ADVERTISEMENT

NEW JERSEY SENATE ELECTION TOMORROW

SnakeTom

SnakeTom

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
19,733
4,565
113
SENATE ELECTION TOMORROW





Two horrible choices in my opinion. Neither will represent NJ properly. The GOP candidate (Lonegan) who said he would have voted against giving Hurricane Sandy aide to NJ would be more at home representing Mississippi than NJ. And the Dem candidate (Newark's absentee Mayor Booker) who is a publicity hound that is more concerned with promoting himself than his state.





Tom K
 
I agree for the most part. I actually watched the debate last week and it was brutal.

The positive points that I see from Booker as a Senator is that as someone who loves the spotlight, he will be out in front fighting for his positions MUCH more than Lautenberg. He also has greater aspirations than the US Senate, so I do see him as someone who will try to be the bridge between the parties... building on the foundation of having a good relationship with Christie who will be running for President soon enough.

I don't see anything positive coming from a Lonegan win... Unless you are a fan of the tea party.

This post was edited on 10/15 3:57 PM by Merge
 
Agree Tom. Both candidates are really bad. I liked Corey in the beginning and was rooting for him to improve Newark but honestly he has done nothing for Newark and continues his self promotion. He should work for a marketing firm and get out of politics.

And Lonegan is simply a strange dude.

As bad as Lautenberg was the last four years or so due to his age, its hard to see these two as an improvement.

Booker will probably serve in the Senate, vote present a lot and become our next President (tongue in cheek).
 
Agree with the general take here, neither are great candidates. I don't believe in not voting so I will be voting for Booker. Lonegan is too extreme for me.
 
Then I guess it comes down to ideology as to how you cast your vote because these two candidates do not agree on anything.
 
Originally posted by SnakeTom:

SENATE ELECTION TOMORROW



Two horrible choices in my opinion. Neither will represent NJ properly. The GOP candidate (Lonegan) who said he would have voted against giving Hurricane Sandy aide to NJ would be more at home representing Mississippi than NJ. And the Dem candidate (Newark's absentee Mayor Booker) who is a publicity hound that is more concerned with promoting himself than his state.



Tom K
Click to expand...
Certainly well said.

Remember though, Lonegan would have voted against Sandy relief because it wasn't offset against other spending, which is actually the mature, intelligent answer. There are no free lunches and $50 billion shouldn't be created out of thin air. We have a serious spending problem in this country, we always kick the can down the road, hence we are in the current stalemate that we are in.

Now on other issues, Lonegan is crazy like a fox. I'll hold my nose and I'm vote for him anyways, I believe in the Constitution and am sympathetic to the Tea Party.
 
I also thought Booker was a good choice initially, but there really isn't much substance to him and not that I'm keeping score, but has anything come of the whole Zuckerberg contribution to Newark's education. It seems like the only progress in their school system has come from the work that Cami Anderson is doing despte the joke that calls itself the Board of Education and their "no confidence vote".

Lonegan's commercials just give me the creeps, but SPK makes a point. But you can look at the Tea Party as either an extreme right wing voice or as an example a party that's emerged as a result of how the public is fed up with the two party gridlock in Congress and are choosing candidates that will just be different.

Can't remember an election I've felt as conflicted on who to vote. I don't vote for ideology, but rather the candidate and their ability to lead and make decsioins.
This post was edited on 10/16 8:40 AM by HALL85
 
I have come to the conclusion that all good candidates for public office are not able to run, because they have either smoked pot or did something stupid when they were young, and are to ashamed it will come to public light one day. Instead we get all these picture perfect people running for office who dont know jack about real life.
 
Originally posted by jcalz88:
I have come to the conclusion that all good candidates for public office are not able to run, because they have either smoked pot or did something stupid when they were young, and are to ashamed it will come to public light one day. Instead we get all these picture perfect people running for office who dont know jack about real life.
Click to expand...
Thats why I tell my kids be real careful what you put on Facebook....lol
 
Originally posted by jcalz88:
I have come to the conclusion that all good candidates for public office are not able to run, because they have either smoked pot or did something stupid when they were young, and are to ashamed it will come to public light one day. Instead we get all these picture perfect people running for office who dont know jack about real life.
Click to expand...
+1
 
Originally posted by HALL85:

I also thought Booker was a good choice initially, but there really isn't much substance to him and not that I'm keeping score, but has anything come of the whole Zuckerberg contribution to Newark's education. It seems like the only progress in their school system has come from the work that Cami Anderson is doing despte the joke that calls itself the Board of Education and their "no confidence vote".

Lonegan's commercials just give me the creeps, but SPK makes a point. But you can look at the Tea Party as either an extreme right wing voice or as an example a party that's emerged as a result of how the public is fed up with the two party gridlock in Congress and are choosing candidates that will just be different.

Can't remember an election I've felt as conflicted on who to vote. I don't vote for ideology, but rather the candidate and their ability to lead and make decsioins.

This post was edited on 10/16 8:40 AM by HALL85
Click to expand...
I'm beginning to agree that we do need a viable centrist third party as the GOP & Dems are controlled by the extremes who think compromise is a dirty word.

As to the Zuckerberg donation I'm not sure but it looks like it was nothing more than a publicity stunt. Hope I'm wrong about this.

Tom K
 
a viable third party would be great, but if we can take lobbying $ out of politics via public financing of elections, then it might be less necessary, b/c then we could potentially get more representatives that vote their real views/the views of their constituents as opposed to whoever is funding their campaigns. That might be a little pie in the sky (hence the "potentially" in there) but it's worth a shot & certainly can't be any worse than our current broken system where banking $ determines everything.
 
I would take a viable third party, term limits and campaign finance reform. Folks were not meant to serve in Congress or the Senate for a career. It was supposed to be a pleasure to serve and get things done for your country. But good luck with any of that.
 
Originally posted by jcalz88:
I have come to the conclusion that all good candidates for public office are not able to run, because they have either smoked pot or did something stupid when they were young, and are to ashamed it will come to public light one day. Instead we get all these picture perfect people running for office who dont know jack about real life.
Click to expand...
You can't be serious with this.
 
Originally posted by Section112:

I would take a viable third party, term limits and campaign finance reform. Folks were not meant to serve in Congress or the Senate for a career. It was supposed to be a pleasure to serve and get things done for your country. But good luck with any of that.
Click to expand...
Great discussion here. Booker just punched his golden ticket to be DC elite. Public service was never supposed to be an elitist, disconnected class of it's own. I am certain that the founding fathers are spinning in their graves.

Until a viable third party is formed, I think it's important for people to vote against the incumbent. This election stunk so bad, I held my nose and voted for Lonegan, not because I lean conservative, but because he's just an extension of Lautenberg (who actually penned a few good bills back in the day). Sadly, after winning by 10 points this time around, I'm afraid Booker will just be the next name-recognition default, despite what he does or does not do, in the future.

The vote can cut short the ride on the gravy train for these elected officials -- it scares the hell out of them. We can't, as Americans, be automatic in pulling the lever for the blue or the red.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back