Today’s Senate Race Coverage from the MSM
Carroll Andrew Morse
Two new entries in the coverage of Rhode Island’s Republican Senate primary, one local and one national, were printed today. Neither breaks much new ground for those already been paying attention to the contest, with perhaps one important exception.
The local entry is a Projo article by Mark Arsenault focusing on the Club for Growth…
In its endorsement of Laffey on its Web site, the Club acknowledges: "One risk is that, after beating Chafee in the primary, Laffey loses the general election to the Democrat. But the odds of this happening are not overwhelming -- and we believe this risk is acceptable."
The Club argues that Chafee is the most liberal Republican in the Senate, and the chance to replace him is worth this risk for several reasons:
"First, it wouldn't be much of a loss if a new Democrat senator were elected, as he would vote much the same as Chafee does now," the Club claims. "Second, it is unlikely this loss would result in tipping control of the Senate back to the Democrats -- though that, too, can't be ruled out. If Republicans lose so many seats that the Rhode Island race is crucial, Chafee would probably lose, too."
Meanwhile, at the national level,
OpinionJournal has a national level summary of the Senate race written by
Kimberly Strassel that concludes in a way that may raise an eyebrow or two…
Yet it says something about GOP frustration that even these long odds haven't fazed many. Laffey supporters are betting that if he wins the primary, the GOP establishment will offer its support....
It's still a long shot, although at least some Republican strategists are nonplussed. They've long argued the party should write off the Northeast, and focus on consolidating its gains in the South and Midwest. If voters are as angry as seems, it may have no choice.
Writing off an entire area of the country is never a good idea, for any political party that wants to actually win nor for any party that wants to actually govern after winning elections.
7:10 AM
From my vantage point, GOP strategists have a myopic fixation on the numbers game. They can't be bothered with policy, or the "vision thing". That the RNSC would foot the bill for attack ads against the more conservative candidate shows that, like Esau, they'll sell their birthright for just one more bowl of delicious majority stew. If relegated to backbench status, they might very well completely abandon Northeast conservatives - but that would leave breakthrough candidates completely unbeholden to the machine (until incumbancy, anyway). That the heavy lifting has to be done locally should be the conventional wisdom. Of course, a couple years of Dem nuance in the face of real threats won't hurt the cause - just a lot of innocents, unfortunately.
If Chafee loses, the Republican Party should write off the northeast.
When you have a region of the country that is so overwhelmingly Democrat and the local Republican base refuses to support electable Republicans that provide the national party the majority, what choice does the national Republican Party really have?
Does spending national money on RI federal candidates like Steve Laffey, Bob Tingle, Dave Rogers, John Matson, Ed Leather, Jonathon Scott, Ron Santa, Bill Montgomery, Barbara Leonard, Al Rego, John Holmes, Trudy Coxe, Burt Stallwood, etc. make any sense when all they do is lose by double-digit margins?
I had a conversation with an out-of-state Republican who used to live in RI. She had an interesting view. She said she didn't care about the Chafee/Laffey race and could care less if Rhode Island had ANY Republicans.
Her position was that if there was no Republican representation in the northeast it would strengthen the relative power of other regions, marginalizing the New England states. Which would be a good thing for the other regions.
One comment stuck with me: "If they're Republicans and they can't even keep their one Republican incumbent in office, they don't deserve to experience the benefits of a Republican majority. They should move to a different place or stop whining."
And no, the person wasn't Jim Davey's wife....
>>When you have a region of the country that is so overwhelmingly Democrat and the local Republican base refuses to support electable Republicans that provide the national party the majority, what choice does the national Republican Party really have?
Your statement is premised on the assumption that Lincoln Chafee is a Republican.
If the national GOP wishes to abandon the northeast, so be it.
I will vote for candidates that support the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution.
When there are no such candidates I will sit on my hands.
If the GOP wants my vote in order to keep majority status, then let it offer candidates that support Republican ideals. If it doesn't, then it is no longer the GOP, but merely a hollow shell with the GOP label appended.
Gee, that last sentence also describes Linc Chafee, doesn't it?
Tom W, you may get exactly what you want. Some out-of-state Republicans already don't want or care about your vote. They're more concerned about getting the votes of independents who actually play a role in determining the outcome of national elections.
>>Tom W, you may get exactly what you want. Some out-of-state Republicans already don't want or care about your vote. They're more concerned about getting the votes of independents who actually play a role in determining the outcome of national elections.
Sadly, both parties take their "bases" for granted, and even abuse them (thing Blacks vis-a-vis the Democratic Party). You are right that both parties are postering for the "independents" a/k/a the "swing vote."
And yes, they don't really care about my vote. I know that. They assume that 1) the "base" will vote for the Republican anyway, simply because the Democratic alternative is so noxious (and there is some merit to this - I held my nose while voting for George W last time); or 2) the "base" will stay home (which is OK so long as the other side's base does the same thing) - and non-voters are irrelevant to the outcome of an election.
The Democrats emply the same calculations regarding their base.
All the more reason to knock out Chafee - the GOP may discover that if you abuse your base it can come back and bite you in the rear - and this can only be a good thing.
Anthony, I take it you like the pork spending and general fecklessness of much of the current majority? You think it was appropriate for Voinovich to cry over John Bolton's appointment? The RNSC can abuse the base all it wants - it's not like I'd send them a dime anyway. As for your friend, maybe you would like to elaborate on what you thought she meant by strengthening the power of other regions and marginalizing New England? BRAC? Pork? I would prefer my Senator do good for the Republic, first.
rhodeymark, you might consider the US Navy presence in Newport and Aquidneck Island to be "pork", but I look at the companies like Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc. and the private sectors jobs they provide as a positive thing.
Don't worry, we're well on our way to getting what you want--a state workforce comprised of state employees and casino-based minimum wage jobs.
But just think of all the things you can complain about then...that should be fun.
Click here for the new Anchor Rising & Ocean State Current page
About Community Crier
About Engaged Citizen
Administrator
From my vantage point, GOP strategists have a myopic fixation on the numbers game. They can't be bothered with policy, or the "vision thing". That the RNSC would foot the bill for attack ads against the more conservative candidate shows that, like Esau, they'll sell their birthright for just one more bowl of delicious majority stew. If relegated to backbench status, they might very well completely abandon Northeast conservatives - but that would leave breakthrough candidates completely unbeholden to the machine (until incumbancy, anyway). That the heavy lifting has to be done locally should be the conventional wisdom. Of course, a couple years of Dem nuance in the face of real threats won't hurt the cause - just a lot of innocents, unfortunately.
Posted by: rhodeymark at August 17, 2006 1:58 PMIf Chafee loses, the Republican Party should write off the northeast.
When you have a region of the country that is so overwhelmingly Democrat and the local Republican base refuses to support electable Republicans that provide the national party the majority, what choice does the national Republican Party really have?
Does spending national money on RI federal candidates like Steve Laffey, Bob Tingle, Dave Rogers, John Matson, Ed Leather, Jonathon Scott, Ron Santa, Bill Montgomery, Barbara Leonard, Al Rego, John Holmes, Trudy Coxe, Burt Stallwood, etc. make any sense when all they do is lose by double-digit margins?
I had a conversation with an out-of-state Republican who used to live in RI. She had an interesting view. She said she didn't care about the Chafee/Laffey race and could care less if Rhode Island had ANY Republicans.
Her position was that if there was no Republican representation in the northeast it would strengthen the relative power of other regions, marginalizing the New England states. Which would be a good thing for the other regions.
One comment stuck with me: "If they're Republicans and they can't even keep their one Republican incumbent in office, they don't deserve to experience the benefits of a Republican majority. They should move to a different place or stop whining."
And no, the person wasn't Jim Davey's wife....
Posted by: Anthony at August 17, 2006 4:21 PM>>When you have a region of the country that is so overwhelmingly Democrat and the local Republican base refuses to support electable Republicans that provide the national party the majority, what choice does the national Republican Party really have?
Your statement is premised on the assumption that Lincoln Chafee is a Republican.
If the national GOP wishes to abandon the northeast, so be it.
I will vote for candidates that support the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution.
When there are no such candidates I will sit on my hands.
If the GOP wants my vote in order to keep majority status, then let it offer candidates that support Republican ideals. If it doesn't, then it is no longer the GOP, but merely a hollow shell with the GOP label appended.
Gee, that last sentence also describes Linc Chafee, doesn't it?
Posted by: Tom W at August 17, 2006 6:14 PMTom W, you may get exactly what you want. Some out-of-state Republicans already don't want or care about your vote. They're more concerned about getting the votes of independents who actually play a role in determining the outcome of national elections.
Posted by: Anthony at August 17, 2006 8:50 PM>>Tom W, you may get exactly what you want. Some out-of-state Republicans already don't want or care about your vote. They're more concerned about getting the votes of independents who actually play a role in determining the outcome of national elections.
Sadly, both parties take their "bases" for granted, and even abuse them (thing Blacks vis-a-vis the Democratic Party). You are right that both parties are postering for the "independents" a/k/a the "swing vote."
And yes, they don't really care about my vote. I know that. They assume that 1) the "base" will vote for the Republican anyway, simply because the Democratic alternative is so noxious (and there is some merit to this - I held my nose while voting for George W last time); or 2) the "base" will stay home (which is OK so long as the other side's base does the same thing) - and non-voters are irrelevant to the outcome of an election.
The Democrats emply the same calculations regarding their base.
All the more reason to knock out Chafee - the GOP may discover that if you abuse your base it can come back and bite you in the rear - and this can only be a good thing.
Posted by: Tom W at August 17, 2006 11:44 PMAnthony, I take it you like the pork spending and general fecklessness of much of the current majority? You think it was appropriate for Voinovich to cry over John Bolton's appointment? The RNSC can abuse the base all it wants - it's not like I'd send them a dime anyway. As for your friend, maybe you would like to elaborate on what you thought she meant by strengthening the power of other regions and marginalizing New England? BRAC? Pork? I would prefer my Senator do good for the Republic, first.
Posted by: rhodeymark at August 18, 2006 8:32 AMrhodeymark, you might consider the US Navy presence in Newport and Aquidneck Island to be "pork", but I look at the companies like Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc. and the private sectors jobs they provide as a positive thing.
Don't worry, we're well on our way to getting what you want--a state workforce comprised of state employees and casino-based minimum wage jobs.
But just think of all the things you can complain about then...that should be fun.
Posted by: Anthony at August 22, 2006 1:59 PM