lautenberg/Torricelli (0.00 / 0)

Lautenberg has a lot of nerve. He could have not accepted the " bidding" of the bosses but he jumped at the chance to take over from his arch enemy a few years back.

Was he worried about how the voters would feel?

A pattern has developed with Lautenberg supporters. He can talk about age ( Fenwick) but we can't. He can criticize the process taking place in a District that is none of his business, but we can't ask him how he felt circumventing the democratic process to get elected in the first place.

Lautenberg is doing a lot of hiding out , but he can't hide forever.

Everyday this campaign continues Andrews gets a little closer. Lautenberg better hope the clock runs out fast.

---

by: firstamend07 @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 19:03:51 PM UTC

Re: Lautenberg/Torricelli (0.00 / 0)

Who said anyone can't talk about age? As far as I can tell, only Andrews said he wouldn't make that an issue.

"When Senator Lautenberg first ran for office in 1982, he based his whole campaign on age. He ran against then-Congresswoman [Millicent] Fenwick, who was 72, and the argument was that she was too old to serve. I won't do that to him," said Andrews.

You can talk about age, height, hair style, eye color or anything else you think is an important factor in this race.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 19:55:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

This is getting out of hand (4.00 / 2)

Lautenberg supporters aren't the ones saying that age is off the table -- that was Andrews in an interview back in April.  

"When Senator Lautenberg first ran for office in 1982, he based his whole campaign on age. He ran against then-Congresswoman [Millicent] Fenwick, who was 72, and the argument was that she was too old to serve. I won't do that to him," said Andrews.

I never said -- and don't think others have, either -- that Andrews couldn't talk about age.  We just noted that he promised not to and then did when it suited his campaign.

Secondly, the Toricelli issue is totally different than the one in NJ1.  

Lautenberg did not seek Toricelli's seat, and in fact the campaign was offered to a few other people.  Lautenberg stepped in when no one else would do it.  I don't see how his stepping up to the plate for the party is a negative, especially when others had the opportunity first and turned it down.

The situation in NJ1 is, apparently according to Andrews in the Ed Board today, one where the person on the primary ballot has no intention of running for the office.  Instead she is knowingly intending to drop out and let the party bosses decide who will replace her.  It is a blatant -- and if Juan is right, public -- attempt to remove Democratic voters from the choice of who will represent them in DC.

---

by: huntsu @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 20:05:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What did Lautenberg do to you? (0.00 / 0)

You seem to making things up just to blame Lautenberg.   It's just an election.

I don't understand all these insipid personal attacks.  Could we stick with the issues?   Whenever campaigns have become personal lately, the Democrats (and the public) have lost.  

-pb

---

by: princetonblue @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 20:17:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Huh? (0.00 / 0)

Was Lautenberg concerned about how the voters would feel in 2002?  As I recall, he won the election handily, so the voters felt pretty good about him.  It looks like he'll sweep both the primary and general at this point, too.  

I really would like to see some evidence that Andrews is getting "a little closer".  

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 20:28:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The only thing Rob Andrews is getting closer to... (4.00 / 2)

...is retirement from the House.

Too bad for him that he's two years short of qualifying for his Congressional pension.

---

by: PocketAces @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 20:36:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Theres might be a definite lack of traction (0.00 / 0)

on Andrews part..
Yawn,

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 02:19:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hmm, ok. (0.00 / 0)

talk about age
but he can't hide forever.
better hope the clock runs out fast.  

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 02:06:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

here's the odd thing (0.00 / 0)

Whenever I volunteer at Andrews' office, I always see Camille Andrews there, working on signs, calling donors, speaking with her campaign manager.  The Inquirer editorial that endorsed Rob Andrews rightly said that she is an ideal candidate for congress, and the articles I've read when she's interviewed mention that she wants to be in congress.

If she is being pushed aside, then this clearly shows how the Camden County Democratic Committee needs reform. They're the ones pulling the puppetstrings here, not the Andrews family.

For the record, I've asked repeatedly about Rob Andrews taking the placeholder position, should he not defeat Lautenberg. I've seen and heard nothing that indicates even remotely that the position is reserved for him or that he's returning. He absolutely wants to win versus Lautenberg.

WE reported on politickernj last week that Assm. Burzichelli and Ass. Exec. Director Bill Castner are in the running for the Andrews placeholder position, should Camille not get it.

---

by: Martin @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 20:49:14 PM UTC

Re: here's the odd thing (0.00 / 0)

Courier Post:

She said she filed because of the short time left between her husband's announcement and the filing deadline and said she will step down after the primary if party leaders reach a consensus on another candidate.

---

by: Juan Melli @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 21:21:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

asdf (0.00 / 0)

If Camille Andrews drops out after winning the nomination, it won't be because she's "pushed aside", it will be because she stepped down on her own accord. It's ultimately her choice.

---

by: Scott Weingart @ Tue May 27, 2008 at 22:48:19 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

She's working on signs? (0.00 / 0)

Why would a candidate for Congress be working on signs?

I also don't think that Rob would take the seat.  She's not there as a placeholder for him, but as a placeholder for whomever Norcross picks.

---

by: huntsu @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 01:16:34 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What is this, an Obama v HIllary Diary at D-Kos (0.00 / 0)

Name calling, personal attacks.

Check out my 3 paragraph primer on Polywell Fusion.

---

by: FogerRox @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 02:09:09 AM UTC