RI-Sen: Laffey of too a strong start.

[Smash255]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You know the GOP is in trouble in 2005, Super. I don't know what to tell you people that can't distinguish 2005 from 2006. Make these complaints sometime next year. In the meantime, I'm not going to say we're in trouble a year away.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How many times to we have to worry whether or not he'll be with us on votes? I'd rather take the risk of getting rid of him in a primary than having to definetley deal with him because we are afraid of the RI Dems.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep. We should have backed away from Toomey, too, because we were thumbing our nose at swing voters, right Super?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's not "just common sense." The GOP cannot afford to just give up in RI and it's not the guarenteed loss you think it is. Laffey is an impressive candidate who would have a chance at the seat.

No Phil, this is  Rhode Island.  Laffey has no chance period of winning a general election.  laffey wins the primary the seat becomes a safe Dem pickup.  We aren't talking about a state that leans Dem here, we are talking about a very stong Democratic state.  State type races someone who is somewhat conservative may pull it off, for Govenor & what not, but a Govenor's race & and senate race ihas different issues.  Not to mention when the GOP took the Governship in 02, the Republicans were doing very well nationwide.  Now while things in 06, might be better for the GOP than 05 (although I don't think so), but even if they are their is no way in hell Bush's approval is going to be in 2002 levels at 20-25 points higher than it is now.  Thats not going to happen.  Chafee is the only chance the GOP has at keeping the seat, he loses the primary its over

[Smash255]

I'll agree somewhat with Phil on this one. Although I believe he would lose, Laffey is being underestimated by Democrats. Remember he did after all somehow manage to get elected mayor of a Democratic leaning city. Maybe he could get elected to the senate in a Democrat leaning state...unlikely but if he does defeat Chafee he won't get less than 44% of the vote in the general election.

A senate race becomes more issue oriented than a mayor race would be.  Also a Senate race  (especially an open seat race) is more impacted by the attitude s the voters have toward the President, and the overal attitude of the state.  While Chafee is a Republican he does well in the heavily Dem state because he is someone who has proven himself as being outside the national GOP party & someone who has clashed many times with the President whose approval rating is hovering around 30% (and down below that in some polls) in the state.  As much as anything the R next to Laffey's name destroys him in a General election Senate race, in a HEAVILY Democratic state during a time when the President's approval ratings are absolutley horrd in the state with disapproavls approaching 70%.  Even if Bush turn it around somewhat by next year, his #'s will still suck in heavily Democratic Rhode Island.  As someone who is running as an alternative Republican to Chafee, Laffey will be seen as being closer to the mainstream Republican & closer to Bush, which will doom him in Rhode Island

[Smash255]

No Phil, this is  Rhode Island.  Laffey has no chance period of winning a general election.  laffey wins the primary the seat becomes a safe Dem pickup.  We aren't talking about a state that leans Dem here, we are talking about a very stong Democratic state.  State type races someone who is somewhat conservative may pull it off, for Govenor & what not, but a Govenor's race & and senate race ihas different issues.  Not to mention when the GOP took the Governship in 02, the Republicans were doing very well nationwide.  Now while things in 06, might be better for the GOP than 05 (although I don't think so), but even if they are their is no way in hell Bush's approval is going to be in 2002 levels at 20-25 points higher than it is now.  Thats not going to happen.  Chafee is the only chance the GOP has at keeping the seat, he loses the primary its over

Keep understimating him. I have acknowledged that it would be a difficult race for the GOP but Laffey is an impressive candidate who would likely surprise a lot of people (even if he doesn't win).

Phil once again, maybe in a different state.  Rhode Island is just too strong of a state for Laffey to pull a senate rce off (or even make it interesting),  the oly way its even remotley possible is if Bush's nationwide approval is up 20-25 points & is approval in Rhode Island is well by a similar amount.  And while things could change for the better for Bush no way its going to get that high again

[Smash255]

Yep. We should have backed away from Toomey, too, because we were thumbing our nose at swing voters, right Super?

I knew this was coming.  First off, Toomey could have won here, because PA is not RI and Toomey was not really that conservative to begin with, not as he was portrayed, or as his campaign portrayed him as being.

Secondly, I didn't back Toomey because he was conservative and Specter was a moderate.  I backed Toomey because I liked Toomey and Specter constantly lies about who he is and tries to play both sides.  Chafee is honest about who he is and what he stands for.  Specter is also personally reprehensable.  Chafee is not.

These situations are far too different to be compared to one another.

I know PA and RI are different. I was never just saying that because you don't think Laffey could win that Toomey couldn't have won. I brought up us screwing around with moderate voters which, by supporting Toomey, it seemed like we were doing. Yet now you say Toomey wasn't conservative? Really? I agree he wasn't the far right winger some claimed he was but saying he wasn't really conservative is foolish.

So, again, the point remains that no matter what your reason was for supporting Toomey, people would see that as messing with moderate voters. It was ok to do it here but not in RI?

Although I think Toomey would have lost if he was in the general election (it would have been close).  Anyway here is the basic differnec e in the so called messing with the moderate voters.  Messing with the moderate voters by knocking off Specter in the Primary you may lose some of those votes to the Dems, but the moderate voters in PA are more likley yo split their vote between a Republican & Democrat once their favorite is out of the picture.  Rhode Island is a differnet story, once the moderate favorite is out of the picture (Chafee) the moderates are going to jump ship & become overwelmingly Democratic in their votes

[Smash255]

And while things could change for the better for Bush no way its going to get that high again

I have yet to find someone who can predict what will happen politically next month let alone next year. Hats off to you, Smash.


There is no way any of us can tell whether Bush can or cannot jump fifteen or twenty points. Anything can happen especially in politics. For all we know he could be down in the thrities next year. We can't make an accurate prediction on his ratings this far out though.

Phil, I'm not ruling out Bush being back in the mid 50's nextt year at this time, but its virtually impossible for him to be where he was during the 02 midterms (mid 60's with his approval hovering between 40-45 now (with the average of the polls around a 42 or 43)  Too much has happened for his approval to bounce back that high again like it was during the 02 midterms.

[Smash255]

And while things could change for the better for Bush no way its going to get that high again

I have yet to find someone who can predict what will happen politically next month let alone next year. Hats off to you, Smash.


There is no way any of us can tell whether Bush can or cannot jump fifteen or twenty points. Anything can happen especially in politics. For all we know he could be down in the thrities next year. We can't make an accurate prediction on his ratings this far out though.

Phil, I'm not ruling out Bush being back in the mid 50's nextt year at this time, but its virtually impossible for him to be where he was during the 02 midterms (mid 60's with his approval hovering between 40-45 now (with the average of the polls around a 42 or 43)  Too much has happened for his approval to bounce back that high again like it was during the 02 midterms.

How is that almost impossible? How can you predict the events that might unfold a year from now? The President's approval rating can jump about ten points in just two or three months and then he's back in the mid 50s. Who knows what can happen come November 2006. It's like a teacher at school I know. Every morning, some of my friends and me go up to his class to chat. He brought up how the potential 2008 GOP candidates are running from Bush. Ok? Three years away and they're running from Bush? Awesome. Sure it makes sense now but come 2007 he could be a widely approved of President.

Phil, their is just too much division in the country for that to happen.  He might become more popular, but his days of the 66% approval is over & not coming back.  Anyway, even if you believe its porrible, you have to admit its highly unlikely, so going the safe route is to distance yourself from Bush because more than likely anyone who is close to Bush will be hurt (on a Presidential level) or especially in a senate race in a very heavily Democratic state like Rhode Island is.  Its not even that Laffey may appear close to Bush, its that he will appear closer to Bush than Chafee is & that will bury him in the general election in a very heavily Democratic state

[Smash255]

Phil,
One more point.  The GOP's chances of getting someone more conservative than Chafee elected to a senate seat in RI is similar to the Dem's chances of getting someone that is a bit more liberal than Ben Nelson in there as Senator.  Many Dems (myself included) don't like how conservative Nelson is, however we know someone like him is the only way a Democrat can get elected to a Senate seat in Nebraska  because of how Republican the state is.  Its the samein rhode Island with Chafee.  Someone like Chafee is the only one who could get elected as a Republican to a Rhode Island Senate seat, someone who is more conservative even if they aren't all that conservative like Laffey is simply can't get elected to a Senate seat in R.I because of how Democratic the state is. 

Elections such as for Govenor are a bit of a different story because they wrap around different issues to a point, but for a senate seat someone like Nelson is the Dems only chance in a Republican heavy state like Nebraska & someone like Chafee is the Republicans only chance in a Democrat heavy state like Rhode Island

[Smash255]

Elections such as for Govenor are a bit of a different story because they wrap around different issues to a point, but for a senate seat someone like Nelson is the Dems only chance in a Republican heavy state like Nebraska & someone like Chafee is the Republicans only chance in a Democrat heavy state like Rhode Island

So how do people like Byron Dorgan get elected in North Dakota? Your response: "Well there are a few certain issues that allow him to gain popularity and people overlook his liberal stance on other issues." Laffey can't do it that way?

& what issues for Laffey would that be exactly??  & Don't say abortion because while Rhode Island is more pro-life then some of the other states in the region it is not a pro-life state by any stretch of the imagination & would not be an issue that would help him. 

[Smash255]

Elections such as for Govenor are a bit of a different story because they wrap around different issues to a point, but for a senate seat someone like Nelson is the Dems only chance in a Republican heavy state like Nebraska & someone like Chafee is the Republicans only chance in a Democrat heavy state like Rhode Island

So how do people like Byron Dorgan get elected in North Dakota? Your response: "Well there are a few certain issues that allow him to gain popularity and people overlook his liberal stance on other issues." Laffey can't do it that way?

& what issues for Laffey would that be exactly??  & Don't say abortion because while Rhode Island is more pro-life then some of the other states in the region it is not a pro-life state by any stretch of the imagination & would not be an issue that would help him. 

Take pretty much any social issue and show me an instance where Dorgan has not stood with people like Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer.

He has a mixed record on abortion, voted for the PBA ban, voted for the Lacey Peterson law

NAARL rates him @ 43%

Kennedy & Boxer are both rated 100%

Collins & Snowe are both rate above 90%, Chafee above 80%

He is more liberal socially than your so called average NortH Dakota voter, but while North Dakota is conservative its not Nebraska, its not Utah nor is it Kansas either. 

Dorgan also has a mixed record on the death penalty, meanwhile both Boxer & Kennedy are strongly opposed.  Dorgan may lean liberal, but he is no Kennedy or Boxer by any stretch of the imagination.  North Dakota also has a bit of a history of electing Senators who differ from their Presidential views, while Rhode Island does not

[Smash255]

I know PA and RI are different. I was never just saying that because you don't think Laffey could win that Toomey couldn't have won. I brought up us screwing around with moderate voters which, by supporting Toomey, it seemed like we were doing. Yet now you say Toomey wasn't conservative? Really? I agree he wasn't the far right winger some claimed he was but saying he wasn't really conservative is foolish.

So, again, the point remains that no matter what your reason was for supporting Toomey, people would see that as messing with moderate voters. It was ok to do it here but not in RI?

No, I said Toomey was "not that conservative", meaning he was not some right wing radical, like he was portrayed as. 

And Laffey is not as conservative as people are making him out to be.

Phil, that's not my point.  Any conservative is not going to be elected in RI, for the Senate.  It doesn't matter how conservative they are.

Ding Ding Ding

[Smash255]

He has a mixed record on abortion, voted for the PBA ban, voted for the Lacey Peterson law

NAARL rates him @ 43%

Kennedy & Boxer are both rated 100%

Collins & Snowe are both rate above 90%, Chafee above 80%

He is more liberal socially than your so called average NortH Dakota voter, but while North Dakota is conservative its not Nebraska, its not Utah nor is it Kansas either. 

Dorgan also has a mixed record on the death penalty, meanwhile both Boxer & Kennedy are strongly opposed.  Dorgan may lean liberal, but he is no Kennedy or Boxer by any stretch of the imagination.  North Dakota also has a bit of a history of electing Senators who differ from their Presidential views, while Rhode Island does not

I'd say ND and NE are pretty similar, Smash. And while you did prove that Kennedy/Boxer and Dorgan are different on some things, I'm sure I could find areas where Laffey disagreed with President Bush and leading conservatives.

I would agree that Laffey doesn't stand with Bush or the Repubklicans in general on all the issues, however Nebraska is a bit more conservative & more Republican (most elections have seen the GOP's margin's 5-10 points larger in Nebrska than in N. Dakota) than N Dakota is.  Not to mention as I said N. Dakota has a history of electing Senators who differ from their Presidental Views, Rhode Island just doesn't do that.  Rhode Island is just too staunchly of a Democratic state to elect a Republican Senator that isn't a moderate or liberal Republican