November 6, 2006

Keep Chafee... Out of the Senate

Justin Katz

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.

Comments, although monitored, are not necessarily representative of the views Anchor Rising's contributors or approved by them. We reserve the right to delete or modify comments for any reason.

Make no mistake, this is not just a referendum on Chafee's performance. I decided in 2004 that I would not vote to re-elect Chafee. But I also must evaluate the Dems' candidate as well. Had it been Bob Weygand or Jim Langevin, I'd probably be voting Democrat. But Whitehouse is not the man I want representing me for six years.

Chafee? No. Whitehouse? No. A write-in is my only choice. More so than "poetic", it is truly democratic, and I will do so proudly.

Posted by: rightri at November 6, 2006 6:56 PM


I sincerely do respect that option, but I simply can't see that it's complete. With what hopes and expectations do you write a hopeless candidate in? The only way that sort of protest vote makes sense to me is if you think Chafee will win and hope merely to give him cause for reflection.

I mean, just look at how thoroughly Whitehouse is associated with the utter wrongness of Democrats' understanding of the world. In this election, we must either squash that vision, or we must give it room to be revealed in all its delusional (and/or deceptive) glory. I think the former impossible — particularly with the current slate of Republicans who would benefit from our vain attempt to achieve it — and I think Whitehouse a particularly well suited personification of the latter.

Posted by: Justin Katz at November 6, 2006 7:10 PM

I respect your position as well Justin. What's interesting is how many are struggling with the same decisions. Don says he will leave the ballot blank, and Marc has yet to make up his mind. It's a tough spot for conservatives.

I certainly don't expect my write-in to make any difference. But then, many people will go into the polls and vote for Jon Scott or Rod Driver, neither of whom have any real shot. For many, including myself, votes are cast on principle, not on any expectation that my one vote may make the difference. And on principle I cannot cast a vote for Chafee, nor will I cast a vote for a candidate I believe is not qualified to serve simply as a way to vote against Chafee.

Good luck tomorrow. Let's hope there's more celebrating on this site than on that scary leftist blog.

Posted by: rightri at November 7, 2006 12:04 AM

Rightri, they can't be too leftist if they're supporting Mollis and Lynch. Mollis is more conservative then Stenhouse - do you really think mobsters are liberals?

Posted by: Rhody at November 7, 2006 12:37 AM

You stupid assholes-why not just right in Harry Reid?

Posted by: Mike at November 7, 2006 8:21 AM

>>You stupid assholes-why not just right in Harry Reid?

Mike -

1) It's looking like the Republicans will keep the Senate no matter the outcome of the RI race.

So you can stop with that tiresome Chafee EXTORTION argument that he and his sycophants have been directing at Real Republicans (non-RINO) all these months.

2) Chafee proudly (albeit proverbially) flips the bird to the Republican Party, and in particular to Real Republicans.

Payback can be a bit**, can't it Linc?

3) Chafee has refused to promise or pledge that he would remain a "Republican" throughout his upcoming term if elected.

4) If the RINO Party establishment had not hijacked the Republican Primary - using Democrats to do it! - Laffey would be the candidate now, and notwithstanding the conventional wisdom could have wiped the floor with Sheldon WeeWee. (And no, I wasn't one of the Laffey acolytes.)

I'm not inclined to endure six more years of Lincoln Chafee's middle-finger being directed at me.

There are plenty of good reasons to vote against Chafee, there are none to vote for him.

DUMP CHAFEE so we can get a Real Republican candidate in '12!

Posted by: Tom W at November 7, 2006 9:40 AM

Well, I was on the fence back and forth all day, but Mike calling me an asshole has solidified my resolve to write in George H.W. Bush.

Posted by: Greg at November 7, 2006 12:09 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Important note: The text "http:" cannot appear anywhere in your comment.