RI-Sen: Laffey of too a strong start.

[Keystone Phil]

I know Laffey would have an uphill battle in the general but I think too many people are underestimating him.

[Keystone Phil]

chafee is going to kick laffey's ass. 

I don't know how it'll work in the primary but here's hoping Laffey atleast gives the RINO a good run.

[Keystone Phil]

chafee is going to kick laffey's ass. 

I don't know how it'll work in the primary but here's hoping Laffey atleast gives the RINO a good run.

Phil, did it ever occure to you that Chaffee is the only kind of Republican that can get elected in many parts of the country, so it is better off him than no one?  Anyone more conservative than Chaffee is going to get creamed in RI.  Laffey has no chance.  At least with Chaffee, we have a better chance of holding our majority in the Senate.

Not to mention that I don;t really have a problem with Chaffee.  For a Seantor from RI, he represents his state with about as well as can be hoped for, which is what he is there for.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe I am not just blindly standing by someone because of their party? Did it ever occur to you that maybe the beliefs of a candidate are more important to me? Yes, this race is a tough one. Chafee is really the type of candidate the party needs up there. However, the fact remains that he is a RINO and I am not standing by him when he has a more conservative challenger.

And to totally destroy your argument about anyone more conservative than Chafee getting creamed, have you have taken a look at their Governor?

To say Laffey has no chance is foolish.

[Keystone Phil]

Carcieri ran in the Republican year of 2002, first off.  Even if we make gains in Senate in 06, it will be just because of dumb luck.  Secondly, he ran against corruption in the state government and on a set of issues that are not national in scope.

You said someone more conservative than Chafee can't win. The truth is that conservatives can win. Would it be an uphill battle? Yes. Impossible? No.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If we were seriously in trouble of losing the Senate, I'd reconsider but that's not the case.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Chafee is a serious thorn in our side.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's premature to say that, Super. I don't see the party just giving up on the seat.

[Keystone Phil]

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.

[Keystone Phil]

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?

[Keystone Phil]

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).

[Keystone Phil]

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.

[Keystone Phil]

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.

[Keystone Phil]

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.

[Keystone Phil]

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?

[Keystone Phil]

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.

[Keystone Phil]

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.