Booker, Lonegan Win NJ Special US Senate Primaries
Source: AP
A rising star in the Democratic Party and a Republican former mayor won their parties' primaries on Tuesday to set up a campaign of political and stylistic contrasts as they seek to fill the final 15 months of the term of the late U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg.
Newark Mayor Cory Booker defeated three experienced politicians U.S. Reps. Rush Holt and Frank Pallone, who had the support of Lautenberg's family, and state Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver in a Democratic primary that may have been more competitive had the field been less crowded. The race was a major draw for them partly because of New Jersey's history of electing only Democrats to the Senate over the past 40 years.
In the Republican primary, former Bogota mayor Steve Lonegan won handily over Franklin Township physician Alieta Eck, who had never run for office before, even though she received support of some tea party organizations.
Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/nj-choosing-candidates-lautenbergs-seat-19943436
Cory Booker sweeps N.J. Senate primary
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/08/13/cory-booker-sweeps-n-j-senate-primary/
Cory Booker is one step closer to the Senate, cruising to the Democratic nomination in a low-turnout special primary election on Tuesday.
The Newark mayor rolled to an expected easy win over his three other competitors in the contest to succeed the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg. With just seven percent of results in, the Associated Press called the race for Booker who was leading with 57% of the vote. Rep. Frank Pallone was second with 25% followed by Rep. Rush Holt at 14% and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver with only 5%.
http://atr.rollcall.com/cory-booker-wins-senate-special-election-primary-njsen/
Newark Mayor Cory Booker won the Democratic primary Tuesday and is now favored to win the New Jersey Senate special election in October.
(snip)
Beyond his financial advantage and personal popularity, Booker is a heavy favorite thanks to the states strong Democratic lean in federal elections. President Barack Obama won the state with 58 percent in 2012, and no Republican has been elected to the Senate from New Jersey in four decades.
The race is rated Safe Democratic by Rothenberg Political Report/Roll Call.
FarPoint
(12,351 posts)Do you think Republicans crossed over to vote for Booker as the candidate " they" wanted to run against? I don't live in New Jersey ....only asking since the other Democratic candidates had more experience.
cal04
(41,505 posts)Booker is the heavy favorite to defeat the newly-minted GOP nominee in the Oct. 16 special general election, and the latest Quinnipiac University poll released last week showed Booker topping Lonegan by 25 points.
roseBudd
(8,718 posts)Just as Obama was the right choice for actually winning the general election in 2008
Hilary who had high unfavorables in 2008 is now a shoo in thanks to her tenure as SoS
FarPoint
(12,351 posts)Sounds and feels good.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)at the beginning of his career.
He has NO business whatsoever being in the Democratic Party. None.
I fully expect this brazen fake to be peddled as a possible presidential or VP candidate.
brooklynite
(94,520 posts)I guess they're all just not as smart as you are.
brooklynite
(94,520 posts)will the people accusing him of being a Wall Street sellout claim that they're part of the conspiracy.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Well, that sounds familiar. I voted against him, I chose Holt.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Hillary isn't as dumb as you are. She realizes to have a shred of hope in 2016, she'll need as many Obama supporters on her side as possible, because, by the reaction I've seen from DU, you're going to see quite the backlash from the left against her.
But keep slighting Obama and making digs about his presidency...I'm sure that's endearing Clinton to his supporters.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I don't give a darn. Careful who you call dumb, buddy. I'm not the one who thought that Obama was a liberal. The joke is on the Left.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)I'm quite content with Obama. I would be content with Clinton. But I'll tell you right now, the toxic tone some Clinton supporters have toward Obama is not going to help your cause. You can continue to dismiss his presidency all you want, but at the end of the day, they're more likely to support your candidate than a great deal of the left ... and without their support, Hillary is going to find it challenging to win.
Just as it was in 2008 and 2012 with Hillary supporters toward Obama.
So, keep attacking and don't be surprised if a lot of Obama supporters decide to stay home in November '16 and your gal loses.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)The Left spent the last how many years trashing Bill, trashing Hillary and voting for Obama because he was supposed to be far more liberal than the Clintons. Now they are bellyaching because he turned out to be the centrist some of us realized from the very beginning that he was.
As for 2016, I have no clue whether Hillary will run or not, but it's downright annoying that the same people who were all in for Obama in 2008 find that she's too much of a centrist for their delicate sensibilities to allow them to vote for her, some say even in the GE. To them I say, get over it. If half of the party had to suck it in and vote for Obama because the alternative was far worse, then they can suck it in too if Hillary is the nominee (which at this point is way too early to tell). What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
JI7
(89,248 posts)he was doesn't mean they would have voted for Hillary without him.
but the more fringe types didn't support either one so it wasn't going to make a difference in the outcome of the race.
i know you feel like OBama took away what rightly belonged to Hillary. but it's an odd way of feeling she was wronged.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)FarPoint
(12,351 posts)I'm glad it was straight dems who made the choice.
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)so I went with Booker.
roughrider101
(35 posts)Not to call you out, and Booker is ok and all, but.....that makes no sense.
Whoever won the Dem primary was going to win the election, in a state that hasnt elected a new republican Senator since the 1950s, against some tea party doofus that nobody likes.
This was literally one election where electability was the very last thing you needed to worry about.
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)roughrider101
(35 posts)with no basis.
Why would you assume that?
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)alarimer
(16,245 posts)What a grandstanding asshole. Typical DLC-type scum. Rush Holt is a good guy, one of the best. If I lived in NJ, no way would I vote for it.
He's going to screw over the people who voted for him, just like Obama.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)I don't like Booker either. I also don't like how he disrespected Sen. Lautenberg by announcing that he planned to run for the Senate before Lautenberg had even decided whether to run for reelection or not. It's worth noting that his family endorsed Pallone.
Response to Beacool (Reply #19)
Snotcicles This message was self-deleted by its author.
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Tiredofthesame
(62 posts)Booker is unpopular with the "tired of fake democrats crowd". Obama put himself there.
tblue
(16,350 posts)Senator Booker is going to drive us up a wall. You watch.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)duffyduff
(3,251 posts)He's the true Manchurian candidate.
tblue
(16,350 posts)what kind of pol he is. We really don't need another Wall Street tool, especially in the Senate.
brooklynite
(94,520 posts)Cory might as well grab it and start shopping for real estate; Steve Lonegan is the Carl Paladino of NJ politics; he'll loose by at least 20 points.
bklyncowgirl
(7,960 posts)We for once had good candidates to choose from and it was nice to be able to vote for the guy closest to my own political philosophy without thinking I had to pick the lesser of two evils or pick someone I didn't like to save the world from someone worse. I don't like his ties to Wall Street but I'll have no problem voting and campaigning for Booker in the fall.
tblue
(16,350 posts)Booker is trouble. Very mediagenic, but trouble. You'll see.
bklyncowgirl
(7,960 posts)The time for an ideological choice is in the primary. In the general election,mMy choice is between Booker and Lonigan not Booker and some progressive ideal. Not voting for Booker means voting to hand the Senate over to the Republicans. Do you really see that as a good thing?
kath
(10,565 posts)Soooooo freakin' sick of this shit.
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)His party hates him, he's the sacrifical lamb a big douche.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)State driecror of Americans for Prosperity, all around fail.