With 7 of 9 precints reporting, Republican Karen Salvatore is leading incumbent Democrat Donald Lally in Rhode Island’s 33rd General Assembly District, 2,644-2,601.
A surge in the last two precints puts Lally over the top, 52.6%-47.4%
With 6 of 9 precints reporting, Republican John Robitaille leads incumbent Democrat Amy Rice, 2,013-1,912 (51.3%-48.7%) in Rhode Island’s 72nd General Assembly district.
With 9 of 9 precints reporting, incumbent Democrat Amy Rice leads Republican John Robitaille, 3,108-3,062 in Rhode Island’s 72nd General Assembly district.
If Fogarty were to win, it might be time to reassess the wisdom of remaining in this state, because it would signal either:
- that Rhode Islanders have a sort of civic death wish (even if of the passive flavor characterized by ignorance and apathy),
- or that the state is so hopelessly corrupt that the democratic process is incapable of bringing change.
Of course, always inclined to leave room for optimism, I suppose such utter defeat could galvanize the right minds in the Rhode Island GOP and prove the next few years to be the darkness before the dawn.
[Open full post]Governor Almond is talking on WJAR-TV like he’s confident the casino amendment has been defeated. WPRI-TV is running a headline saying “Casino Bill rejected”.
UPDATE:
WJAR-TV just called the casino amendment as defeated.
WJAR-TV NBC 10 is calling every statewide race, except the Governor’s race, for the Democrats.
[Open full post]Don is going to “No Vote” and Justin is going to hold his nose and color in the Whitehouse arrow. I admire them for their ideological courage and consistency and for their honest explanations of why they’re doing what they’re doing.
Immediately after the primary, I was resigned toward the “pragmatic” solution of holding my own nose and voting for Chafee.
I’m as idealistic as the next conservative, but also recognize that there is a time for idealism and a time for pragmatism. For two years, I’ve attempted to rebut the pragmatic reasons for supporting Senator Chafee in the primary–he’s more electable and he can vouchsafe a GOP controlled (and thus more conservative) U.S. Senate–by offering arguments rooted in conservative beliefs.
For me, the primary is the best time to argue over the ideas that should undergird a political party and in this primary I tried to convince Rhode Island Republicans the value of maintaining conservative ideals against practical politics. In the end, I was unsuccessful. It was a spirited debate, but ideas lost and pragmatism won. It’s disappointing, but now pragmatism will simply have to be enough.
That last “will” should have been a “may.” Two months later, and I’m not so sure. Yes, it’s a sad commentary on the choices, but how does a conservative weigh short term objectives versus hoped-for long term goals? After all, if Whitehouse does win, what are the chances he’ll ever be voted out in incumbent-loving li’l Rhody?
Or does it really just come down to punishing one whom you feel has served you poorly (Chafee) by either not voting for him (a swing of the electoral hammer) or the exponential act of voting for his opponent (a swing of the electoral sledgehammer)?
So what am I going to do? For the first time in my voting life, I actually don’t know who I’m voting for before election day. It could be a long night.
That is the slogan that will determine my vote tomorrow. Under the present circumstances, there could be no worse outcome than to reinforce Republicans’ belief that we must keep them in power regardless of their beliefs and behavior.
Frankly, I disagree with Orson Scott Card. “A chance” that Republicans will get the War on Terror right in the face of the palpable wrongness of Democrats is not good enough. Republicans must learn that the opposition’s absolute looniness does not amount to a get-into-office free card, and more importantly, Democrats must learn that trafficking in insanity is not acceptable among our nation’s leaders. To answer the first imperative, the Republicans must suffer electoral hardship. To answer the second, the Democrats must be given some responsibility — even with (perhaps especially with) the expectation that they will not live up to it.
The Rhode Island Senate race consists entirely of this choice: Either it is better that Lincoln Chafee wins, or it is better that he loses. As much as I sympathize with the poetic justice of a write-in vote, that route strikes me as passive negligence. Either Chafee should win, or he should lose. Standing aside and allowing your vote to be thrown in an “other” pile shirks the responsibility to make a decision. Chafee in, or Chafee out.
The Democrats could not have given us a better temporary repository of undeserved power on their side of the race.
There is really only one possible interpretation of Republican ballots that go toward Sheldon Whitehouse, and mine will be one.
Chafee out.
To provoke thought, even if you disagree with their content, here are four interesting articles I have read in recent days about issues we face as a country:
Austin Bay on Military service, John Kerry, and honor
The Only Issue This Election Day
John Derbyshire on To Vote Or Not To Vote: A tough call for conservatives
Rick Santorum on The Gathering Storm
I hope the Republicans lose control of the House of Representatives in tomorrow’s election.
I am a conservative who happens to be a registered Republican. My disgust with the Republican Congress is intense. As I have said to many friends in recent months, they have done in 12 years what the Democrats took 40 years to do.
A more detailed reflection on the policy reasons for my disgust have been previously articulated on this site in many previous posts.
Now is not the time to regurgitate the specifics. Rather, it is a time to focus on the big picture:
The current Republican party needs some time in the wilderness in order to rediscover its currently lost connections to beliefs in limited government, to the defense of freedom and ordered liberty. Hopefully, they can find some new leaders with principles in time for the crucial 2008 elections.
And what could be better for the American people than to see the House be led for two years by a bunch of left-wing lunatics, to experience a sampling for 2 years before 2008 of what little the Democrats can offer during a time when our country is engaged in a world war with Islamic fascists dedicated to destroying America.
The overriding problem here is we have two political parties who stand for nothing but either the retention or gaining of political power for the sake of power itself.
For the long-term good of America, we need two vibrant political parties competing with each other. This isn’t a Democrat or Republican thing. Both political parties have become devoid of a vision for the future of America. The Democrats have been devoid of vision for several decades. The Republicans have become devoid of vision, because they have faced little real competition and they are devoid of leaders with any coherent views of the world.
Think about the effect of this vision-less world view: Political races this year have become focused on the efficiency of voter turnout operations rather than articulating a vision for America that creates a natural passion within individual citizens to stand up and be counted in the voting booth.
And America is worse off for it.
Not for nuthin’, here are some super-secret election eve poll numbers obtained by Dan Yorke “on background” from a well-respected Democrat polling outfit:
Senate: Chafee up 2 over Whitehouse (Explains why Pres. Clinton is coming)
Gov: Carcieri up 7 over Fogarty (Nothing new…)
LtGov: Roberts up 10 over Centrachio (Name recognition not enough?)
SecState: Stenhouse up 2 over Mollis (Something must be sticking to Ralph.)
Treas: Caprio up 50 over Lyons (Yikes, 50?)
Yes on Casino down 11 to No on Casino (Again, nothing new…)