• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who should replace Senator Menendez

Who should replace senator Menendez


  • Total voters
    8
A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.

for the purposes of this thread assume that:

1. Menendez is convicted.

2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)

Cant you find a cantaloupe or something just as useful as another politician?
 
Whoopdee-do, this kind of political oneupsmanship is the problem. As I stated. Doesn't matter who did what before, if we make decisions out of spite or revenge, because Obama did it, or Hillary did it, or Trump did it, or Bush did it. We are only going to keep going around and around til we implode. It's time to move on, and stop letting politicians game the system. On any side that it is happening. And let things work how they are intended to work.

Just because Obama did it as a senator, doesn't mean it should have been done to him. This isn't a schoolyard playground, eye for an eye has no place in how we conduct our government.
Obama did it knowing it was symbolic, but wanted to register his opposition. He knew the qualifying votes were there, and the filibuster failed, yet felt it important to take a stand on letting people know what a POS Alito is.

Alito turned out to be every bit of that POS.

The circumstances aren't even remotely similar to what McConnell pulled.
 
I see, it was okay for Senator Obama but when it happened to President Obama it was wrong? Face it, the Democrats lost the election. It hurt.

Did you grow up in a house with lead based paint? Because that is a weak straw man. Take your bull**** elsewhere.
 
Did you grow up in a house with lead based paint? Because that is a weak straw man. Take your bull**** elsewhere.

Simple facts. Obama had one opinion on appointment of justices in the last year of a president's term when he was a senator, that changed when he was president. You all lost this election. It was an important one. I expect Kennedy to be replaced, and (You will love this...) Ginsburg is not immortal.
 
Simple facts. Obama had one opinion on appointment of justices in the last year of a president's term when he was a senator, that changed when he was president. You all lost this election. It was an important one. I expect Kennedy to be replaced, and (You will love this...) Ginsburg is not immortal.

Ok, let me explain this in simple terms. You've taken my position that Christie (a republican) should be the one to appoint a replacement. And my examples of why it's a bad idea to subvert our political systems, and turned it into a "you lost, get over it" partisan pissing contest. You have terrible reading comprehension, you were even told that your argument is a straw man, and yet you continue.

Basically, you're not worth my time. Take your bull**** elsewhere, I'm not buying.
 
Whoever his constituents decide should replace him? Why is this a poll?
 
He'd be getting replaced by an appointment by the governor.

Then it's up to the governor, not the members of a debate forum.
 
Then it's up to the governor, not the members of a debate forum.

It's actually up to the rest of the Senate on when to expel him, assuming he doesn't resign voluntarily. This is a poll on when one would think the right time for the senate to do that is, before or after the imminent gubernatorial election.
 
Last edited:
It's actually up to the rest of the Senate on when to expel him, assuming he doesn't resign voluntarily. This is a poll on when one would think the right time for the senate to do that is, before or after the imminent gubernatorial election.

You familiar at all with Jay Kim (R-Convict)?
 
For those who don't know, Jay Kim was a republican congressman who was a convicted felon. He actually wore an electronic ankle bracelet while serving in Congress.

The same guy while wearing the felon's ankle bracelet, Newt Gingrich appointed to a plum position negotiating huge sums of money

-- even though he was convicted of committing the largest amount of campaign violations ever by a member of Congress, and pretty much stole his election.

Whadda guy. He didn't resign, wasn't expelled, and actually was promoted by the ****nob Trumping Georgia reptile named Newt.
[SIZE=+2][SIZE=+2]
Days in the Life of Jay Kim in the U.S. House of Correction
[/SIZE]
[/SIZE]

Washingtonpost.com: Days in the Life of Jay Kim in the U.S. House of Correction

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Bud Shuster (R-Pa.), who is facing an ethics investigation himself, is not particularly eager to talk about why he and House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) gave Kim a plum appointment on the group negotiating the colossal highway bill. Shuster emphasized that Gingrich actually made the decision to select Kim, whom he described as "a very active member."

And what strengths does Kim bring to the bargaining table?

"He's a very active member," Shuster repeated.

In fact, Kim is diligently going about his business, shuttling regularly between his office to the House floor so he can maintain his perfect, largely conservative voting record and an appearance of normalcy.

The only difference between Kim and other legislators is the electronic ankle bracelet he wears under his suit pants, so federal probation officers can track his movements.
 
If he resigns or is convicted prior to January 16, 2018 then Governor Chris Christie will appoint his successor until the regular primary election.

The Judge is certainly trying to make that happen after his actions today ...
 
However, when Obama was a Senator, he opposed a president filling a SCOTUS vacancy in his final year of the term. He even participated in the filibuster.

Obama filibustered Alito in 2006, not Bush's last year ...
 
Obama filibustered Alito in 2006, not Bush's last year ...

There are some posters you can almost always take to the bank

- do not have their facts correct.

Others who strive hard to maintain credibility and a reliance on fact-based posts.

After numerous interactions, it is apparent those who uphold integrity and credibility as a standard -- and those who don't.

For this, we should be thankful.
 
Last edited:
I see, it was okay for Senator Obama but when it happened to President Obama it was wrong? Face it, the Democrats lost the election. It hurt.

Did Alito get a hearing? Did Thomas get a hearing? Did Kennedy get a vote in 1988, an election year? Did trump support McConnell in not giving Garland a hearing ?
 
A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez
who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.

for the purposes of this thread assume that:

1. Menendez is convicted.

2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)


Unless there's some news out that I haven't seen Menendez hasn't been found guilty of anything yet
 
Unless there's some news out that I haven't seen Menendez hasn't been found guilty of anything yet

Nope. Jury's still deliberating. Sounds deadlocked though. So we might get to avoid this after all.
 
It's actually up to the rest of the Senate on when to expel him, assuming he doesn't resign voluntarily. This is a poll on when one would think the right time for the senate to do that is, before or after the imminent gubernatorial election.

It shouldn't contingent on the election at all, it should be contingent upon when he's no longer a Senator.
 
A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.

for the purposes of this thread assume that:

1. Menendez is convicted.

2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)
Looks like a hung jury.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
It shouldn't contingent on the election at all, it should be contingent upon when he's no longer a Senator.

It is. If hypothetically the jury returned a guilty verdict today. Which is possible, but unlikely. The Senate could expel him now and Chris Christie would replace him. Or they could wait until January when governor-elect Murphy would replace him. It's the Senate deciding when he's no longer a senator.

Though like I said above, with the jury unlikely to reach a verdict, we're likely to avoid the issue.
 
Isn't it odd that the left isn't in a hurry to want to drum Senator Menendez out of office but wants to when it comes to Roy Moore, who isn't even elected, yet?
 
A likely coming political battle is over the replacement of Senator Bob Menendez who is facing corruption charges dealing with bribery and non-disclosure of gifts. His trial is coming up soon, and he's likely to be found guilty of at least one. The timing of this is significant since we're in the last few months of historically unpopular governor Chris Christie's term. Democrats are likely to not vote to expel Menendez until after likely winner Phil Murphy is sworn in as Christie's replacement, arguing it's not right to have an unpopular lame duck governor appoint a replacement whose values would likely be drastically different than what New Jersey voted for in Menendez. Republicans will argue that a senator convicted on these charges should be expelled immediately, as it would be inappropriate to let a corrupt Senator remain in office.

for the purposes of this thread assume that:

1.
Menendez is convicted.
2. Murphy will win the governorship. (He's up by 25-30 in the polls.)


Didn't happen.The judge declared a mistrial.Read the news.It looks like Menendez will be staying in the Senate.

:lol:
 
Isn't it odd that the left isn't in a hurry to want to drum Senator Menendez out of office but wants to when it comes to Roy Moore, who isn't even elected, yet?
Only to people on the far right.The rest of us see Moore for what he is.Would you want your teen daughter sitting next to Moore on a park bench? Fill us in.

:lol:
 
Didn't happen.The judge declared a mistrial.Read the news.It looks like Menendez will be staying in the Senate.

:lol:

Yeah, like I said several times upthread, it looks like we get to avoid this as by the time of his next trial, should they decide to re-prosecute, Murphy will be sworn in.
 
Back
Top Bottom