rip to him. end of an era.

started reading his list of accomplishments...it's freaking 1000000 pages long. dang, he did a lot of stuff that directly benefits us in regards to the roads, railways, environment, etc

Ralph Hall (R-TX) and John Dingell (D-MI) are the only Congressmen left that have served in WWII.

rumor has it that springsteen will run for his seat, and christie may appoint him as the interim

Bucky wrote:rumor has it that springsteen will run for his seat, and christie may appoint him as the interim

rumor or just people thinking itd be cool?

CalvinBall wrote:

Bucky wrote:rumor has it that springsteen will run for his seat, and christie may appoint him as the interim

rumor or just people thinking itd be cool?

well he was born to run, so

Passes it to the man... and boom goes the dynamite.

I can't imagine Christie won't nominate a Republican.

you have to go back 30 years for a republican representing NJ in the senate.

Yeah, it's going to suck. I imagine they'll try to pull a Scott Brown.

New Jersey Senate appointment extravaganza

Layers of complexity here…

Timing: The biggest question is whether the special election has to be held in 2013 or if Christie’s appointment can serve until November 2014. Some people seem to think it has to be 2013, while others are saying 2014. If Christie’s appointee can serve until November 2014, that would be fantastic. The Office of Legislative Services said today an appointment could serve until November 2014, but the more recent law says next general election. I imagine this will go into the courts. It would be justice of sorts for the Torricelli/Lautenberg bullshit in 2002 if the Dems get stuck with Christie’s appointment for a year and a half based on a court decision.

If the answer comes down that the special has to be held by November’s general election, the next question is whether Christie will call for the election to be held even sooner. It would be somewhat silly to hold a general election before November for the seat, but there might be factors from both sides pushing that way. Christie won’t want Democratic partisans who might be tuned out from the gubernatorial race given extra incentive to turn out. Booker/Dem nominee won’t want a popular Republican at the top of the ticket. My guess is this would not be the route chosen, but it's a real possibility.

If the election does get held on the same day as the governor's race, that will make both contests more competitive than otherwise would be expected. Booker/Pallone/etc. would do a better job bringing out the Dem base than it seems Buono is likely to manage. It would also heighten the partisan nature of the gov race, which Christie has been doing a great job at playing down, which would help Buono not only among Dems, but also the independents in the state who don't like the national GOP. On the other side of things, if Christie stays personally popular, people turning out to vote for him might also be inclined to support his candidate for US Senate.

Candidates for appointment: I think this list is heavily contingent on what shakes out on the timing front. If the appointee would only be guaranteed to serve until a special election in September or November, there’s a decent chance Christie goes with a placeholder. I’d guess Bill Palatucci, a Christie friend/adviser/big deal in state GOP politics, while others have mentioned former Gov. Tom Kean.

It would make sense for Christie to go with a placeholder over someone who will run for the seat because there isn’t one person who jumps out from the GOP Congressional delegation to run, and the state level office holders who might be more attractive candidates are all up for reelection in November. Odds are the GOP candidate isn’t going to beat Booker or whomever the Dems put forward, so a state level elected official would be basically giving up elective office for a few months in the Senate. Also there is an outside shot the GOP can take back the state senate this year, and making an appointment that could damage that seems dumb.

If the appointment gets to serve until November 2014, that’s a much more appealing gig, and I would expect a number of elected officials at the state level to be in the mix. It’s better not only because you get to be senator for a decent amount of time (so even if you lose it’s not a terrible thing), but also because you’ll be able to build up name ID and fundraise and get other advantages of incumbency so you have a puncher’s chance against whoever the Dems nominate. At the top of the list will be the LG, Kim Guadagno, and State Sen. Tom Kean Jr. Saw interesting speculation that maybe he would name Guadagno and then bring Kean onto the ticket as LG, setting him up in case Christie leaves in 2016 or giving him the driver’s seat to the GOP nomination for gov in 2017. Guadagno has been a loyal number two, and appointing NJ’s first female senator would look good. Kean has his father’s name if not all of his political skills, and would probably be the GOP’s best statewide candidate. Like other Republicans, he'll have an easier time winning a race for governor than senator, so the LG spot could be more appealing.

Below them are a number of other state officials like State Sen. Joe Kyrillos, who ran against Menendez, State Sen. Kevin O’Toole, who is half Korean and NJ has a growing Asian population that the GOP gets crushed in, and GOP Assembly Leader John Bramnick, who was going to run for the seat next year and is socially liberal enough that he might make an interesting candidate in 2014. If Christie wants to appoint someone to really impress the base, he could go with Assemblyman Jay Webber, who is an impressive dude, but I don’t think he can win statewide unless something goes horribly wrong for the Democrats.

One outside name that has popped up a few times today is John Crowley. He’s the guy who came up with the cure for the rare disease his kids had, and they made a movie about him with Harrison Ford playing him. I don’t know a lot about his politics, but he's gotta be impressive and carries a great personal story that can transcend party lines. Plus he’s loaded so would hopefully be able to at least partially self-fund. If he was interested, I think he’d be a great choice (no matter when the special is).

I’m pretty excited that we’ll finally have a Republican senator. I don’t think there’s a chance in hell he appoints a non-Republican, and if he did it would be unforgivable. I love the dude, but if he ran for the GOP nomination, I wouldn’t support him.

Democrats: Obviously Booker is the 800 pound gorilla in the field. He’s remarkably popular among NJ voters, and what little polling has been done on the race shows him crushing potential Dem rivals for the nomination. There are a bunch of complicating factors here though.

1) The nomination may be decided by the Democratic State Committee and not in a primary. This is all unclear, and I think dependent on when the special election occurs. Booker is not a favorite of a lot of the county and state Dem leadership. He’s not necessarily viewed as a team player, there's lingering resentment over how he handled his Senate announcement, and they might prefer to go with someone like Rep. Frank Pallone who has patiently waited while helping to build the state party. The question is whether his absurd poll numbers would force their hand and make them choose him even if Pallone or others whom they like more signal their interest in the seat.

2) Booker has serious problems with the liberal, activist base of the party. He’s had run ins with the public sector unions in Newark, he’s loudly pro-school vouchers, he’s seen as being close to Wall Street (remember the weird comment about private equity from last year), etc. If there is a primary, either Pallone or Rep. Rush Holt could easily outflank Booker to the left. They might get union support, and both have $$ in their House campaign funds that would be pretty useful in smashing Booker’s image among the Democratic primary electorate. Booker would be the favorite still, but it’s a race that would get interesting IMO.

3) Underlining all of this is the timing aspect. Any member of the Dem congressional delegation would have essentially a free shot at the nomination/special election this year, since they are not up for reelection until 2014. If the appointment lasts until November 2014, then they’d have to give up their seat to seek the Dem nomination, which is much less appealing.

Best guess: Christie appoints Guadagno and picks Kean Jr. as his new running mate. Special election is November 2014, and Booker beats her 56-44%. But really no one knows anything right now.

How would November 2014 be a special election? Booker takes over a month early?

jerseyhoya wrote:New Jersey Senate appointment extravaganza

Layers of complexity here…

Timing: The biggest question is whether the special election has to be held in 2013 or if Christie’s appointment can serve until November 2014. Some people seem to think it has to be 2013, while others are saying 2014. If Christie’s appointee can serve until November 2014, that would be fantastic. The Office of Legislative Services said today an appointment could serve until November 2014, but the more recent law says next general election. I imagine this will go into the courts. It would be justice of sorts for the Torricelli/Lautenberg bullshit in 2002 if the Dems get stuck with Christie’s appointment for a year and a half based on a court decision.

If the answer comes down that the special has to be held by November’s general election, the next question is whether Christie will call for the election to be held even sooner. It would be somewhat silly to hold a general election before November for the seat, but there might be factors from both sides pushing that way. Christie won’t want Democratic partisans who might be tuned out from the gubernatorial race given extra incentive to turn out. Booker/Dem nominee won’t want a popular Republican at the top of the ticket. My guess is this would not be the route chosen, but it's a real possibility.

If the election does get held on the same day as the governor's race, that will make both contests more competitive than otherwise would be expected. Booker/Pallone/etc. would do a better job bringing out the Dem base than it seems Buono is likely to manage. It would also heighten the partisan nature of the gov race, which Christie has been doing a great job at playing down, which would help Buono not only among Dems, but also the independents in the state who don't like the national GOP. On the other side of things, if Christie stays personally popular, people turning out to vote for him might also be inclined to support his candidate for US Senate.

Candidates for appointment: I think this list is heavily contingent on what shakes out on the timing front. If the appointee would only be guaranteed to serve until a special election in September or November, there’s a decent chance Christie goes with a placeholder. I’d guess Bill Palatucci, a Christie friend/adviser/big deal in state GOP politics, while others have mentioned former Gov. Tom Kean.

It would make sense for Christie to go with a placeholder over someone who will run for the seat because there isn’t one person who jumps out from the GOP Congressional delegation to run, and the state level office holders who might be more attractive candidates are all up for reelection in November. Odds are the GOP candidate isn’t going to beat Booker or whomever the Dems put forward, so a state level elected official would be basically giving up elective office for a few months in the Senate. Also there is an outside shot the GOP can take back the state senate this year, and making an appointment that could damage that seems dumb.

If the appointment gets to serve until November 2014, that’s a much more appealing gig, and I would expect a number of elected officials at the state level to be in the mix. It’s better not only because you get to be senator for a decent amount of time (so even if you lose it’s not a terrible thing), but also because you’ll be able to build up name ID and fundraise and get other advantages of incumbency so you have a puncher’s chance against whoever the Dems nominate. At the top of the list will be the LG, Kim Guadagno, and State Sen. Tom Kean Jr. Saw interesting speculation that maybe he would name Guadagno and then bring Kean onto the ticket as LG, setting him up in case Christie leaves in 2016 or giving him the driver’s seat to the GOP nomination for gov in 2017. Guadagno has been a loyal number two, and appointing NJ’s first female senator would look good. Kean has his father’s name if not all of his political skills, and would probably be the GOP’s best statewide candidate. Like other Republicans, he'll have an easier time winning a race for governor than senator, so the LG spot could be more appealing.

Below them are a number of other state officials like State Sen. Joe Kyrillos, who ran against Menendez, State Sen. Kevin O’Toole, who is half Korean and NJ has a growing Asian population that the GOP gets crushed in, and GOP Assembly Leader John Bramnick, who was going to run for the seat next year and is socially liberal enough that he might make an interesting candidate in 2014. If Christie wants to appoint someone to really impress the base, he could go with Assemblyman Jay Webber, who is an impressive dude, but I don’t think he can win statewide unless something goes horribly wrong for the Democrats.

One outside name that has popped up a few times today is John Crowley. He’s the guy who came up with the cure for the rare disease his kids had, and they made a movie about him with Harrison Ford playing him. I don’t know a lot about his politics, but he's gotta be impressive and carries a great personal story that can transcend party lines. Plus he’s loaded so would hopefully be able to at least partially self-fund. If he was interested, I think he’d be a great choice (no matter when the special is).

I’m pretty excited that we’ll finally have a Republican senator. I don’t think there’s a chance in hell he appoints a non-Republican, and if he did it would be unforgivable. I love the dude, but if he ran for the GOP nomination, I wouldn’t support him.

Democrats: Obviously Booker is the 800 pound gorilla in the field. He’s remarkably popular among NJ voters, and what little polling has been done on the race shows him crushing potential Dem rivals for the nomination. There are a bunch of complicating factors here though.

1) The nomination may be decided by the Democratic State Committee and not in a primary. This is all unclear, and I think dependent on when the special election occurs. Booker is not a favorite of a lot of the county and state Dem leadership. He’s not necessarily viewed as a team player, there's lingering resentment over how he handled his Senate announcement, and they might prefer to go with someone like Rep. Frank Pallone who has patiently waited while helping to build the state party. The question is whether his absurd poll numbers would force their hand and make them choose him even if Pallone or others whom they like more signal their interest in the seat.

2) Booker has serious problems with the liberal, activist base of the party. He’s had run ins with the public sector unions in Newark, he’s loudly pro-school vouchers, he’s seen as being close to Wall Street (remember the weird comment about private equity from last year), etc. If there is a primary, either Pallone or Rep. Rush Holt could easily outflank Booker to the left. They might get union support, and both have $$ in their House campaign funds that would be pretty useful in smashing Booker’s image among the Democratic primary electorate. Booker would be the favorite still, but it’s a race that would get interesting IMO.

3) Underlining all of this is the timing aspect. Any member of the Dem congressional delegation would have essentially a free shot at the nomination/special election this year, since they are not up for reelection until 2014. If the appointment lasts until November 2014, then they’d have to give up their seat to seek the Dem nomination, which is much less appealing.

Best guess: Christie appoints Guadagno and picks Kean Jr. as his new running mate. Special election is November 2014, and Booker beats her 56-44%. But really no one knows anything right now.

tl;d -

I kid. nice summary

The Nightman Cometh wrote:How would November 2014 be a special election? Booker takes over a month early?

Whoever won the special election would take over immediately. Different people could run in the two elections, and a different person could theoretically win the special election and the general election for the next six year term. Usually the same person wins both though.

The Supreme Court held today that police may collect DNA from a suspect, much the same they can take fingerprints. Something to note, the dissent was Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Although it may be shocking, in the sense that Justice Scalia is joining the "liberal" justices, it goes along his jurisprudence. I haven't had a chance to read the opinion, and probably will not for a long time, but I assume his dissent has to do with the historical underpinnings of the 4th Amendment and how this violates that right.

It'd be cool to see JH's head explode if Christie nominates an independent or democrat.

I'd admire it--and I think it would be great politics--if Christie just ahead and did the Senate election with the gubernatorial. "Yeah, it might hurt me politically. The alternatives are costing my state $25 million we don't have, or depriving the people of the chance to have their chosen representative in the senate for another year. I do what's best for my state." he'll win anyway, and Booker would owe him a big one.

slugsrbad wrote:The Supreme Court held today that police may collect DNA from a suspect, much the same they can take fingerprints. Something to note, the dissent was Justices Scalia, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Although it may be shocking, in the sense that Justice Scalia is joining the "liberal" justices, it goes along his jurisprudence. I haven't had a chance to read the opinion, and probably will not for a long time, but I assume his dissent has to do with the historical underpinnings of the 4th Amendment and how this violates that right.

And there's nothing to require law enforcement to destroy the DNA samples, even if charges are dropped or the suspect is exonerated. So now there'll be a national DNA database. Awesome.

Good on Scalia for finally siding against law enforcement on something and actually sticking with his (alleged) philosophy. Boo on Thomas for continuing to schill for law enforcement whenever possible, regardless of individual liberties.

convince me why a DNA database is a bad thing/unconstitutional??

then they will come for your guns